Tae Kim is Korean

Yeah if you look up the actual rules you kinda wonder how anybody could learn all that. :joy:

That’s where I think there are some grammar rules that you won’t ever internalize unless you see them a million times.

3 Likes

Same here.

Exactly.

My problem is people complaining about this stuff are often not technically incorrect in their criticisms, but they’re often not rooted in practicality. All beginner resources have to do is provide knowledge that will get you breaking down sentences on your own so input becomes more comprehensible at the start. Much like mnemonics, grammar explanations fade from memory and the only thing you’re left with is an intuitive understanding of how shit works (which is the goal).

Besides, saying that something is confusing is a pretty empty complaint on its own. Thats like…subjective yo

14 Likes

Japanese grammar is basically the same as Korean grammar

[citation needed]

4 Likes

citation here

1 Like

We have a discussion about it here:

I don’t disagree, but I also think that better resources have come out in the years since TK’s guide were written and they haven’t been getting as much exposure as they should.

And I also think it’s time to rethink our recommendations to new learners so that they can take advantage of our experiences.

I’ve been guilty myself of parroting the popular wisdom, but I just took a look at Pomax’s Guide and it’s pretty good and I’d never heard of it before.

I mean, I get the notion that “it was good enough for me so it should be good enough for you”, but I think I’d rather say “it was good enough for me years ago but here’s something better that’s come along since”. :smiley:

7 Likes

Uhm, no.

Even a cursory glance at Korean grammar - Wikipedia will show you several features that Korean has and Japanese doesn’t, e. g. a subject-verb agreement and a future tense.

For the strong claim that “Japanese grammar is basically the same as Korean grammar”, I think it is fair to expect some kind of actual evidence and I generally think posting highly-questionable truisms in a forum aimed at language learners is not a very nice thing to do.

Now stop wasting my time.

4 Likes

I think you misunderstood.

If I had an alternative I found to be better, I would love to provide it and point out why it’s better. I just don’t have one. I’m not interested in arguing about who’s book is better so I intentionally dont join those conversations. OP just seemed to be worried about the viability of the resource due to certain complaints and I just made it clear that I don’t find those complaints to amount to
much.

I literally provided an opinion based off of my own experience lmao. You just don’t like it.

3 Likes

Wait did you mean to quote me or the other guy?

I meant to quote you, because you went to “the other guy”'s defense with that nonsensical “citation here” post.

3 Likes

Was the citation not satisfactory

2 Likes

That’s where I was coming from. I never actually looked for alternatives since I had already moved past it, and that’s where I think we can explore what’s out there right now.

But I can understand that there are merits on both sides, so I’m not trying to change your mind. I’m just sharing my experience.

I don’t like it or dislike it, I just disagree. :slight_smile:

I’m not even claiming there is a merit to using tae kim tho, just that it’s viable. If you go back, me and crihak were just responding to the concern that the kims guide wasn’t a serious one. We were talking about viability, not superiority. Two very different things.

At the end of the day, I imagine there is a better guide than tae kim out there. Personally, I don’t know of it and I don’t really don’t care to look for it. As a result, I can’t say tae kims the best but only that it works.

I’m literally living proof that it’s viable. I’m not sure what you’re disagreeing with.

3 Likes

Did he?

1 Like

Ah, ok, that’s where the misunderstanding crept in then. I misread your position on viability versus superiority. My mistake, sorry about that.

2 Likes

No, pointing to EXACTLY THE SENTENCE I HAD JUST PUT INTO QUESTION as proof of ITSELF was NOT BLOODY SATISFACTORY!

3 Likes

Yes. Citation here

4 Likes

Thank you, that clears it up quite nicely.

2 Likes

No problem. To make it clear to anyone else in case my posts were confusing, tae Kims guide is on the older side and a lot of people who are really good at japanese now have used it. I do think that this can be misleading some people to think it’s better, but really only take it as meaning it’s viable. Again I don’t have any alternatives personally, but I’m sure there’s plenty of good stuff out there.

1 Like

[Citation needed]

3 Likes