Please keep it. I don’t wanna see this other words removed just because they are triggering for some people. I actually think this is a very interesting word as it gives me an insight into the Japanese culture and mentality, as they made a dedicated term to express this concept.
As implied by other people in the thread, removing words from dictionaries is not the proper way to deal with one’s insecurities and problems. (I know WK is not a dictionary, but I think I made my point)
It was an opinion. And I hope you as a team think about how and when to talk about means of suicide, as it’s sadly not an abstract matter of words in the end. It’s also cause and effect, even when just mentioning it.
I’m very happy to be alive today (unrelated to WK), but if I picked this up earlier…I just don’t know)
Imagine having never learned the word “suicide” in English. How would you discuss the topic when it inevitably comes up, and I think it eventually does some time or another. Is it really beneficial to swipe certain words under the rug, limiting our means of communication? You can’t look the other way forever.
If someone sold a meal service to a general audience, that dispensed the same meals to everyone every day in a certain order for a year and a half, it wouldn’t be erasing the existence of nut-based cuisine to say “hey meal #123 has nuts in it, that might be tough for people with nut allergies.”
Wanikani isn’t comprehensive, and has by design only minimal ability to provide surrounding context and tailor itself to the individual vs. the sea of general users. Not every word that’s worth knowing is suitable for a platform like that; the question is just whether this one is or not. I think it’s debatable, so WK staff doublechecking what they think about it is a good outcome.
A bit more complicated, and probably too messy to be practical, but you could use one of the custom notes / synonyms to get syncing between browsers “for free”.
I feel like I should clarify that I’m not advocating for the censorship of language, I do think this is an important term to know. And I do think that studying a language means learning unpleasant things about the culture.
While the word doesn’t trigger me personally (though of course it makes me sad to remember how often this kind of thing happens), I do my reviews at work, as between classes is some of the only free time I have some days to do reviews. I just don’t want that to flash across my screen in giant letters as a coworker passes by and sees it - they didn’t sign up for WaniKani, and I don’t know their backgrounds about things like this, so I don’t want them to feel triggered about something they didn’t even sign up to learn.
I’m mainly just hoping for a SFW mode, where one can toggle a switch on/off and make sure those kind of words don’t pop up at a bad time, if it’s possible (or if someone knows how to use scripts for this and can explain it to me like I’m 4 because I have no idea how they work…)
I checked what level this word shows up in Wanikani, at around level 34. By that time we will have already long burnt 自殺, 飛ぶ, and 込む right? In that sense I think removing the word wouldn’t harm the learning experience at all. Plus, if you immerse in native content (which you should be doing haha) you’ll unfortunately see the word come up. Man, honestly I dunno, I’m just some schmuck.
Well, the term doesn’t even mention trains or a train station, so if you’ve never seen it before it’s not obvious what it means unless the context makes you able to guess it. If I didn’t learn what it meant from WaniKani I might’ve guessed that it has something to do with a tall building or bridge instead. It’s also (sadly) an important term in Japanese culture, while reinforcing four Kanji readings.
Ah, that’s a good point… I never considered the train part… I think in that case, might be best to keep it in.
But im also saying that from the standpoint of not being bothered by the word in the first place… in short, I have no clue.
If certain words are to be censored, please make it optional. This way no one gets to decide for other people.
The parent comment sums it up well. I like the surprise of interesting usages (less so their readings), but would welcome the ability to block a word when it hits too close to home. I sigh whenever I encounter 脳死 due to personal reasons. Doesn’t mean it’s not a valid vocabulary word, but I’m learning Japanese for fun, not to be reminded of tragedy.
The life-is-tough response just exposes one’s lack of compassion or inexperience. We don’t need trigger warnings on every word, but the ability to exclude a word when you don’t want to see it again is not an outrageous suggestion.
I completely agree with you, but I get the feeling that virtually everyone here is all for the ability to exclude words or implementing a safe mode - that would definitely just be a win-win for everyone.
What appears to have some people upset (and posting potentially inconsiderate comments) is the possibility of the words in question being completely removed for everyone, arguably akin to censorship
I’m going to suggest that you’ve brought some baggage with you to this debate that’s getting in the way of you seeing it properly. I’m not the first to point out that no-one here has suggested neutering language, censorship or curbing anyone else’s free speech - just greater user-controlled options on a private education platform.
I also doubt I’m in the minority in working in an office with 1) a lot of downtime and 2) a fairly strong no-phone policy. Of course no-one needs to do reviews at work, but tell me again why options to suit more users - on a platform that has so far embraced third party applications to tailor the experience, no less - is a bad thing?
Can people in this thread please look up the word “censorship” in a dictionary? Removing a word from a language learning app is not censorship. Your rights are not being violated if WK decides to remove a word out of regard for the people using their platform.
Also if people could stop conflating trigger words with being “offended” that would be great. The two things have nothing to do with each other. It’s also not the same thing as being safe for work although adding a SFW mode would be helpful as well.
All that said I certainly would like to see a solution that doesn’t involve removing the words entirely but allows people to opt out or be forewarned that they might be running into upsetting words. I don’t know what the best solution for this problem is but I think it’s worth it for WK to find a way to accomodate people here.
Sure I’ll look it up.
censored; censoring\ ˈsen(t)-sə-riŋ , ˈsen(t)s-riŋ \
Definition of censor (Entry 2 of 2)
: to examine in order to suppress (see SUPPRESS sense 2) or delete anything considered objectionable
also : to suppress or delete as objectionable
Nothing there about rights being violated. It’s simply the suppression and removal of information that is considered objectionable.
Not any baggage, per se, aside from a general annoyance at how there are absolutely efforts nowadays to sterilize language in order to avoid offending anyone. And while I don’t think this topic was an effort to do such q thing, I do believe that it is a symptom stemming from the same source.
As for an option for individual users to hide vocabulary, while I think its silly and juvenile I’m not necessarily opposed to it so long as it doesn’t affect anyone else. But the TC didn’t make that clear. He asked if there was any way to get rid of the word which, to me, sounds like an appeal to WK to remove the word entirely.
absolutely efforts nowadays to sterilize language in order to avoid offending anyone
No there are not. This line of thinking is absolute BS dreamed up by right wingers who don’t want to be held accountable for the fact that the way we choose to speak can actively harm people.
“No baggage, just a preconceived notion of what this is really about that’s totally clouding my judgement.”
As others have said, respecting the existence of trigger warnings and avoiding offence are two entirely separate things. The fact you describe one as a “symptom” of the other belies that you are mistakenly conflating them.
As others have pointed out, there are numerous style guides by various publications on how to approach the topic of suicide sensitively, because of how upsetting it can be to some people. You’re welcome to think and say “I don’t care if others are upset” as is afforded by your free speech rights, but don’t try to kid yourself and others that this is a principled response to some amorphous threat to censorship (or be surprised that people might call you out for being inconsiderate).
As a Buddhist, I reject the notion that people have a right (or even a remote possibility) to go through life without being triggered or offended. It’s part of the human experience that can’t be avoided, and is one of the many forms of suffering that characterize our existence as animals on a deeply impefect planet. I have close friends and family members who have committed suicide, and in my role as a priest I have tried to help others who have ultimately taken their lives. Nonetheless, it would never make sense to me to try to expunge the mention of suicide from my life. Attempting to remove triggers and offense will never lead to hapiness becuase it simply can never be succesful. It will thus only lead to more furstration and disappointment when one inevitably come upon the next offending word or concept they feel they by right should not experience. I wish we could live in a Pure Land without such suffering, but in reality the only way we can overcome such suffering is by learning to be comfortable with it. Some cases, like the use of a viciously deragatory word, may of course truly require action, but even still, accepting is not the same as condoning.