比治山大学現代文化学部紀要，第10号， 2∞3 Bul. Hijiyama Univ. No.lO， 2∞3

Cultivating Visual Memory:

Reflections of a Nonnative Kanji Leamer

David M. Mosher

Abstract

119

For伊 oplefrom non -kanji cultures， the single greatest barrier to acquiring the ]apanese 1anguage is

learning the ]apanese characters (henceforth， kanji) . 1n this article， this problem will be examined from

the perspective of the author' s kanji literacy autobiography， a comparison of four published kanji

learning methods， psycholinguistic studies of kanji acquisition， and psychological studies of effective

memory strategies. 1紅 'guethat卯 orlydeveloped visua1 memory ability is the primary cause of kanji

learning difficulties for ]apanese language learners from non-kanji cultures and that common rote

memory approaches which rely heavily on kinetic memory are ineffective. 1n order to foster visual

memories， it is essential to employ learning methods that more carefully take into account the

mechanisms of human memory.

要旨

非漢字文化圏の人にとっては、日本語を習得するには漢字が一番大きい障壁であろう o この論文で

は、この問題を著者の漢字取得自伝 (kanjiliteracy autobiography)、出版されている四つの漢字学習

方法の比較、漢字の心理言語学的習得過程研究と心理学の記憶方略研究を通して考察する o 著者は、

ビジュアル記憶の能力が十分に発達していないことが非漢字文化圏日本語学習者の漢字障壁の一番大

きい原因であり、漢字学習のために一般的に用いられる運動記憶 (kineticmemory)を頼りにする棒

暗記法は有効的ではないと主張する D ビジュアル記憶を育成するには、人の記憶の仕組みを十分に考

慮した学習方法が必要である。

1. INTRODUCTION

1n my experience， kanji has proved to be the single most difficult barrier to learning the ]apanese

language. However， 1 am not alone. Mastering a sufficient number of kanji to achieve basic literacy in

]apanese has proven extremely difficult for the majority of students of ]apanese from non-kanji

cultures. As Henshall (1998) states，“For everyone student who feels confident in reading and

writing kanji， there are dozens who seem daunted and full of despair (p.， ix)." Heisig (1986， 1994)

aptly refers to the difficulty of learning kanji as the kanji curtain， evoking provocative images of the

iron curtain that so totally separated the communist world and the free world during the cold war era.

Recently， 1 have concluded that the major cause of my kanji learning difficulties has been my卯 orly

developed visual memory ability. 1n this article， 1 will attempt to shed some light on the nature of this

problem by means of a brief kanji literacy autobiography (c.f.， Belchers & Connor， 2001; Mosher，

120 David M. Mosher

2002). Next， 1 will consider some of the memory and psycholinguistic processes involved in learning

and remembering the kanji， in order to better understand the nature of visual memory. Finally， 1 will

discuss seven specific memory strategies that can be used to enhance long-term memory of ka吋i.

2. KANJ I LlTERACY AUTOBIOGRAPHY

2.1 Early Ka.ηji Literacy

1 have been learning kanji for the past five and a half years following a blank of virtually no kanji

learning in the preceding ten years. My first encounter with kanji， however， begins in the mid-70s

when 1 taught English in ]apan for two years. The second of these two years， 1 picked up a mostly

passive knowledge of about 500 kanji chiefly through a general study of ]apanese using a self -study

textbook with dialogues， grammar notes， readings and a cassette tape， and by using a small toyo-kanji

(1，850 characters) dictionary which 1 occasionally carried with me on the bus to both learn ka司iin the

order they appeared in the dictionary as well as to look up any kanji in my environment that grabbed

myattention. Towards the beginning of this first kanji study phase， 1 alωrecall reading a book that

ga ve a brief pictorial-etymological history of 300 kanji (Walsh， 1969).

Upon returning to the U.S.， 1 decided to study ]apanese formally. During this time， 1 took a total of

four university courses in ]apanese. The kanji in the first-year werejust light review. However， 1 took

second-year ]apanese as a nine-week intensive summer program in which we were tested over some

twenty or so kanji per day. Early this summer， one professor gave me a kanji-learning tip outside of

c1ass. He回 idto fold a letter-sized sheet of paper twice to form a small square， then write the hiragana

for the kanji to be learned on the outside and the kanji on the inside. Once 1 could write all of the kanji

in my list three times without a single mistake， he回 idthat 1 could consider that 1 knew the kanji.

For me this was a key learning moment. It was my discovery of the power of rote memorization: the

magical effect of simply writing something down repeatedly. With this advice， 1 was able to ace all of

my kanji quizzes that summer and successfully apply this technique to my third -year ]apanese course.

1 even adapted it to the last two years of my undergraduate schoolwork， raising my GPA considerably.

Although this “quiz sheet" style of rote memorization was a break through for me， when the

volume of kanji compounds to be learned in my fourth course， a newspaper reading c1ass， jumped

sharply upwards， 1 discovered that there was no time to even make a quiz sheet. Instead， 1 resorted to

just writing the kanji as many times as 1 could， usually in the last hour or so before c1ass and usually in

a state of semi-panic. Up to this point， my approach to learning kanji was to read， look up kanji in a

dictionary， and memorize them by rote.

Regardless of the course description for third -year ]apanese that c1aimed all the toyo-kanji would be

taught， and although 1 had even taken a more advanced newspaper reading course subsequent to

third -year ]apanese， when 1 returned to ]apan for my second extended坑ay，1 could not read even one

simple news story without extensive and laborious dictionary work. Clearly， 1 was a long way from

“knowing" the toyo-kanji. My reaction was to do an intensive review of the 996 kyoiku-kanji that are

Cultivating Visual Memory : Reflections of a Nonnative Kanji Learner 121

required characters for elementary school children (Halpern， 1993)， using a rather traditional textbook

that provided vocabulary， readings and sentence translation exercises. Still， my goal of being able to

read a newspaper fluently seemed a long way off.

It was not until 1 learned about extensive reading a couple of years later that 1 was able to break out

of my impasse. 1 discovered much to my delight that 1 could read the newspaper fluently if 1 were only

willing to guess and shrug off the discomfort of not understanding 100% of what 1 read. Also， of

tremendous help at this time were two other se!f-study books that helped me to increase my core

newspaper vocabulary quickly and efficiently: An Introduction to Newspaper ]apanese by Osamu and

Nobuko Mizutani (1981) and ]apanese Newspaper Compounds by Tadashi Kikuoka (1970). The first

book c1aims to inc1ude approximately 1，400 characters， and the latter drills students in the 1，000 most

frequent newspaper compounds or jukugo (熟語).By the late 1980s， 1 could read a ]apanese newspaper

with anywhere from 70 to 100 percent comprehension although 1 was constantly perplexed by

encountering kanji 1 did not know， or kanji that 1 knew， but could not read. 1 attempted to learn these

kanji by rote a5 1 encountered them in my reading. In 1987，1 returned to the United State5 to attend

graduate school， and with the exception of two years in ]apan from 1989 to 1991， 1 did not study kanji

again until the spring of 1998.

2.2 A Second Round of Kanji Learning

1 ended my kanji learning draught five and a half years ago upon returning to ]apan. 1 began with

the modest goal of just reading the newspaper everyday， watching television news for reinforcement

and trying to single out a minimum of one kanji a day for either review or new study under the theory

that 1 could easily cover 500 or 50 kanji a year at that pace， and thus have the joyo-kanji (1，945

characters) down pat in three years. 1 kept a kind of modified kanji quiz sheet in a loose-leaf note加ok

with the kanji 1 wished to remember on one side and the readings and meanings on the other. In

addition， 1 usually wrote a few extra compounds using the target character to both expand my

vocabulary and to anchor the kanji in my mind.

However， 1 found that since 1 wished to maximize my reading time， 1 had little time left over to

review kanji， and when 1 did， 1 was shocked by the high percentage for which 1 could no longer recall

either the reading， the meaning or both. To a certain extent， 1 know that such forgetting is part and

parcel of any second language study because to truly learn a new word or character， it is necessary to

see it and comprehend it in several different environments. Still，I knew 1 must do better， but 1 wanted

to do so with out sacrificing scare reading time.

My solution was to write the sentence or phrase that the compound appeared in， hoping that this

context would stimulate recall. A1though time consuming， it helped substantially since 1 found that 1

invariably remembered the content of a news story longer than the language. But， writing sentences

and phrases down provided additional unexpected benefits. 1 was surprised that more and more often 1

was able to write kanji when 1 needed to at work or when fi1ling out forms at various public offices.

Also， 1 found that the mere act of copying sentences as the last phase of a kanji study facilitates

grammatical and pragmatic usage analysis as well.

122 David M. Mosher

2.3 A Kanji Learning Breakthrough

Still， as 1 continued with my kanji learning， 1 increasingly encountered a new and highly annoying

problem: mistaking one kanji for another. To illustrate， when 1 encountered the kanji compouild探査，

1 had the strong urge to read it as shinsa， but 1 was not at all sure that was right nor did 1 understand

why 1 was having difficulty reading a character that 1 have looked up more than once in the past. The

correct reading of course istansa， which means investigation or inquiry. The fact that 1 could read this

character in other compounds， such as探偵小説 (tantei-shousetsu:detective story) or探索 (tansaku:

search)， helped me to understand that 1 was not really “seeing" the kanji. 1 was relying too heavily

on the context of the surrounding characters， the surrounding ]apanese， the genre， etc. In terms of

reading theory， 1 was applying a strong top-down strategy to my kanji processing (Grabe， 1993;

Carrell， et al.， 1988; Weaver， 1988). In this case， 1 could not see that the left radical or grapheme was

the te-hen or hand radical and not the sanzui-hen or water radical for the more common 深 character

(on -reading， shin) as in 深い (fukai:deep). Undoubtedly， 1 was influenced by the familiarity of the

name of a town near my house:深川町 (Fukawa-cho). Still， 1 could not have told you what the left

radical for深 was.This and other similar confusions showed me that 1 processed many kanji at a very

holistic level， highlighting a glaring deficiency in my approach to learning kanji. It also showed me that

the tendency to confuse graphically similar characters stemmed from my unsystematic approach of

learning a handful of unrelated characters from my reading.

2.3.1 Kaη;iABC

A couple of years ago， 1 came across the book Kanji ABC by Foerster and Tamura (1994; c.f.，

Noguchi， n.d.) that helped me remedy my rote-memory， shotgun approach to kanji learning. Kanji

ABC first presents and encourages the student to learn the stroke order and one core English meaning

for each of 451 graphemes used in the jouyou-kanji. Then， it uses 422 of these graphemes to c1uster

each of the 1，945 jouyou-kanji into graphically related groups for memorization of the major on-and

kun-readings and of some of the major English meanings of each character. Although 1 thought this

book was a little too Spartan at first， since it gives no kanji compounds， no ]apanese names for

graphemes， and it fails to inc1ude some high -frequency readings and meanings for some graphemes

and kanji due to its core meaning and reading only approach， in combination with other references and

dictionaries， it has proved to be an excellent tool.

For example， when 1 look up深 and探， 1 can see at a glance that it is only the water and hand

radicals that 1 have to be careful to notice; that is， these are the only twojoyo-kanjithat share the same

right-hand structure or tsukuri (穿).This alone is valuable and comforting information. However，

Kanji ABC puts these two characters into a c1uster of seven graphically similar characters -突く、空

く、控える、搾る、窯、深い and探す-because the first five share a common grapheme (穴)that

is named “airhole." Kanji ABC identifies each of the graphemes of a character. For example， the first

character tsuku consists of “airhole" and “big" (大)and the second character aku consists of

“airhole" and “handicraft" (工).With assistance of the two core definitions given for the first kanji

(i.e.， thrust and protruding)， one can then imagine in the mind's eye something protruding from， or

thrust into a big “airhole."

Cultivating Visual Memory : Reflections of a Nonnative Kanji Learner 123

For me， the first three and last two characters of the above cluster were quite familiar， but the

fourth and fifth were not， so by studying this cluster 1 could efficiently increase my knowledge of new

characters as well as learn graphemes and improve my “analytical eye" for kanji. According to ABC

Kanji， for example， the fourth character (shiboru)， has three graphemes -“hand" ，“airhole" and

“generate" the last of which you may recognize as the right radical of作る (tsukuru).Knowing the

core meaning is “squeeze" one can easily imagine a hand generating a stream of milk through the

“airhole" of a cow'snipple. This cluster yielded multiple payoffs for me: 1 could see commonalities

between previously unassociated characters， do a quick review of old characters， integrate knowledge

of new characters into old knowledge， learn a new name or two for graphemes， and graphemically

analyze each character. This not only reduces the likelihood of confusing 深and探， it lays a sounder

foundation for learning new kanji encountered in the future.

2.3.2 Minimalist Drawbacks

Despite its advantages， Kanji ABC's minimalist approach has some drawbacks. The other day， 1

wanted to confirm the kanji for kuchibiru (lips). ABC Kanji says the on-reading for this kanji (唇 is

shin， the kun-reading is kuchibiru and that the graphemes are “tremble" (辰)and “mouth" (口).

Kuchibiru is listed in a cluster of seven kanji that use the tremble grapheme. However， since 1 knew

that辰 (tatsu)is dragon (the fifth sign in the Chinese zodiac)， 1 was suspicious of this ABC grapheme

name. Therefore， 1 looked up唇 inHenshall's (1998) “A Guide to Remembering ]apanese

Characters" which provides brief， but comprehensive etymologies for all of thejouyou-kanji. (Note:

辰， although a commonly used character in ]apan， is not a jouyou-畑中i).Here， 1 discovered that the

original meaning for辰 isclam， not dragon.、

Certainly，辰doescontain the core meaning “tremble" as in the震える (furueru:tremble) of地震

ω'shin: earthquake)， but knowing the original meaning is very helpful in this case. For example， 1 can

now think of辰 asthe clam-dragon as opposed to the real dragons龍 and竜 thatshare the same kun-

reading， tatsu. Also， with the help of Henshall， 1 can use the clam meaning to remember several of the

kanji in this cluster. For example， lips (唇)might be thought to open and close like a clam shell， and

when someone does not want to talk， they clam up. For the娠 (shin:to be pregnant) of妊娠 (ninshin:

pregnancy) ， one can think of a woman incasing her unborn child safely and securely in her womb like a

clam shell incases the clam. For the農 (nou:farming) of農業 (nougyou:farming)， once one knows

that曲 isnot etymologically related to kyoku or bend， but is a miscopying of an earlier form that

showed a field (田)surrounded by plants and trees， it is easy to imagine a farmer using a sharp clam-

shell-like tool to clear fields for planting. In addition to useful and scholarly etymologies， Henshall

provides three high frequency compounds for each character， helping you to further anchor the

meaning of a character in your mind as well as to expand your vocabulary. However， there are

potential drawbacks to etymological studies like Henshall's; namely， etymological study can be very

time consuming， the real etymology of a kanji can be more complicated and obscure than helpful， and

one can be tempted to try to remember too many bits of information for each kanji.

2.3.3 Mnemonic Story Issues

Another drawback to minimalist approaches like the ABC Kanji approach， at least for me， is the lack

124 David M. Mosher

of any mnemonic for relating the graphemes for each kanji to a core meaning or two for a given kanji.

Kanji ABC leaves it totally up to the learner to make their own mnemonics， which 1 have found to be

difficult for many kanji. Heisig's (1986， 1987; Heisig & Sienko， 1994) “Remembering the Kanji"

series tries to remedy this problem by teaching learners to make their own mnemonic stories.

However， 1 have been dissatisfied with this particular approach because of its anything that works

approach， which is often totally indifferent to the real etymology of the kanji， content to use any

association that shocks the mind's eye. DeRoo's (1980) “2001 Kanji" has filled this gap for me by

providing short stories for 2018 characters -the 1，945 jouyou -kanji plus 73 additional high -frequency

or c10sely related characters -that more c10sely follow the historical roots of each character.

For example， for学 (gaku，manabu: school， learn)栄え (ei，sakae: glory， flourish)， DeRoo explains

that the top radical elements originate from two different radicals:撃ぶ forlearn， and楽 forglory.

The top element of learn consists of two hands (~'f) of a pupil wearing c10thes (r--7) an element which is

also written as (円)and has a range of meanings， such as cover， bag， things grouped together as well

as c1othes， and textbooks written by hand (支)， giving a pupil wearing c10thes reaching up to receive a

textbook written by hand. With this knowledge as a base， he suggests that the character be

remembered simply as “a child (子)at school (μ)." The top element of glory is explained as

consisting of brilliant little lights (火火)grouped together (η). The mnemonic is “trees (木)planted

around the school (μ) to promote reforestation." However， armed with the background knowledge

given in DeRoo a different image can be cultivated. 1 choose to remember this character as a flower

covered tree in a blaze of glory like that of a paulownia tree.

For these same two characters， Heisig (1986) ignores the differing etymological roots of the top

elements. He names both top elements “school house" and encourages the following mnemonic story:

Here we see a little read記 h∞，lhou鑓 withthe three dots on the roof. As you write it in

the following frames， you should acquire a "feel" for the way the first two short

strokes move left to right， and the third one right to left. W rite it twice now， saying to

your self， the first time as you write the first 3 strokes，“In the sch∞，1 house we learn

our A -B -Cs，" and the second time，“In the school house we learn our 1 -2 -3s."

(、"'" ，'" P4) (p. 127)

Heisig names学“study"and gives this mnemonic:

The child in the little red school house is there for one reason only: to study. Anyone who

has gone through the schooling system knows well enough that study is one thing and

learning quite another again. In the kanji， too， the character for learning (Frame 574習

う，narau) has nothing to do with sch∞J house (p. 127).

Heisig names栄“flourish"and provides this mnemonic:

The botanical connotations of the word flourish (to bud and burst into bloom， much as a

Cultivating Visual Memory : Reflections of a Nonnative Kanji Learner 125

tree does) are part of the ideal of the schωJ house as well (p. 127).

For car (車，kuruma) ， Heisig admonishes the learner to look for the front and back wheels and a seat

in the middle of the carriage. He encourages the reader to make any (modern) associations withαr

that they can as long as they do not interfere with the pictograph itself. Unnecessarily lost is the fact

that this was a pictograph of a palanquin. Instead of (or in addition to) seeing the top and bottom

horizontallines as wheels， one could just as easily see them as palanquin bearers. The verticalline

could be seen as the ridge pole holding a sedan chair. This is， in fact， exactly what DeRoo does. DeR∞ provides a picture (知的 andexplains that the palanquin or sedan chair is placed vertically when

written. For me， DeRoo's explanation provides an equally vivid image， yet gives me the additional

satisfaction of knowing the basic origins of this pictograph. One then is， of course， still free to make

any other creative associations they wish， in order to make a more vivid image， or to update it to a

more current image like that of the automobile.

For most kanji， however， the reader is left to create their own story based on a rudimentary

“knowledge" of the new kanji's radical components. For 5~ (ku， kakeru: drive， gallop)， Heisig merely

lists the radicals as “team of horses" and “ward" and leaves the learner to come up with their own

story， virtually assuring they will stray far from the original historical senses. In this case， however，

DeRoo does not do much better. His mnemonic is a “ward (区)were people raise and sell horses

(馬)." Though vivid enough this mnemonic lacks any c1ear connection to the meaning of the kanji.

Henshall's (1998) etymological description provides that connection by explaining that ward was

originally written as匿.Ward， he explains， most likely acts as a phonetic in Chinese (ou， oi) that refers

to the cries of a rider exhorting their horse. Armed with this bit of etymological information， the

learner can make a more vivid mnemonic that not only stays considerably c10ser to the original， but

allows the learner to make otherwise impossible associations with other kanji like the old form (鴎)of

sea gull (ou， kamome，鴎)that is used in Oushuu Juku (鴎州塾)， the name of a private cram school

with schools throughout Japan.

2.3.4 Heisig Strengths

Although there are problems with Heisig's approach， his genius lies in his recognition of the immense

nature of the memory task that learning thousands of visually complex kanji places on adult learners

from non -kanji cultures. Instead of asking the student to learn to read， write and memorize multiple

meanings for each new kanji simultaneously， he severely curtails the memory task. First， turning

conventional wisdom on its head， he argues that learning to write Japanese kanji is actually easier than

learning how to read it. The first memory task in the Heisig approach is to learn one core meaning as

signified by a unique English “key-word" for each character (e.g.， equivocal暖， flavor味)and how

to write the character. Heisig provides stories for the first 508 kanji， after which it is up to the learner

to create their own， armed with the unique English key-word for the character and the names of the

kanji's radical elements. The object of the story， in Heisig's (1986) words， is to“shock the mind's eye，

to disgust it， to enchant it， to tease it， or to entertain it in any way possible so as to brand it with an

image intimately associated with the key-word (p. 9)." Once the story is created， the student is

encouraged to write each character while recounting the story until the image is fixed in memory. The

126 David M. Mosher

second step is learning to read the kanji. In the first stage of this step， the learner learns one or two of

the on-readings and very srnall nurnber of representative cornpound words， rnost often just one. In the

second stage， the kun-readings are added. After cornpleting the first and second steps， the learner is

encouraged to use flashcards to randornize the order in which the kanji are reviewed. Heisig c1airns

that if one works full-tirne that the first rnernorization step can be cornpleted in a rnere four to six

weeks.

3. A VISUAL MEMORY PROBLEM

3.1 Mental Representations

Heisig (1986) argues that the p∞r perforrnance of rnany kanji learners from non -kanji cultures is

due to an improper use of visual memory. Learners， he argues， tend to be naively overconfident in

their ability to rernernber visual patterns given the apparent ease of remernbering faces， flowers， or

city skylines. In reality though， only a fraction of such visual patterns can be recalled. Moreover， the

task of learning kanji is more similar to the kind of memory patterns required for learning an alphabet

or numbering system. However， these symbols are few in number and more-or-less sound related;

whereas， there are thousands of kanji that have no consistent phonetic value. Yet， the traditional

approach to teaching kanji to non-kanji culture and native-kanji culture learners alike is the same as

for learning alphabets: rote memorization based on copying the shapes of the kanji again and again in

tandem with learning their on-and kun-readings and several words using the new kanji. This may

work relatively well for young ]apanese children who already speak the language and who are

immersed in a rich linguistic and literary ]apanese environment， but it only serves to stiffen the kanji

curtain for non -kanji culture learners. A major reason for this difficulty is the lack of well-developed

visual memory ski1ls.

As Gleitman et al. (1999) state， the eye is not a camera. Stimuli are fluctuating and two dimensional，

but the eye sees past the continual variations and transforms the stimuli into familiar， meaningful

objects. That is， the eye does not passively record objects， but rather employs both bottom-up (data

driven) and top-down (knowledge-driven) processes to interpret and make sense of the visual input.

Consequently， the visual images that we hold in our heads are not the same as pictures: unlike pictures，

they are pre-encoded to come extent. Evidence comes from the way experimental subjects view

ambiguous pictures. Su同ectsshown a line drawing that can be viewed as either a rabbit or a duck， for

example， see one or the other， but not both; that is， the subjects' active viewing interprets and

disambiguates the picture. Gleitman et al. assert that， contrary to popular opinion， memory experts

generally do not possess photographic memories， which are extremely rare. Instead， they excel at

organizing material in mernory.

There are two broad c1asses of mental representations: symbolic and analogic. Symbolic

representations bear a totally arbitrary relationship to what they represent. For example， the word

mouse bears no direct relationship to the actual rodent. Analogical representations， however， capture

some of the actual features of the objects that they represent. Some of our knowledge is recorded in

the form of analogical images. For exarnple， if we are asked to irnagine sorneone standing with her

Cultivating Visual Memory : Reflections of a Nonnative Kanji Learner 127

arms hanging loosely at her sides， we can retrieve certain information from this image easily， such as

the hands fall below the hips， but above the knees (Gleitman et al.， 1999). English words are clearly

symbolic representations; whereas， ka吋iare relatively more analogic. The character for car (車)as

we have seen above shares certain graphic features with cars， not to mention with palanquins.

3.2 A Horse Race Hypothesis

Kess and Miyamoto (1999)， however， argue against the notion that kanji occupies an intermediate

position between pictures and phonetic scripts， citing research that shows both English and ]apanese

words can be named more quickly than pictures. The same researchers review other research though

that shows visual memory superiority in recall tests involving logographic symbols， such as Arabic

numerals and kanji. In a study of temporary memory for four stimuli types -hiragana， kanji， abstract

designs and photographs of faces一theyreport that good readers excelled in hiragana， kanji and

abstract design recall， but not for faces. Furthermore， they report that whereas memory for kana only

correlated to memory for spoken words， memory for kanji correlated to both memory for spoken words

and abstract designs， suggesting the involvement of graphomotor coding strategies common to both

abstract design and kanji memory. Other research indicates that there may， in fact， be six distinct

short-term memories for (1) phonemic， (2) graphemic， (3) pictorial， (4) graphemic word shape， (5)

phonological word shape， and (6) semantic information. Each of these memories is thought to employ

different encoding systems and to exhibit both different decay and different storage capacities with

semantic memory having the longest decay time and the largest capacity.

Gleitman et al. (1999) suggest that there may be an analogical to abstract continuum with

photographs being highly analogic at one end， an abstract Picasso painting falling somewhere in the

middle， and the name of a person being fully abstract at the other end. Somewhat contrary to Kess and

Miyamoto， although maintaining that images are not the same as pictures in that images are pre-

encoded as noted above， they stress five broad similarities between mental images and pictures;

namely， (1) spatial proximity characteristics of closeness and distance; (2) spatial relations of between

versus next to; (3) the ability to discover elements in mental images just as in pictures; (4) color; and

(5) fine detail.

Although all kanji are considered to be logographic， they likely lie along different points on the

analogic to abstract continuum depending on which of four basic kanji types they fall into. Ideographic

kanji (象形文字，shoukei moji) which are stylized versions of objects or ideas， for example a mountain

(山，yama) with its peaks and valleys， would be towards the analogic end of the continuum.

Diagrammatic kanji (指事文字，shiji mojj) ， which depict logical， geometric or conceptual relationships

like “above" (上，ue) or “below" (下， shita)， may be slightly further to the right. Compound-

semantic kanji (会意文字 kaiimoji) that combine two simple kanji to form an ostensibly transparent

kanji (e.g.，日+月→明 akari，light， bright;人+言→信 shin，belief， trust) would be still further to the

right of the continuum. Phonetic-semantic kanji (形成文字 kei記imoji) ， which often contain a

semantic radical on the left (偏， hen) and a phonetic radical on the right (穿， tsukurj)， such as in the

character for sea海 (semanticwater radical + the phonetic “every" radical pronounced kai) or the

character for regret悔 (semanticheart radical + the phonetic “every" radical pronounced kaj)，

128 David M. Mosher

would likely be the furthest to the right of the continuum.

Given the picture-like qualities of kanji， the traditional view has been that the semantic properties of

kanji and hanzi (Chinese characters) are accessed more quickly than for alphabetic words since the

phonologic route maybe bypassed (Kess & Miyamoto， 1999: 49). Most psycholinguistic studies，

however， discredit the direct processing hypothesis in favor of a competitive horse-race hypothesis， in

which two routes， a phonological and a semantic route， compete for each other (Yamada， 1997). After

an extensive review of the ]apanese psycholinguistic literature， Kess and Miyamoto (1999) opt for a

similar interactive pr∞essing explanation as follows:

Depending upon the contextual setting for a given kanji， and its specific features of

familiarity， frequency and complexity one of the two processing routes may be realized

as the most efficient path to word recognition. Both processing routes ultimately access

the same semantic information， but one route is sound mediated and the other is a

grapheme-medicated route (p. 195).

They conc1ude that those who argue for an all-or-none course， such as the traditional direct access

view are off target and that a realistic interactive explanation should state that all information-

phonological， orthographic/ graphemic， kinetic/ motoric and semantic -are being accessed.

3.3 Visual-Orientated vs. Sound-Oriented Cultures

Although a simple direct route does not have much support， the phonology to orthography relation

for English words is unarguably c10ser than it is for ]apanese kanji. Furthermore， as Kess and

Miyamoto (1999) conc1ude although ]apanese readers are not fundamentally unique， reading processes

are more orthographically driven than for more phoneme-based texts like English. In my experience， 1

have found that native ]apanese readers are often totally indifferent to the pronunciation of many low-

frequency kanji compounds， while 1 am disturbed by my inability to pronounce the same words.

Chinese proper nouns， place names (地名， chimei)， and people's names (人名，jinmei) provide dramatic

examples.

The other day when 1 read the news of the successfullaunching of the神舟5号 spacecapsule from

the酒泉衛生発射センター launchsite (Chugoku， yuujin uchuusen， 2003)， 1 asked several native

]apanese speakers how to read神舟.After some pause， most of my students said“Kamibune?" A

group of adults replied “shinshuu" with greater confidence. However， 1 recall hearing the former

pronunciation on a television news program. In an American on-line newspaper (China's Astronaut，

2003)， the pronunciation for both was totally unambiguous;神舟5号 wasgiven as Shenzhou V more

or less approximating the Chinese pronunciation and酒泉衛生発射センター wasgiven as ]iuquan

Launch Site. In ]apanese， however， readers can “directly" access the meanings of the words. In

fact， the presence of a special sidebar (See Appendix A) that explained the history behind the naming

of the capsule， but which did not give the correct ]apanese reading， seems to signal a high interest in

meaning and a relative indifference to pronunciation. The case is， of course， the direct opposite for

English.

Cultivating Visual Memory : Reflections of a Nonnative Kanji Learner 129

Regardless， of the general importance of phonology for processing and storing ]apanese kanji， the

multiple readings available for a given kanji and the lack of predictability of whether on-or kun-

readings will be used， make it impossible even for the educated person to know the proper reading for

some kanji that they have seen before (Kess & Miyamoto， 1999). Even Yamada (1997) suggests that

although no research has been conducted as yet， there may be visual spaces for the neurological

storage of kanji in addition to phonological and semantic spaces. To me， all of this points to a much

more visually-oriented kanji culture for ]apanese and a more sound-oriented alphabetic culture for

English. For me， then， the task of penetrating the kanji curtain lies not only in finding better

strategies for memorizing kanji， but in learning to be more content with a visual-semantic only

processing of some kanji words.

4. MEMORY STRATEGIES FOR PENETRATING THE KANJI CURTAIN

The goal of the serious kanji learner is to commit kanji to both long-term and explicit memory. By

explicit memory， 1 mean the ability to recall kanji information from memory on demand as opposed to

implicit memory that cannot be accessed at will. Here， 1 will draw from psychological studies on the

nature of memory summarized in Gleitman et al. (1999) to understand how to better and more

efficiently achieve these goals. Frequent references will be made to how each of the four kanji learning

approaches introduced in section two make use of the memory strategies reviewed in Gleitman et al.

This is not intended to be an exhaustive review of all possible kanji memory strategies.

4. 1 Chunking

According to Gleitman et al. (1999)， chunking is a way of recoding the input so as to expand working

memory by means of putting the material to be learned into more memorial packages. Chunking

works because working memory is measured in chucks and not bits of information. For example， it

would be very difficult to memorize CIAFBIIBMTW A because it exceeds the seven plus or minus two

items of information that humans can hold in working memory. However， if this series of letters is

chunked into the following four meaningful chunks， the memory task is eased considerably: CIA FBI

IBMTWA.

In Kanji ABC， Foerster and Tamura (1994) employ two major types of chunking. First， they break

the 1，945 kanji into 451 graphemes. To facilitate learning， these graphemes are further grouped into

six characteristic positions-left， right， top， bottom， enclosure and free. The student is encouraged to

memorize the meanings of these graphemes before memorizing the kanji themselves. Second， the

jouyou kanji are presented in 26 large clusters (A to Z) of kanji deemed to have some graphemic

similarity. Within each of these larger clusters， ka吋iare further clustered by both grapheme and on-

reading. In contrast to Heisig， Forester and Tamura chose to group kanji by their right-hand radicals，

which Kess and Miyamoto (1999) say are more informative because they collocate with a smaller

number of companions.

De Roo (1980) also presents graphemes first， but limits the graphemes presented to only those that

130 David M. Mosher

are not simple characters in their own right. A further difference is that each grapheme is presented

along with its other allophonic shapes(e.g.， some allophones for grass 4<-areゆ，屯， iJ.，汁).A wide

range of meanings is presented for each grapheme-allophone cluster as opposed to the single core

meaning provided by both Foerster and Tamura， and Heisig. 2018 kanji are then listed by a unique

look-up system that has the ad hoc effect of grouping the kanji by visual similarity， but contrary to

Foerster and Tamura or Heisig， the kanji are not necessarily intended to be memorized as presented，

rather the book is intended to be used more as a dictionary. However， ample cross-references are

employed to help students to group kanji by meaning and shape， and an additional143 characters are

mention under the main character entries whenever they share a common explanation.

Heisig makes the most extensive use of clustering. As you will see in the ensuing description， Heisig

is the only one to chuck both graphemically and by pronunciation. In Remembering the Kanji I， Heisig

groups 2，042 kanji (the jouyou kanji plus 97 particularly useful kanji) by graphemic similarity and to a

certain extent by complexity. Most of the kanji in the earliest clusters， for example， tend to be the

simpler ones that serve as building blocks for the more complex kanji to follow. Although there is no

separate list of graphemes as in Kanji ABC or 2001 Kanji， new non -kanji graphemic elements are

presented at the beginnings of kanji clusters throughout the book. Heisig asserts that the graphemes

are best learned and remembered as one learns whole kanji and not separately. In book one， the learner

is asked to learn to write each kanji and to remember one unique English keyword that captures a core

meaning. ]apanese kun-and on-readings are not introduced until Remembering the Kanji I1.

In volume two， the 2，042 kanji introduced in book one are clustered into ten chapters， in which the

kanji are in someway related to their primary on-reading， or to their kun-reading in the absence of an

on-reading. The first chapter， for example presents 56 kanji that are the parent-kanji for the hiragana

and katakana syllabaries. Their on-readings are directly related to the kana pronunciations. Other

chapters group the kanji via the consistency with which their signal primitives indicate the

pronunciation (pure， semi -pure， and mixed). Pure groups are 100 percent consistent semi -pure have

one exception， and mixed groups have two or more different pronunciations. Kanji without homonyms

are listed separately. Three groups of kanji are clustered according to their frequency in forming

compound words used in everyday ]apanese. The first group includes kanji that are used frequent1y in

everyday conversation and would likely appear in any elementary ]apanese textbook. The other two

groups follow the same organizing principle， but list kanji used in lower frequency compounds. A small

group of 86 kanji with no on-readings are listed separately. However， as with all kun-readings， the

student is left to find the kun-reading， minus the meaning which has already been learned in volume

one， from an index at the end of the book. The final group of kanji includes a random group of

characters whose readings are considerably less common and/or are generally restricted to proper names.

In Remembering the Kanji III， Heisig and Sienko (1994) present an additional 965 kanji for learners

wishing to obtain advanced kanji literacy ability， bringing the total number of kanji included in all three

volumes to 3007 kanji. The additional kanji include the remainder of the 284 extra characters for use in

given names 人名用漢字， jinmeiyoukanjj). Each of the other characters was carefully chosen

according to published frequency lists. In a departure from the first two volumes， this volume presents

Cultivating Visual Memory : Reflections of a Nonnative Ka可iLearner 131

both the writing and readings for the kanji， but places them in separate sections of the book. The

writing and core meanings of kanji are clustered into six groups in part one of the加ok.First， nine

new primitives or graphemic elements not covered in the first two volumes are introduced along with

several clusters of 47 new kanji that employ these elements， followed by sixteen formerly introduced

primitives that are now introduced as kanji in their own right. Second， the bulk of the kanji (734) are

introduced in several clusters under their “principle primitive." The third group is a list of 107

miscellaneous kanji listed more-or-less randomly回 vefor a few two to three character clusters here

and there. Fourth is a small group of eight kanji used for Western units of measurement. Fifth is a

group of ten phonetic kanji each with a clear signaling primitive. The final group is a list of 37 old and

“alternate form kanji" (異体字，1臼iji).

The kanji are then grouped according to reading more-or-less like they were in volume two， but with

a few interesting differences that are worth mentioning. First， there are two pure groups in volume

three. The first group consists of clusters of “old pure groups" that include kanji whose signal

primitives were introduced in volume two. The second group consists of “new pure groups" whose

signal primitives were introduced in section one of volume three. The reading section ends with two

new groups: a group of old and alternate form kanji whose simpler modern forms have already been

learned in the first two volumes. The final cluster consists of seven kanji that are numbered 3001 to

3007 and are intended to encourage the kanji learner to continue acquiring kanji beyond the 3000

presented in Remembering the Kanji 1 -ill.

4.2 Attention

It has been thought by some that the brain contains a virtually indelible record of everything that we

have heard， seen， or felt， the so-called tape recorder theory of memory， and that the only trick is to

find a way to rewind the tape; i.e.， to retrieve the information from memory. However， more and more

research makes it clear that information will only be recorded into long-term memory if we pay some

attention to it (c.f.， Gass & Selinker， 1994). Gleitman et al. (1999) state:

Memory， it seems， is not a passive repository for our experience， recording the days of

our lives and then permitting playback of these records later on. Instead， memory

depends on a highly active set of pr∞esses， starting with interpretation inherent in the

initial encoding and continuing through the processes of reconstruction and

interpretation used to unwittingly fi1l gaps in what we recall (p. 291).

All four kanji leaning approaches considered here force the learner to pay very close attention to

each graphemic element of a kanji. Henshall does so by encouraging the learning to become familiar

with the etymology of each character. De Roo separately introduces the graphemes and then provides

a brief mnemonic for each kanji. Forester and Tamura separately present the graphemes and then

cluster visual1y similarly kanji together by graphemes， which due to the inherent semantic and

phonetic nature of graphemes not only encourages the learner to pay attention to the graphic structure

of the kanji， but to their semantic and phonetic similarities and differences. Heisig， as we have seen

above， in addition to making the learner pay close attention to the graphemic structure， focuses the

132 David M. Mosher

most explicit attention to the phonetic qualities of the graphemes of either of the other approaches. De

Roo and Heisig， and to a lesser extent Henshall， also point out alternate and older forms of kanji，

drawing learner attention to graphic similarities and differences that may be easily overlooked by

many rote memory approaches.

4.3 Mnemonics

According to Gleitman et al. (1999)， mnemonics are centuries old memorial organization techniques

based on the idea that “we remember well what we have organized well (p. 272)." The ancient

Greeks， for example， used verse with fixed rhythm and rhyme to faci1itate memorization of long epic

poems， such as Homer's Iliad and the Odyssey. Visual imagery is another time-tested mnemonic

device. A specific type of visual imagery is the method of loci technique that requires the learner to

place each item to be memorized in a different loci or spatiallocation， such as locating each item in a

1ist of 40 unrelated concrete nouns in a different location on a university campus thatone knows well.

In some studies， subjects using this method retained seven times more than those who used rote

memory strategies. Gleitman et al. believe that such visual imagery is a powerful memory aid because

unrelated items are joined together by means of the su同ect'smental campus image into one new whole.

In other words， the method of loci is another form of chunking. Studies show that mental images are

effective memory aids only when they unify the elements into a coherent whole. Furthermore， other

experiments show that interactive visual images are more powerful memory aids than static， non-

interactive aids. If one wants to remember the visual pair eagle-train， for example， imagining an eagle

winging to its nest with the locomotive in its beak will be more effective than a non -interactive， static

image of an eagle perched next to the locomotive.

Three of the four kanji learning approaches considered in this artic1e make use of mnemonic memory

devices. Henshall， De Roo and Heisig employ them albeit in significant1y different ways， and Forester

and Tamura leave it up to the learner to make his or her own mnemonics. Henshall (1998) states in his

preface that the key to successful kanji learning lies not in the rote approach favored by native

]apanese kanji learners， but in breaking down the barrier of kanji unfamiliarity by means of

etymologies that show how “a lifeless and anonymous jumble of lines and dots becomes a

‘character'... with a distinctive personally of its own (p. ix)." Henshall provides short mnemonics for

each kanji after presenting a detailed， but concise etymology. However， he cautions that mnemonics，

although “a useful adjunct" to kanji learning， used carelessly can lead to serious misconceptions

regarding a kanji's connotations， function in compounds and role as a window on the society of its time.

De Roo stays relatively c10se to the actual meanings of the graphemes in his mnemonics; whereas，

Heisig (1986) often departs from the original sense， stating that: “Proper etymological studies are

most helpful after one has learned the general-use kanji. Before that time， they only add to one's

memory problems (p. 6)."

4.4 Depth 0' Processing

Psychological studies distinguish between shallow processing and deep processing. Shallow

processing refers to the encoding of superficial aspects of a stimulus， such as the typeface of a word.

Deep processing refers to encoding that emphasizes the meaning of the material. The processing of

Cultivating Visual Memory : Reflections of a Nonnative Kanji Learner 1お

sound is considered to represent an intermediate level of processing. Most studies show that deep，

semantic processing promotes the best recall performance. Given these definitions， it should be c1ear

at this point that Henshall's etymological approach calls for the “deepest" semantic processing

followed by De Roo and by Forester and Tamura (e.g.， both encourage the learning of multiple

meanings and readings for new kanji; whereas， Heisig limits the memory task to the memorization of

one core English meaning per kanji). Heisig， on the other hand， is the only one to make extensive use

of the intermediate processing level by carefully grouping kanji according to their on-and kun-

readings as seen above.

In the case of kanji， however， too much processing can easily lead to memory overload. Heisig takes

the most care to alleviate this problem. He addresses the problem of memory load by cyc1ing the

memory tasks into three basic phases: writing and visual memory， reading， and random retrieval. In

sharp contrast， Henshall's approach contains the greatest memory demands per kanji of either of the

learning approaches. For each kanji he lists (a) most of the main ]apanese on -and kun -readings， (b)

the equivalent English meanings， (c) three representative compound words， (d) an etymology that

can be quite lengthy (e.g.， the etymology for kan (款)， meaning friendship， c1ause， or engrave， runs

some 924 words and characters in length) and (e) a short mnemonic. The etymologies of characters

are， however， often obscure and the mnemonics presented by Henshall often do nothing to tie together

the etymological information given. Forester and Tamura give a similar amount of information for a-

b， but skip c-e. De Roo provides information for a， b， and e.

4.5 Retrieval Cues

Retrieval cues are stimuli that open memory paths allowing successful recall of stored information.

The more cues that are available， the more likely there will be successful recall of the sought after

information. For example， various sights， sounds or smells may help you to recall hometown memories

that you thought were lost. Recall is also mostly likely to be successful when cues and retrieval context

match those in place at the time of the original encoding， a principle known as coding speci五eity

(Gleitman et al.， 1999). For example， when a kanji is learned in a c1uster of other kanji sharing a key

grapheme， it may not be immediately recognized when it appears in a naturally occurring text. If a

kanji has been learned by rote， its graphemic elements maybe unavailable as retrieval cues. In the four

kanji learning approaches considered here， core English meanings， signal primitives， on -and kun-

readings， etymological schema， mnemonics and kanji compounds form some of the main retrieval cues.

In general， it is safe to回 ythat deep processing creates more potential retrieval paths. Randomization，

such as employing flash cards， helps to avoid obsessively narrow， context specific encoding， fostering

context independent bottom -up kanji skills.

4.6 Rehearsal

Items that are kept in working memory become candidates for long-term memory. One means of

doing this is the repeated repetition of an item in working memory or rehearsal. Two types of

rehearsal may be employed: maintenance rehearsal and elaborative rehearsal. Maintenance rehearsal

refers to more-or-less passively holding material in working memory. Elaborative rehearsal refers to

the activity of looking for connections between the material to-be-remembered and what one already

134 David M. Mosher

knows. Each elaborative step builds another path to the object of memorization; the more paths

created the easier subsequent retrieval will be. Expressed differently， the key to good encoding is to

provide effective means for retrieval; namely， building up many retrieval paths to the object of

memory that will allow easy access from many starting points (Gleitman et al.， 1999).

Heisig (1986) shows an acute awareness of this aspect of effective memorization when he asserts

that the majority of characters can be fixed in memory at one setting if enough time is taken fix the

image (p. 9). Furthermore， careful sequencing of the kanji allows for a kind of buiJt-in rehearsaJ. If

early basic characters are carefully selected for their graphemic elements， then when the learner

progresses to more complex kanji that use these graphemic elements， the previously learned

graphemes can be elaboratively rehearsed. For this reason， as Heisig asserts， the kanji are not best

learned in the order of frequency employed in the jouyou kanji list， which is the order in which

]apanese school children learn them， and the order that Henshall (1998) employs.

Learning kanji compounds that employ newly learned kanji provides another avenue for elaborative

rehearsal. Of the four approaches reviewed here only Henshall and Heisig include kanji compounds.

Henshal1 provides three two-kanji compounds for each character. Heisig generalIy provides just one

two-kanji compound for each kanji in the second or reading memorization phase， but he provides three

or more compounds for a few characters with important multiple on-or kun-readings. Flash cards，

suggested as a third memorization phase by Heisig， provide a randomized rehearsal opportunity. Yet

another means of rehearsal is writing the kanji. Heisig states that simply remembering the kanji does

not demand that they be written， but adds that there is no better way to improve the aesthetic

appearance of one's writing and to acquire a natural feel for the flow of the kanji. Done mindlessly， of

course， this equals a form of maintenance rehearsal. However， when done while rehearsing a mnemonic

story， it is elaborative rehearsal. Overlooked， by any of the four kanji learning approaches， however， is

the existence of kinetic memory.

4.7 Kinetic Memory

Kess and Miyamoto (1999) define kinetic memory as motor representations of kanji. They state that

“slips of the pen" research shows that the motor representations of kanji can be retrieved without the

accompanying phonetic or semantic representations although they may be activated as well. This

research shows that kanji memory storage incorporates (a) phonetic， (b) semantic， (c) configurational

features， and (d) kinetic movement information. Evidence of the pervasiveness of this type of

memory is the phenomena of finger-wiring (空書 kuusho)in ]apanese and Chinese culture. Both

]apanese and Chinese students performed more poorly on kanji tests when finger-writing was

prohibited. Kess and Miyamoto refer to finger-writing as an externaJ mnemonic and note that this

strategy is also applied by ]apanese and Chinese students to English spelling.

5. CONCLUSION

Penetrating the kanji curtain is a challenging task for students from non -kanji cultures. After all，

just learning the jouyou kanji requires mastering 1，945 unique graphic configurations and 4，087

Cultivating Visual Memory : Reflections of a Nonnative Kanji Learner 135

readings for those kanji (De Roo， 1980). Being able to read a novel may require yet another 1，∞o kanji (Heisig & Sienko， 1994). Yet， students from alphabetic sound -oriented cu1tures are only used to

learning a very small set of letters that are linked to specific pronunciations. In a more visually

oriented kanji culture， they confront thousands of “letters" in the form of kanji， the vast majority of

which have multiple pronunciations， not to mention many homophones as well. Learning the exact

stroke order and correct graphemic configuration for each character is also extremely difficult

compared to learning the configurations of the 261etters of the English alphabet. Learning the various

stroke combinations will be especially difficult if they are devoid of names or semantic meaning.

Success in such a large memory task requires a heightened awareness of the nature of memory in

general and the nature of visual memory in particular.

Although kinetic memory is one powerful form of memory， rote memorization alone is not a very

efficient approach. Even ]apanese school children do not necessarily perform well with traditional

instructional methods that rely heavily on rote memorization. Yamada (1997)， for example， reports on

a study involving 39 fourth graders， 39 fifth graders and 37 sixth graders who were selected at random

from an average elementary school in Hiroshima City. On a reading and writing achievement test of

third grade level kanji， children in grades four， five， six scored 39， 56， and 68 percent respectively for

writing， but only 32， 51， and 61 percent for reading. This suggests that the teaching and learning of

kanji calls for more effective， organized learning approaches both for kanji culture natives and non-

kanji culture learners alike. For non -native kanji learners， an especially strong emphasis should be

placed on fostering a strong visual memory.

Memorizing two or three thousand kanji by means of an approach like Heisig's， De Roo's or Forester

and Tamura's is， of course， only a good beginning in the journey towards full mastery of the kanji. Full

mastery entails acquiring a large vocabulary of kanji compounds as well as extensive experience in

reading and writing of the newly acquired kanji. Increasing one's vocabulary stock will provide more

retrieval cues to the kanji that one wishes to recall. Furthermore， given the low predictability of

pronunciation of ]apanese at the sub-word (i.e.， individual kanji level) compared to either English or

Chinese， this whole-word access to the ]apanese lexicon is critical for obtaining the explicit memory

necessary for writing the ]apanese kanji. Experienced ]apanese readers use many things to

successfully decode kanji: and inventory of kanji building blocks that relate to compound words， world

knowledge and context. Although top-down processing strategies are important for reading any

language， they seem especially important for ]apanese (Kess & Miyamoto， 1999). What Gleitman et al.

(1999) say is true for expert versus novices in general seems particularly true for kanji users as well:

(1) experts simply know more; (2) their knowledge is heavily cross-referenced; (3) it is focused on

higher-order knowledge that allows them to think in units (p. 314).

References

Be1cher， D. & Connor， U. (2∞1). Ref1ections on multiliterate lives. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters，

LTD.

Carrell， P.， Devine， ]. & Eskey， D. (1988). Interactive approaches to second language reading.

136 David M. Mosher

Cambridge University Press.

China' s astronaut returns safely. CNN.com. [Online]. (2003， October 15). Available:

http://edition.cnn.com/2oo3/TECH/space/1O/15/china.launch/index.html [2003， October 15].

Chugoku， yuujin uchuusen uchiage [China launches manned space craftJ. (2003， October 16).

Chugoku Shimbun， p・1.

De Roo，]. R. (1980). 21ω'1 kanji. Tokyo: Bonjinsha.

Forester， A. & Tamura， N. (1994). Kanji abc: A systematic approach to ]apanese characters. Boston:

Tuttle Publishing.

Gass， S. M. & Selinker， L. (1994). Second 1anguage acquisition. Hillsdale， N]: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates.

Gleitman， H.， Fridlund， A. ].， & Freiberg， D. (1999). Psycho1ogy， 5th ed. New York; W. W. Norton &

Company.

Grabe， W. (1993). Current developments in second language reading research. 1n S. Silberstein，

(Ed.) ， State of the art TESOL essays (pp. 205-236). Alexandria， V A: TESOL.

Halpern， ]. (1993). NTC's new ]apanese-English character dictionary. Lincolnwood， 1L: NTC

Publishing Group.

Heisig， ]. W. (1986). Remembering the kanji 1，3ぺed.Tokyo: ]apan Publications Trading Company.

Hesig， ]. W. (1987). Remembering the kanji II. Tokyo: ]apan Publications Trading Company.

Heisig， ]. W. & Sienko， T. (1994). Remembering the kanji m. Tokyo: ]apan Publications Trading Company.

Henshall， K. G. (1998). A guide to remembering ]apanese characters. Boston: Tuttle Publishing.

Kess，]. F. & Miyamoto， T. (1999). The ]apanese menta11exicon. Psycholinguistic studies of kana and

kanji processinιPhiladelphia: ]ohn Benjamin Publishing Company.

Kikuoka， T. (1970). ]apanese newspaper compounds: The 1，000 most important in order of

frequency. Rutland， VT: Charles E. Tutt1e Company.

Mizutani， O. & Mizutani， N. (1981). An introduction to newspaper ]apanese. Tokyo: The ]apan

Times，LTD.

Mosher， D. (2002， April). Using DeR∞1， HenshaJJ， and Kanji ABC in tandem. Kanji Clinic [On -line].

Available: http://www.kanjiclinic.com [2003， November 24].

Mosher， D. (2002， May-]une). Rote memorization and extensive reading: His two powerfu11earning

tω，1s. Kanji Clinic [On-line]. Available: http://www.kanjiclinic.com [2003， November 24]

Noguchi， M. S. (n. d.). Kanji abc: A systematic approach ω]apanese characters. Kanji Clinic [On-

line]. Available: http://www.kanjiclinic.com [2003， November 24].

Weaver. C. (1988). Reading process and practice. Portsmouth， NH: Heinemanr

David M. Mosher(コミュニケーション学科)

(2003.11. 27 受理)

137 Cultivating Visual Memory : Reflections of a Nonnative Kanji Leamer

Ap問、dixA: Newspa問 rSidebar

一構造で、打ち上げ時や帰

一還時に乗組員が搭乗する

神舟中国が自主開発一帰還カプセル、乗組員が

した宇宙船。中国の別名一活動したり休憩したりす

「神州」(シェンチョウ)一る軌道モジュールと推進

と発音が同じで、地上と一機関などのある推進モジ

天を結ぶ舟として「神舟」一ュ

iルから成

υ、最大収

と名付けられたとされ一容人員は3人。事故時の

る。

1999年日月から一安全性にも配慮が加えら

2002年ロ月までに無一れ、飛行士の安全性確保

人で4回打ち上げられ、一率は鈎・

7gmと、長征2

地球に帰還。初の有人宇一号Fロケットの設計上の

宙船

5号は全長

8・9一打ちょげ成功率引勿を上

M州、重さ7・8J。3室一回るという。(北京・共同)

Click

TheGωShipホ isthe name of the independently develo詳d

Chin間 spa低 raft.Its (Chin悶)pronunciation -shenchou

-is the担 meas one name for China. It was given出isname

God Ship 民間use註isa ship that∞m配 ts回比handh回ven.

FromNovemt町 H粉 to以澗n国r2002， it was launched and

retumed to自民hfour也n白 asan凹unanneds開αョ::raft.The

first manned spacecraft， Number 5， is 8.9 meters long and

weighs 7B協18.官官明白Daftror国 sof由服compartmenぉ:出ereωrncap:;叫e出atα出白thecrew from launch to re加rn;

出eorbi出g旬開ulewhich provid白 awork and rl白 t紅白 for

the crew; and， a prop叫岳onmod叫e切出propulsionrockets and

d政問uiIXIffitIt can cany a maximum crew of伽民 Ithas

builtin回fetyfl回 tur白血αseofanaαident， and an astronaut

回fetyreliability of 99.7016. The Long March 2F Rocket has a

suα部 rateof greater than 97%. (Beijing， Kyodo Press)

(Translation by出eau出or.)

寸heJa悶 1俄 readingis not S1脱出ed.The mat likely kun-

andon-li回 dingswould be伺mibuneand泊inshurespectively.