Running head: JAPANESE LANGUAGE TEACHING APPROACH TO ZERO LEVEL WESTERN STUDENTS 1

Japanese language teaching approach to zero level western students:

Conversation & Ludic vs. Structure & Lexical Syllabus

Jonathan Roza Magoga

Tokyo International University

JAPANESE LANGUAGE TEACHING APPROACH TO ZERO LEVEL WESTERN STUDENTS 2
JAPANESE LANGUAGE TEACHING APPROACH TO ZERO LEVEL WESTERN STUDENTS 3

Japanese language teaching approach to zero level western students:

Conversation & Ludic vs. Structure & Lexical Syllabus

Why it seems so hard to learn Japanese? And how current methods help or hinder students in

their quest to learn? A single factor makes all the difference: Method! Teaching Asian languages to

western students is a challenge, and while most widely used approaches yield slightly favorable results,

there has been no significant evolution to—or stepping away from—the traditional teaching methods in

the past few decades. Students, especially those with very low to zero knowledge of the target language,

have to cope with major dissimilarities in culture, behavior and expectations. On top of that, they have to

deal with a huge and utterly unfamiliar new set of characters. To encompass all the facets and

subtleties of language learning, there is a whole spectrum of methods, each with strengths and

weaknesses on each aspect of the process. Notwithstanding the inherent difficulty of the Japanese

language, both of the most used approaches for language learning in general, ludic and structured, are

known to produce good results.

At the humane and natural flow end of the spectrum, there is the Ludic approach, spearheaded

by the Conversation method as “an integral part of learning a foreign language”, and the Ludic Learning

method, where “the game has an essential role in cognitive, emotional and social development of the

student“ (Ionica, 2014). It can be argued that those two methods are an essential part of a learning

environment, since they are very akin to how children will learn during their formative years, the first 8

years of their lives, according to Unicef (2013). At the other end of the spectrum, where learning is

analytical and intensive, there is the Structured approach, led by the Lexical Syllabus method, which

focus on the word, or vocabulary, as the center of the language learning process (Richards & Rodgers, p.

132, 2001), and the structured method, which is “based on the belief that in the learning of a foreign

language, mastery of structures is more important than the acquisition of vocabulary” (Menon & Patel,

1957, p. 47). Those two distinctively contrasting methods can contribute to a very thorough and

analytical learning process, and despite it’s opposing approaches, they are often used in conjunction,

contributing to an extra intensive learning process. Of the two approaches, the first is most prevalent in

western cultures, where students are generally cared for, and nurtured towards knowledge, while the

latter is the pillar of the eastern education, with focus on hard work, and punishment or shaming for non-
JAPANESE LANGUAGE TEACHING APPROACH TO ZERO LEVEL WESTERN STUDENTS 4

performers. For all these reasons, a deeper comparison is warranted, addressing the three most

important aspects of language learning: Frustration management, early first successful use, and solid

foundation for continued progress after the course.

Before we start comparing apples to pineapples, we must acknowledge the very wide cultural

differences between east and west, to the point of showing up on brain scans. Goldberg (2008) points

out that western people are more independent, and will perform better when they feel they have free

choice, while asian people will perform best when a choice is made by someone in a higher position in

the hierarchy (ex.: mother, teacher, or boss). With the cultural differences taken into account, and the

three aspects to be evaluated clearly defined, this article will focus on students from the Germanic and

Neo-Latin languages groups. According to the University of Duisburg-Essen (n.d.), Germanic languages

are comprised by German, English, Dutch and other similar languages, and according to Sala and Posner

(2016), Neo-Latin, or Romance languages, are comprised by French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese and

other similar languages. Those groups have several important commonalities, the most relevant being

the use of the roman alphabet, but also the widespread use of modern teaching methods from the

elementary school and up (Tourtet, 1998), cultures that favor incentives and rewards for successful

academic results, and a higher than average chance of having gone through most of elementary school

under some degree of the ludic method. Among the aforementioned aspects, especially for students

with zero knowledge of the Japanese language, frustration ranks the highest, aided by the very shallow

learning curve caused by traditional eastern teaching methods. That, in turn, may lead to months of

inability to effectively use the language, even for very basic daily activities. And lastly, the foundation

acquired, as solid as it should be after months of study, is weakened by frustration and lack of use.

Frustration is the highest cause for dropouts in language schools, and frustration management is

now recognized as a fundamental factor in any learning environment, a pivotal aspect that is

consistently ignored by eastern teaching methods. More importantly, frustration is a routinely

unacknowledged feeling in most eastern cultures, and the accepted solution for that problem is to

toughen up and work harder. Therefore, it is safe to assume that frustration management is not an active Commented [1]: While I don't necessarily disagree
with you, it would be useful to find an outside source to
element of the traditional eastern education, thus making this first comparison admittedly unfair. support this claim.
Commented [2]: Still looking for support, otherwise will
Notwithstanding, a comparison will be drawn. For instance, the Structured method will emphasize the remove.

learning of the basic characters, Hiragana and Katakana—with more than 110 characters and phonetic
JAPANESE LANGUAGE TEACHING APPROACH TO ZERO LEVEL WESTERN STUDENTS 5

variations each. According to Thompson (2014), Japanese is the most difficult language to learn for

English speakers, and the primary factor is the inherent difficulty of the writing system. Nevertheless,

kana is taught with a direct memorization approach: “Please read these five characters and repeat with

me: ka, ki, ku, ke, ko. Good. Next: sa, shi, su, se, so…”. Quickly learning all the characters is a necessity,

because without them the student can’t use the books in any way. For Japanese language classes, the

most used books are the popular series Minna no Nihongo, with a highly structured approach, and the

less used Genki series, which attempts to include some elements of the ludic, but without stepping away

from the roots of structure. For instance, as soon as the two extensive character sets are learned, the

students will learn several words, mostly classroom terms, and immediately move to grammatical rules,

and basic vocabulary. All that in a very short period of time, more than enough to make the student feel

overwhelmed. Conversely, under a ludic approach the student would start naturally, as any native

children would: learning words and simple phrases, playing games with the characters, drawing, but

more importantly, talking, watching, drawing parallels, and creating memories and mnemonics. The

structured method, with a subject-oriented learning curve, offers mindless repetition of increasingly

difficult sentence patterns and the early addition of Kanji. That, in turn, will make the overwhelming

feeling, caused by the quick pace and high volume of information during the first days, likely to persist

for several months. If the student fall behind the class, an almost certainty for a student with average

willpower, that feeling can turn into an almost unshakeable frustration. Kanji alone, the vast set of

character comprised of over 85,000 individual letters, is to blame for a sizable piece of the frustration

pie. Granted, a person must learn only around 4,500 kanji for realistic daily use, a still fright-inducing

number. In contrast, the ludic perspective respects and abides by an organic and student-oriented

learning curve, with sentence patterns being learned with daily use and a wide variation of live, and lively,

examples; particularly, kanji would only be introduced later, at the beginning of the steeper upward

incline of the learning curve, when a more comprehensive vocabulary is already set in the student’s

minds, and word associations would help commit the shapes to memory. All in all, a frustration-free

student will be less apologetic for simple mistakes, and will feel encouraged to try and talk to people.

Talking to people, knowing what you are saying and understanding what is being said to you in a

new language, is an amazing feeling. How soon that will happen depends largely on the student and the

method used. Following a structured method, the traditional teaching method in eastern cultures, the
JAPANESE LANGUAGE TEACHING APPROACH TO ZERO LEVEL WESTERN STUDENTS 6

student will be presented with a high flow of information, and an ever increasing amount at that, just in

the first weeks. The student starts with a few words to form a basic vocabulary, then will start to learn

grammar rules, and soon will be faced with a multitude of particles with intricate rules, all the while

trying to wrap their mind around a clearly distinct language structure and phonetics, within a culture that

contrasts highly with their own. Here is an analogy to illustrate the quick pace and increasingly higher

flux of information of the structured approach: a kid is starting to assemble her first 500 piece jigsaw

puzzle with a slightly more complex picture than the previous ones, a reasonable challenge. Some hours

pass, a few pieces are connected, and the kid feels she is starting to get the hang of it, and get

comfortable with the just acquired techniques to find matching pieces. But when returning to the

unfinished puzzle the next day, she finds 2000 pieces in the box, and the picture startlingly changed to

one full of trees. Not impossible, but certainly harder to connect the pieces with so much similar

information in the picture, all but nullifying her current techniques. With resignation and determination

the kid soldier on, reframing her mind to the bigger undertaking ahead, and work on it for a few days,

now progressing more steadily. After a weekend away, the kid confidently returns to finish her puzzle,

but to her dismay there are now 5000 pieces, and the picture again changed, now to a vast snow

covered mountain range against clear sky, a most beautiful picture, but one that will require the learning,

or conception, of several new matching rules and techniques. In summary, by burdening the student with

a high flow of new information every day, there is no respite, no time to connect the pieces of data, Commented [3]: This ties your analogy to your
argument nicely.
consequently delaying the first meaningful use of the language to the second month, or later. However, Commented [4]: Thank you.

the higher number of rules and vocabulary learned in the first few months can help form a healthy, if a

bit inflexible, foundation for future self learning and evolution in the use of the language. But use the

language we must, indeed! And the ludic method, founded on encouragement to try and use the few

pieces of learned language, will usually make that happen from day one. Students will play thematic

games, listen to educational and fun songs, draw and paint, do phonetic exercises to improve

pronunciation even before the student starts to speak, do roleplay of daily activities, and much more.

The student will then naturally acquire new pieces, new words, connecting them to other words already

known, steadily increasing their communication ability. After a couple of weeks, the gradual transition to

the written word will be met with optimism, and a cheerful will to learn how to read and write what they
JAPANESE LANGUAGE TEACHING APPROACH TO ZERO LEVEL WESTERN STUDENTS 7

are already saying and hearing, and probably even singing! That positive attitude will help cement the

knowledge into a solid base for growth.

Creating a strong foundation is arguably a mandatory aspect of any learning process. That

foundation will determine the rate and extent of evolution, both in and post-course. If the foundation is

feeble, progress will be slow, hindered by lack of self-confidence caused by the doubts still present

regarding rules or meanings. A weak foundation will severely limit the student, possibly creating a cycle

of doubt>non-use>doubt>non-use and so on, until the knowledge rusts away. If instead the foundation is

strong, the student will have confidence to keep learning, knowing how to express most meanings and

thoughts, even if with simpler words at the earlier levels of knowledge. Under a structured method,

students will form the foundation slowly, gradually, with years of use, but with a wider base, knowing a

great number of rules and forms, and having a good vocabulary. One major drawback of this method is

the student’s need to think and compose the phrase mentally before speaking, matching the correct rule

and words, a handicap that is likely to persist for a year or more. Conversely, a student under the ludic

method will quickly establish a narrower foundation, although an ever increasing one, with every

preceding piece of acquired knowledge supporting the new information, that in turn will become a part

of the expanding foundation. The drawback in this case is the reduced set of known rules, which may

cause the student to sound uneducated sometimes, although it can be argued that perfection is not

expected during, and shortly after, the learning process. Another important characteristic of the

foundation is flexibility, the ability to take advantage of most interactions or readings to grasp a new

meaning or form by context, correlation or deduction. Under a structured method, where the student

learned that everything must come with rules and examples, that flexibility is limited. New meanings will

mostly come from known subjects, where known rules can be applied by substituting the new word in

known reference sentences. On the other hand, a great advantage is that the student can significantly

progress by simply doing it the learned way: to sit and study. From the ludic perspective, however, the

student will have learned an important skill: how to learn dynamically from trial and error, and from the

environment. The student is used to take risks by trying new words and forms (Zafar & Meenakshi, 2012,

p. 644), assured by the ability to convey the same meaning with simpler words, in case the new word or

form fails. Any new subject is open for grabs. Rules and patterns may be memorized by association, and

by repeated exposure, something that naturally happens with an increased use of the language.
JAPANESE LANGUAGE TEACHING APPROACH TO ZERO LEVEL WESTERN STUDENTS 8

That steadily increasing use of the language, from zero to fluent, and hopefully native level, is the

ultimate goal of learning a language. For that, an environment conducive to learning must be provided,

and the most appropriate method must be chosen for each student type. The exceptional results

achieved with the most recent techniques in ludic methods for western students directly contrasts with

the slowly but steadily declining results offered by the traditional structured methods characteristic of

the eastern cultures. Mindless repetitions from book passages must be a thing of the past, and kanji,

with its obtuse hieroglyphical nature to the western eye, should be gradually introduced with their

associated words. Japanese, the language that gave the world the Haiku, deserves a modern learning

method, to be taught and spread, bringing with it its venerable culture and beautiful art.

Spring in sight — Still far

The winter I brave, struggling
To talk, to listen…
Jonathan Magoga
3:09 am, last year of the Heisei Era
JAPANESE LANGUAGE TEACHING APPROACH TO ZERO LEVEL WESTERN STUDENTS 9

References

Goldberg, C. (2008). East and West: Seeing the world through different lenses. The New York

Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/04/health/04iht-

6sncult.1.10695876.html

Ionica, L. (2014). Traditional and modern methods in ELT. Language and Literature – European

Landmarks of Identity, 15, 404-411. Pitești, Romania: Universitatea din Pitești. Retrieved from

http://www.diacronia.ro/ro/indexing/details/A14593/pdf

Menon, T., & Patel, M. S. (1957). The teaching of English as a foreign language: Structural approach.

Baroda, India: Acharya Book Depot.

Richards, J. & Rodgers, T. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching (2nd ed., pp.

132). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Sala, M. & Posner, R. (2016). Romance languages. Encyclopaedia Britannica. Retrieved from

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Romance-languages

Thompson, I. (2014). Language Learning Difficulty. AWL - About World Languages. Retrieved from

http://aboutworldlanguages.com/language-difficulty

Tourtet, L. (1998). A Brief History of Modern Methods. Innovative Methods in the Associated

Schools Project, 19-21. Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/education/pdf/34_26.pdf

Unicef. (2013). The formative years: UNICEF’s work on measuring early childhood development.

Retrieved from https://www.unicef.org/earlychildhood/files/Brochure_-

_The_Formative_Years.pdf

Universitat Duisburg-Essen. (n.d.). The Germanic languages. Studying the History of English.

Retrieved from https://www.uni-due.de/SHE/SHE_Germanic_Languages.htm

Zafar, S. & Meenakshi, K. (2012). Individual Learner Differences and Second Language

Acquisition: A Review. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 3(4), 639-646.

doi:10.4304/jltr.3.4.639-646