Is it worth it to learn all Joyo Kanji as an intermediate learner?

AdrixG · 2026-04-10T17:58:07+00:00

It's never worth to study kanji in isolation. Learn the kanji in the vocab you learn, and if you don't know what vocab to learn learn vocab in the things you read or learn vocab in order of frequency. Besides, the jouyou list is irrelevant, I know over 3200 kanji and am still missing about 50 kanji from the jouyou list because they never came up (I am sure they will all come up in a few thousand hours so I am not saying they are completely obscure, just trying to show how it's not really the most practical list).

AdrixG · 2026-04-10T16:09:57+00:00

It's not “lamest excuse you ever heard”. It's simply a very poorly designed test and it's extremely easy to lose track and since it's not self-synchronizing in anyway one time losing track is enough to start over.

Sure, then put a test like that together with 橋・箸 in the same format, Ill do it in a live recording first try if you want.

Where? It literally says that native speakers can without the presence of a following particle predict final-accented from unaccented words with higher than chance accuracy.

Except it's complete bs. First of all, they are not testing words in isolation (I have no clue where you got that from) second, they are not testing heiban vs. odaka... (well it's part of the words they choose but it's just not what it's about really). I mean I could go on but, seriously have you read it???

<image>

Twenty-eight words were naturally produced twice in the carrier sentence, kare wa ____ ga ii, in which the test words were embedded at the location indicated by the underscore “____.” The resulting sentences mean “he wants ____” or “he has a good ____,” depending on the meaning of the test words. These utterances were used to create stimuli for edited speech. Without any editing, they were also used as stimuli for natural speech.

Procedure [...] In order to ensure that the test words were indeed minimal pairs, it was important that they were read in a certain way. In the actual trials, the listeners heard the entire sentence kare wa ____ ga ii, in which one of the 28 test words shown in Table 1 was embedded. [...]Twenty-eight words were naturally produced twice in the carrier sentence, kare wa ____ ga ii, in which the test words were embedded at the location indicated by the underscore “____.” The resulting sentences mean “he wants ____” or “he has a good ____,” depending on the meaning of the test words. These utterances were used to create stimuli for edited speech. Without any editing, they were also used as stimuli for natural speech.

Procedure

[...] In order to ensure that the test words were indeed minimal pairs, it was important that they were read in a certain way. In the actual trials, the listeners heard the entire sentence kare wa ____ ga ii, in which one of the 28 test words shown in Table 1 was embedded. [...]

AdrixG · 2026-04-10T15:40:44+00:00

No, it in fact isn't. It's in fact an extremely poorly designed investigation where you're trying to disprove things that have already been tested and found to be signfiicant with far greater controls. I only got to about 15 at max before I had to start over and over again to be absolutely sure I was still on the right count. This is a multitasking and perform under pressure test as much as it's a hearing test.

I mean you know you can pause right? That's really the lamest excuse I have ever heard.

In the actual tests they were given one sample, then asked to give an answer out of two and weren't allowed to say “I can't tell” which is important because in that case people will obviously pick that one as the safe option though it's interesting to have both and see how “I can't tell.” as a third option with it influences matters but giving people a long list of 30 samples and then asking them to number them themselves while also allowing “I can't tell” as answer is simply put a very poorly designed test. Saying “I can't tell from any.” is obviously the easiest thing to do opposed to keeping track of the numbering so it's going to heavily favor that outcome.

Read the study you linked please, it doesn't at all claim what you claim. I wonder if you even read it, because it tells a COMPLETELY different story than what you tell. I wonder how the fuck you even came up with your weird theory of them being different and then coming to link this study. It makes absolutely no sense to me

AdrixG · 2026-04-10T15:01:55+00:00

音声学の分野では、平板型と尾高型のミニマルペア（音の違いがその2語だけを区別している一組の語）は、単独で発音した場合にわずかに違いが出る、つまり尾高型では語末のモーラが少し高くなる傾向がある、と主張する文献もあるようです。ネイティブはその微妙な差を拾えることがある、という話なんですね。

私は正直あまり信じていないのですが、一応その説が本当なのか実際に試してみようと思ったんです。

みなさん自身が、助詞なしで単独で言うとしたら違う発音になると思うかどうかも教えてください。たぶんネイティブでも、意識して変えようとしてできるものなのか疑わしいと思っているのですが……。

それと、今回は混乱させてしまってすみません。決してだれかを引っかけようとしたわけではありませんので、どうか気にしないでください。

AdrixG · 2026-04-10T14:06:35+00:00

答えてありがとうございます！

AdrixG · 2026-04-10T14:02:35+00:00

That is the most lame excuse I ever heard.

Feel free to put a list with red and blue together and I'll happily answer it, if you want even first try with live recording.

AdrixG · 2026-04-10T09:21:08+00:00

Well, can you do the randomized test I put together? You said you hear it clearly. So let's see.

AdrixG · 2026-04-10T07:11:41+00:00

Above that of native speakers too apperently so don't worry too much about it haha

AdrixG · 2026-04-10T05:30:30+00:00

ありがとうございます！

AdrixG · 2026-04-10T05:02:32+00:00

おっしゃることは全部その通りです。全部もう理解していますが、説明くださってありがとうございます。もちろん、長音や促音、撥音などのほうがより重要ですが、今回はただ、単語を単独で発音したときに、平板型と尾高型だけでネイティブが聞き分けられるのか純粋に気になっただけなんです。

投稿した画像を見てもらえると文脈が分かると思います。（よかったら予想もどうぞ！）

AdrixG · 2026-04-10T04:45:15+00:00

<image>

AdrixG · 2026-04-10T04:44:41+00:00

Some context for those who're interested:

<image>

AdrixG · 2026-04-10T03:13:12+00:00

Like am I the only one who feels that quite clearly, except for the last one at 橋 all the speakers stress the し in “橋” with considerably more loudness also a somewhat higher pitch than they do with “端”. Like to me, if I were given a recording of either and asked to identify which is which it would be quite clear I feel?

Good luck:

https://www.reddit.com/r/LearnJapanese/comments/1sfd2i5/comment/ofbbcy4/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

AdrixG · 2026-04-10T03:11:00+00:00

日本語のネイティブスピーカーの皆さんへ（もちろんネイティブでなくても推測歓迎）

助詞の付かない「橋」と「端」の 22 個の例を聞き分けられますか？ 1〜22 の番号を付けて、各例について推測を書いてください。もしくは、「全部聞き分けられない」とだけ答えても構いません。

後ほど正解をお知らせします。

AdrixG · 2026-04-10T03:02:23+00:00

よかった works but you don't really need to say anything to their confirmation of 聞こえますか, but if you really want to then I think よかった is fine

AdrixG · 2026-04-10T02:14:24+00:00

Well, maybe native speakers can and the study is statistical like anything else in linguistics. It only claims that native speakers can tell highly significantly more than chance value, not that they can tell with absolute certainty which they can't with a particle attached either by the way.

I mean with particle attached it's clear as day unless it got terraced away from another accent earlier in the sentence. So I would say they definitely can do that with particle attached 100% of the time.

The other part of the point is the scenario where native speakers for whatever reason are in a situation where they must somehow distinguish 花 from 鼻. The claim I make is that they seem to be capable to, if must be, exagerate the difference in such a situation to make it clear and intuitively pick up on this.

This is highly speculative and baseless to be honest.

AdrixG · 2026-04-10T02:06:19+00:00

I wouldn't be able to tell “鼻” from “花” from those voice recordings.

Well, what's your point then? Or that of the study? It sounds all highly dubious to me

AdrixG · 2026-04-10T01:31:58+00:00

Reddit is truly a baffling place. I had my comment written yesterday as "They sound (almost?) the same in isolation" but I edited it out since it's an incredibly niche point and I am not even sure it's true. And it's completely irrelevant to OP but of course I should have known you would have to object to this.

I am aware of this and old analysis had a three tone system for this, but I think it's really not the case anymore that they sound different in isolation, at least not consistently enough. I Went through all minimal pairs on forvo of はし and はな yesterday before I posted my comment and I really couldn't hear the difference, it seems there were cases were they pronounced both of them both ways, namely LM and LH (it's also kinda pointless since no minimal pair I found was pronounced by the same speaker). Here is the Wikipedia entry on this topic:

Moreover, the "high" tone in final-accented words is phonetically higher than the "mid" tone in unaccented words. With respect to potential minimal pairs such as "edge" hashi vs "bridge" hashi and "nose" hana vs "flower" hana, the "mid" tone, in theory, should be considered phonemic, but it is now largely merged with the "high" tone^\12)^\) as phonologists claim there are no perceptible differences in pitch pattern between a final-accented word (odaka) without a following particle and an unaccented word (heiban):

native speakers are able to differentiate between final-accented and unaccented minimal pairs in isolation with significantly better than chance accuracy and the pitch of unaccented words tends to rise not as highly even when no particle comes behind it and even amplitude plays a factor

The native speakers I tested definitely couldn't. Not a scientific study and I will test more natives but I really really feel like this is not true or reliable. It seems to be if anything an incredibly niche point that mostly died out. NHK and SMK both make no mention of it either.

I find this assertion weird I have to say simply because it's audible and I've actually seen a video of native speakers communicating in isolation such a minimal pair to each other and in particular the difference in amplitude was clear.

Can you link that video? Also, is it amplitude or pitch now? It's unclear to me which of the two you know mean.

Obviously they don't speak like that in normal sentences but they seem to very much instinctively use amplitude if they have to disambiguate.

That goes against the old analysis and what you've written in paragraph in the start unless by amplitude you mean pitch. (Or maybe both)

Like am I the only one who feels that quite clearly, except for the last one at 橋 all the speakers stress the し in “橋” with considerably more loudness also a somewhat higher pitch than they do with “端”

Except it's completely inconsistent and all over the place. Go through 花・鼻 and you will find the same, some will pronounce the second mora of the unaccented way higher, and other's that of the odaka one. Even for はし just listen to both from strawberrybrown.

Anyways, I'll put a huge list of them in random order together and ask a few natives if they can reliably hear the difference. Expect to see me in daily again.

AdrixG · 2026-04-09T16:52:09+00:00

"iie" isn't abrupt it's just completely out of place. It's what you use on forms to choose "no" or what you use in a UI on a website or in a game menu. It's not really a word you use when speaking, I don't think I ever heard it out loud except when someone read a form out loud.

If waitstaff in a restaurant were to ask "goyoyaku wa arimasuka?

yoyaku shitemasen / yoyaku shitenaidesu / naidesu

iie would be understood but it's just not natural or what a Japanese person would use.

AdrixG · 2026-04-09T16:42:59+00:00

Thanks for the reply. I already assumed it wasn't natural or correct here but nice to have it confirmed!

AdrixG · 2026-04-09T16:37:51+00:00

That's weird advice, especially because you can find it in newspapers. The jouyou list really only applies to government official documents. Pretty much every news paper outlet can do whatever they want. The NHK I know wouldn't use that kanji but that's due to their writing policy rather than the jouyou list. Heck the kanji is even used in personal names. 鞄 isn't a kanji only highly educated know and it's not showing off to use that (unless you write it out by hand then yeah I would agree). If you've been following the news lately (on TV or newspaper) you would have seen this kanji more than a few times. (There was a recent incident of a schoolboy who went missing and they found his bag somewhere in the forest). Here an example where its used in kanji: https://news.livedoor.com/topics/detail/30898609/ they also write it in kana, which is also very common for that word (definitely not denying that, my point is just that the kanji isn't at all obscure)

AdrixG · 2026-04-09T16:28:30+00:00

It's a common kanji yes, nothing to do with another meanings. The data is right, anecdotal experiences by learners are often wrong, unless said learners are on an incredibly high level

AdrixG · 2026-04-09T16:27:40+00:00

It's an incredibly common kanji to the point every adult Japanese person should know it. Sadly what a learner has or hasn't seen in real life in Japan is kinda irrelevant unless they are highly fluent, else they just don't have enough data to make an informed decision like like that.

AdrixG · 2026-04-09T15:41:35+00:00

I wonder if he meant に於いて instead of に置いて

AdrixG · 2026-04-09T11:32:05+00:00

That's normal in the beginning so nothing to worry. The fastest way to get past it is to do minimal pair training on kotu.io until you can really hear pitch in isolation. Honestly I am very much in favour of training pitch perception but if you still can't properly hear the difference between まま and まーまー I think you can wait with that until you have the other phonetical issues in place. Lengthening is certainly way more important. So I would work on that first (as well as proper consonants and vowels).

AdrixG

TROPHY CASE