Beginner's Questions

[cababunga]

Are you going to have a separate mnemonic for each word?

I see many people get really confused. And I never said a word about mnemonics. Let me try to elaborate.

First let's finish with mnemonics. Mnemonics are not useful for reading, you are right in this part. However they do help a lot when you go through your freshly learned cards in SRS. They help you until you get to the level when you do not have to make an effort to recall your card. Last thing here is that mnemonics in the book are mostly needed for remembering how to write a character. As writing is not high on the priority list for most people these days, there is no much benefit discussing it further.

Now, let me bring another quote here:

This will depend on your memory.

... and discuss this for a bit. This statement taken out of context is true, of course. Everyone has some level of uniqueness in learning approaches. What we should not forget though, is that with all those differences our brains have identical evolution path and have identical way of storing information. Information in brain is compressed by removing unimportant details and reusing prior knowledge as macro blocks of a new piece. Some more on this topic can be found here: http://www.molwick.com/en/ebooks/z-memory-books.pdf ["3.d) Data integrity" on page 11].

Now, if you learn characters as independent images, you brain will eventually infer all the differences and similarities necessary to store all of them in compact enough form, yet have enough details to distinguish different glyphs. Eventually a system of interconnected pieces will be built without you consciously helping the process. That doesn't mean that helping the process is a bad idea, and that's exactly where books like RHS have most value, in my opinion. Do you remember yourself confusing 的 and 时 in the beginning? Okay, maybe you are too advanced to remember that; but I do. And this confusion ended forever the day I was shown explicitly what components they were made of. Note again, this has nothing to do with mnemonics.

[renzhe]

Actually, I have nothing against mnemonics at all. I use them myself whenever a character is too tricky to memorise.

But however you initially memorise a character, it's only a temporary measure. The characters will burn into your brain through repeated exposure after lots of reading and until that time, you need to keep them fresh through repeated exposure -- flashcards or reading. How many mnemonics you need before it "sticks" will really depend on how your memory works. People with good visual memory may find it easy to remember characters without mnemonics.

For me, 板 is 木 + 反. I've never needed a mnemonic for this, and many other characters. I did need a mnemonic for 望 and 哲. Funnily, I also needed a mnemonic for 杯. But not for 命. With some of them, I simply have a photo in my mind and don't need anything else.

But my memory is odd.

[dreamon]

BTW, I forgot to ask the traditional (and simplified) beginner's question: which characters to learn first, traditional or simplified? I assumed by default that I should start with traditional, because then the simplified are almost effortless. But if pretty much all intermediate-level reading material is in the simplified, then maybe I should do the simplified first?

Let me also ask a more specific question: which of the two books, "Remembering Traditional Hanzi" or "Remembering Simplified Hanzi", is more useful? One Amazon.com review for the Traditional Hanzi book complains: "However, after the first few hundred characters, the writer reduces the work on his part ... for each character, the story "plots" become more basic ... Eventually (by character #476), this gets worse with the reader having to do 90% of the time-consuming work in thinking up an effective story ..." Is this the same for the Simplified Hanzi book, as well as for the earlier Kanji books? Is this "by design" or due to laziness / lack of time on the part of the author? How about the traditional vs. the simplified character mnemonics in the books, are they both equally good?

[cababunga]

Same for simplified. Book would be three times heavier if it had stories for every character. The idea is to teach you how to do it yourself having first 500 or so characters as examples. In the sample of the book you can read introduction chapter, where authors give rationale for various design decisions.

Let me also ask a more specific question: which of the two books, "Remembering Traditional Hanzi" or "Remembering Simplified Hanzi", is more useful?

You see? People are trying to avoid this question, which makes me think there is no strong opinion. My two cents here would be this... Simplified characters are simplified for a reason. And the reason is faster learning. So, if you take this as a starting point, then reaching that reading ability threshold should happen faster if you go simplified route.

[Glenn]

Same for the kanji book too. It's the "teach a man to fish" principle.

I'm not sold on the idea that simplified characters are easier to learn, though. Easier to write (as in not as time-consuming and less labor-intensive), yes. But I don't think they're easier to learn to write.

[roddy]

Asking which is easier or more useful, traditional or simplifed, is a wrong question. From elsewhere

Characters

You’ll need to decide whether to study simplified or traditional characters. The usual choice will be simplified but if you have a good textbook which uses traditional, plan to spend lots of time in Taiwan, or just think they look better, learning traditional is fine. Once you’ve learnt one set, the other is well within reach.

[dreamon]

Asking which is easier or more useful, traditional or simplifed, is a wrong question.

For me the question is very real. I am not asking "which is more useful" - I want to eventually learn the recognition of both forms. It is just the question of learning order. I have already invested into DeFrancis textbooks, which use mostly traditional (and pinyin), but if starting with the Heisig's method can propel me forward much faster, I should revisit the order question. There is huge value in what can be called "the Pimsleur Effect": when you suddently find yourself making rapid, tangible progress in a nearly impossible task. Just like drawing a realistic picture for the first time, or getting a key insight in a science problem, or even falling in love. Once the quantum leap is made, you work as much as needed to pick up the "loose ends" and consolidate your new position. On the contrary, if the leap is not happening for some time, your interest declines and other tasks take over your attention. For me now, learning hanzi sounds like an impossible task, a dream-killer, and Heisig could be the Pimsleur for characters. If the traditional version is much slower, the risk of running out of steam is higher. But the traditional version may prepare me better for the next leap: reading DeFrancis (whose pinyin vocabulary may be familiar by then).

[Glenn]

I see no reason why the traditional version would go any slower than the simplified one. There'll be more characters to learn (10s or so?), but it shouldn't be any slower. It all depends on you, the amount of time you're going to put into it, and the energy and creativity you bring to the task, really. Simplified or traditional is a moot point. The method is the same either way. From the looks of things it seems like traditional is the way to go for you, since you have DeFrancis's books and seem to like them. Like roddy's quote said, once you have one down, the other can be picked up with relative ease.

[cababunga]

For what it worth, here is an opinion of the authors themselves:

If your aim is to achieve fluency in writing both systems, then it is preferable to begin with the traditional. If you are sure you will be content with recognizing the traditional and writing the simplified, then begin with the latter.

[dreamon]

For what it worth, here is an opinion of the authors themselves: "If your aim is to achieve fluency in writing both systems, then it is preferable to begin with the traditional. If you are sure you will be content with recognizing the traditional and writing the simplified, then begin with the latter."

My goal is to recognize both systems, writing is secondary at this point. Writing simplified is probably a lot easier than writing traditional, right? (Otherwise they would not have been simplified.) Using Heisig-Richardson system requires learning to write. These two assumptions imply that the simplified version of Heisig-Richardson is a lot easier. If so, one possible plan is to (1) work through the simplified Heisig-Richardson, then (2) work through the traditional DeFrancis readers without trying to write, while at the same time (3) consolidate the knowledge of the simplified characters via flashcards, spaced repetition etc. Glenn, do you find that my logic is flawed?

[renzhe]

You should generally first learn the set you wish to write and/or the set you will be using primarily. This will depend on your reasons for learning Chinese in the first place. In my case, it's simplified due to links to the PRC, for other people it's traditional due to their personal reasons.

This is the set you should start with.

The vast majority of people can only write one set. It's not a problem in general, as many people can comfortably read both.

[Glenn]

I personally happen to agree with the Heisig-Richardson statement that learning Traditional first would be better if you plan on learning them both from the outset. I can't say that it's absolutely the case though. If you want writing ability in simplified because they take less time and effort to physically write and want only the ability to recognize traditional characters, I can't find any fault with your thinking. In the end, if you want to learn to write traditional characters, you will still be able to do it without much of a problem if you already have a few thousand simplified characters, because 1) there is a huge overlap, and 2) many of the simplifications are pretty much the same as the traditional characters, except with a component (usually the radical) simplified. From what I read in another thread that only leaves about 500 that you'd have to learn completely new shapes for (although to me, learning to write 書 after you learned 津 and 律 is easier than learning to write 书, for instance. I still can't write 书 from memory, but 書 is no problem). So if you want to do simplified first, go for it. I don't think it'll matter that much in the end.

[jacob22]

You can trust the Pimsleur style programs. I learned this way and am told my pronunciation is quite good. Of course after finishing the 3 or so big units, you're off on your own to continue your education of Chinese.

[Neil_H]

On the strength of the recomendations here I just ordered Assimil part 2 for £11 in the UK from a large book store on Amazon I have used loads of times before.

Those other prices sound way too high.

[dreamon]

> Neil_H: On the strength of the recomendations here I just ordered Assimil part 2 for £11 in the UK from a large book store on Amazon I have used loads of times before.

Which store is it? I just got my Assimil today, looks good on the first glance. I was away traveling for a month, now getting back to Pimsleur. An interesting feeling: I remember and not remember at the same time! It's actually fun to hear the Chinese phrases again, kind of like re-reading your old childhood books, or singing Christmas carols. After some practice that I had, albeit little by your standards, these words already occupy a special place inside my head, perhaps even my heart...

[Neil_H]

It is called the Book Depositary.

I was disapointed there was no Audi CD's included with it. I have already learnt a lot of the stuff in the book but am always willing to go over previous ground to hammer it in to the sub concious.

I have listened to CD's 2 and 3 of Pimsleur a second time. Working through it a second time allows you to speed up and work on the grammar and sentence patterns.

[dreamon]

I am sorry, Neil_H, that you did not get the CDs. I guess, that's why the price was so cheap.

When I came back, I took just two last lessons from Pimsleur II (learned material) and moved on to Pimsleur III (new material). I don't want to dwell too long on Pimsleur, or else I'll be dead from old age - or at least too ugly to enjoy happy conversations with a Chinese girl - long before I'm fluent in Mandarin.

[dreamon]

Here is another beginner's question: Is there a website or an on-line resource that lists common sentence patterns in Chinese, such as "If [X] then [Y] else [Z]" or "When should I [do X] and when [do Y]?" I was trying to compose simple e-mails to a Chinese friend and realized that, even with a dictionary and the Google translator, I still cannot translate even the simplest of patterns. Thanks!

[OneEye]

You need a good grammar book for that. I don't know if a web resource exists for that (I'm sure there's one somewhere).

Don't make the mistake of assuming that simplified characters is really all that much simpler. The simplification process was rushed, and never really finished, so we've been left with a mess instead of the easier system that was the goal. But really, which one is "better" depends on how you'll be using Chinese. I've always focused on traditional characters because I prefer them, and it works out because I'm likely moving to Taiwan next summer. However, if I were moving to the mainland instead, you can bet I'd switch gears right now to simplified. Pick which one will be more useful to you, because the difference in difficulty between the two systems is not really much to speak of.

[dreamon]

A grammar book is not a list of patterns, it cannot be used for a quick reference while writing an e-mail, nor is it comprehensive enough. A typical grammar book (for English at least) is a textbook that should be studied in parallel with reading. Most patterns, beyond the most basic ones, are picked up while reading. But if you are a beginner and want to just write a simple e-mail, you need a quick reference. A word dictionary provides few patterns, if any at all, and Google translate doesn't "understand" what I want to say, so it cannot be trusted.

With characters, I decided to study the simplified ones because they are easier/faster to write, while learning to just recognize their traditional counterparts. BTW, yesterday I accidentally found an erratum to the Heisig's book. The folder also contains the traditional erratum. There is indeed some strange beauty in Chinese characters, coming essentially unchanged from the ancient world, they provide an intimate connection to the homes, daily lives and feelings of people like us who otherwise would be completely forgotten.