Talib wrote:
Nastaʿlīq is not really representative because it's a calligraphy style not used in Arabic.
But it is the standard for written Urdu, I believe.
Talib wrote:
Quote:
Well, I would advise anyone attempting to learn Japanese to learn at least the 1,945 jōyō kanji (jp:常用漢字; "habitual use sinographs") first, before even learning kana. Knowing those kanji gives you a solid foundation for learning the actual language itself.
I would study those but learn kana first, because it's simpler and might give me a) some idea of how to read Japanese and b) practice with the stroke rules and so on of kanji.
sokuban wrote:
Nah, I think learning kana first would be better, because a lot of dictionaries etc only show the reading in kana anyways, and if they romanize it you don't know which romanization system they used, which might be a little confusing.
The reason why I recommend
kanji first is because while you're learning them you won't be using
kana for anything. When you're learning
kanji you only will be learning the meanings; no readings. If you learn
kana first, there's a chance you'll forget them by the time you're done with the
kanji.
But, I don't think that learning
kana first would be detrimental, either, so it's OK to do it that way.
Talib wrote:
Would it be helpful to study Chinese characters first, since they are what kanji (and the principles of their composition) are based on?
I'm not sure I understand your question.
Kanji are Chinese characters.
Kanji (JP:漢字) is just what they're called in Japanese. I suppose the term in English specifically refers to those that are used in Japanese but most of them also are used in Chinese.
But that's exactly what I recommend: to learn
kanji before you start learning actual Japanese.