Incorrect reading explanation for 現す

I think this is uncalled for in this discussion.

1 Like

And the fact that they’re often both present in WK is because the are there to reinforce a reading of a kanji (primary goal of the site is to have you read the kanji, right?). So they refer to eachother so the kanji reading gets reinforced. Picking out etymologically related soundalikes will not necessarily aid that goal.

But please, if you’re especially interested in this aspect of the language, start a thread to discuss these in the Japanese language thread, maybe? We can start off easy with the みる example @crihak posted!

1 Like

I strongly disagree. I find it much more useful to be reminded that these two words which share the same kanji have the same reading for the kanji. Adding in unrelated homophones simply because they share the same pronunciation (as the complete word) is going to make me work way harder to remember the reading.

If the homophones help you, that’s great! Maybe you can add your own personal mnemonics around them. But as a general strategy, I for one greatly prefer the current approach, even if it’s obvious.

Edit: @Saida kind of beat me to it :smile:


oh, yeah… こうしょう… try to remember, yep. :crazy_face:

1 Like

Just looked that one up for the first time… Maybe I should just use こうしょう as my guess whenever I don’t know a reading for a word. I feel like I might get it right ~50% of the time :rofl:

Sure, but this has been about verbs and kun’yomi from the start, no?

well… we are not in campfire, so…

かえる should suit this requirement.

1 Like

Well… I took it upon myself to actually make that happen!


Aside from this being largely unproductive as these threads usually seem to be, I have to agree with the majority here. It’s never a given that a kanji in any form is pronounced the same.

Since there’s a two-level difference between the two vocab, it’s likely used as reinforcement of the sound, utilizing something that should already be Guru+ by the time that you encounter 現す.

It might be redundant, but I’d prefer that over re-using a mnemonic two-levels later, thereby alienating the relation between the two, or alternatively just forgoing the original mnemonic for something “inventive.”


One thing’s for sure, you are not a wuss

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 365 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.