It's getting harder to recommend Bunpro

Bunpro
#21

I definitely hit a wall now in N2, so many similar grammar points and I cant differentiate them in reviews at all.

This reminds me, once I tried that kaniwani, that system works as the opposite of wanikani asking for the japanese word, but then they would ask for “work” or “action” that there are like 10 different vocabs for them and of course they always show as wrong what you type since I am not a psychic!

Same is happening now in N2 with bunpro, cant see any difference in “judging from” or “from the point of view” or “from the stand point” or “cant help but”…

My subscription ends in december, I will try at least finish N2, not in the mood to continue N1 if it keeps like this.

just a little rant now, sorry.

4 Likes
#22

I’m in the same stage.it’s the frustrating alright but there’s usually at least one keyword in the hint that will tell you which one to use. Not perfect, but better than trying 3 or 4 options before getting they are asking for.

2 Likes
#23

I think I’ve written before, but I’ve found Bunpro is best served as a compliment to other things (in my case, 新完全マスター). Bunpro helps me remember the meaning of grammar points and makes sure I don’t forget them. The books I have serve as the way to remember them in detail and their specifics.

For example, をもとに, に基づいて, に沿って are all super similar. I looked and added them all specifically at the same time because it was the order they appeared in the book. I remember them because Bunpro allows me to review them within a SRS system. I remember the differences because of the book. Gradually, they’ve just linked together in my head the more I’ve encountered them.

5 Likes
#24

Check out the N5-N3 updates. I expect N2-N1 to come up to standard within 6 months or so too. But more significantly I’d like to see more missing grammar points added (新完全マスター has at least 10-15 grammar points missing from bunpro)

4 Likes
#25

I generally find the explanations helpful here and the lack of explanations was one of the points that was annoying to me when I started with Bunpro back in the day when I felt it was “only” a SRS-tool.

I think Bunpro has taken big steps towards being more useful in my studies since then.

That said, there is room for improvement in the material here with corrections, clarifications and additions. The lack of explanations on the N2 level and the missing N4 audio will hopefully be addressed soon for example.

Just my two cents.

7 Likes
#26

There is value in short explanations.

I’d say that the detailed explanations shouldn’t be deleted, but that without any distinction between the 10-second explanation and the 10-minute explanation, studying the explanations can quickly become a tedious grind. Personally, I like the detailed history and grammatical perspective, but only after I have become familiar with the 10-second concept. I would suggest creating a formatting break between the short and long explanations. (ie. here’s the main points, and if you want more detail, you’re welcome to continue reading.)

Yes. :+1:

Bunpro explanations recently are a mixed bag.

  • (+) The recently revised hints are a big improvement, because they are consistent across sentences and allow users to focus on key words. (Some of them are little long-winded, tbh, but that’s minor.)
  • (-) When a staff member provides an answer that is not supported by any Bunpro page nor any other internet resource, that is a big negative, especially by a site that is a definitive reference source. (Maybe Bunpro wants to establish itself as the new alternative standard of learning, similar to Cure Dolly and the like, but youtube videos typically have niche audiences where Bunpro, as a stand-alone website, is expected to be appealing to all audiences.)
8 Likes
#27

Thank you for so clearly pointing out the issue :joy:

After discussing it internally we have decided to leave the Noun + の as it is, keep it’s focus on the omission of the following noun. I have renamed it and we are updating the writeup. All of the examples already used the Noun + の construct. It is pattern that can take some getting used to so simply adding it on the の possession one might not give enough practice.

In the near future we will put together a pronoun の grammar point that uses いAdj + の , なAdj + な + の, and a relative clause + の.

7 Likes
#28

Here is a link that talks about the sentence ending particle な and its different uses. 【古典】古文「な・そ」の意味と用法 終助詞 例文

Sorry for the confusion. What I should have written was: there is one 終助詞の「な」. There aren’t three different 終助詞の「な」, but rather one, used three different ways.

A similar example might be the 格助詞の「と」 which has 5 different use cases. Some of them pretty similar but something like the 引用 case standing out as ‘seeming like’ an exception, when it is not. There aren’t five different 格助詞の「と」.

I agree that the extra information that we provided wasn’t written clearly enough and belongs on it’s own grammar point talking about another use case for the sentence ending な, used similarly to how ね is used.

4 Likes
#29

You should be able to set your batch size to 1 here: https://bunpro.jp/settings/general which will let you learn them one at a time. :wink:

You can also study separate grammar and vocab decks and have different batch sizes for each deck.

6 Likes
#30

My humble two cents. I think it’s harder to recommend Bunpro due to a lack of scope in the overall app.

Like what is Bunpro supposed to do? Is it supposed to be my sole resource to learn Japanese or a supplement with books? It gives credence that it can be both, but I don’t think it does the best job at being a dedicated resource imo. Is the goal just to teach what is taught from N5-N1 or to reach fluency? Idk

I get the impression there’s not an exact focus on the team as to what the mission statement is, just reactionary changes to what users want. Which isn’t bad per se, but the customer doesn’t really know what they want until they are shown.

Personally I haven’t used the app in a few months, so maybe certain things have changed. Ideally I would prefer an app that guided users from nothing to fluency. Having an app confident that it can take someone who doesn’t know a lick of Japanese to someone who can experience their favorite Japanese media is an effective hook and would be an angle I would shoot for if I was making an app.

In the about section it says, “We aim to provide an enviroment that lets users make mistakes fast,
and learn from them even faster.” I think poetically describes the current app right now.

Spoilers

The typo in environment.

4 Likes
#31

We had internally discussed having the technical terms toggleable in the past. We could probably combine that with a default setting to either show the English or Japanese by default and make it possible to click on them to show switch them.

4 Likes
#32

It used to be a supplement for some other sources you’d actually learn the grammar from, before using bunpro to solidify it. This was very easy for me to recommend, I thought it did a great job at this limited scope.

Now it tries to be a universal resource for everything, but in my opinion it’s not good at most of the things it tries to do. The mistakes this thread has been mostly criticising are one thing, but also e.g. the vocabulary functions are just not good. That’s what makes it harder for me to recommend it now. It hasn’t actually gotten worse at being a supplement, but many of the newer features just feel like they were implemented a bit too hastily and without a good plan. So now I can’t say “use bunpro”, I have to say “use bunpro to review grammar, be aware of these caveats, and you already have wanikani and anki so you can ignore the vocabulary, and the reading exercises are nice so have a look at them, but there are some mistakes there too so if something feels fishy do double-check with someone else, …”

12 Likes
#33

I think setting a scope as large as “guiding users from nothing to fluency” is a bit ambitious and will lead to a lack of focus in development. There are so many factors that contribute towards fluency.

Personally (and this is just personally), I think Bunpro should stick tightly to being a grammar resource. Developing grammar explanations aimed at all levels and interests would be for the best. I.e., have serious long explanations of the copula aimed at more advanced learners/using native linguistic jargon as well as the more basic 10 second version for when people are first learning. Improve/fix the SRS, which is currently just a bit of an odd system compared to more serious SRS algos, and think about SRS in relation to learning grammar specifically (which is its own kettle of fish). Create longer articles about the general concepts of Japanese grammar and language (make them optional or sticky them to the front of each N-level) which aren’t in the SRS system but act as a level appropriate reference for understanding Japanese grammar (it is left-branching, it is agglutinative, etc). Currently that “meta” information is scattered around the various lessons but it should be introduced in a more organised manner. Hyperlink any native linguistic jargon to a master page with all terms listed and explained in serious detail, that way the linguistics lovers can fill their boots but it won’t take up space on the explanation page, etc. Link to native resources as well, even if they aren’t seemingly level appropriate they can be used by people who are reviewing earlier material etc. Just, there are a million ways to improve the grammar side of Bunpro (which, again, I think just personally should be the focus).

I also think the addition of vocab is a distraction and vocab is better learnt elsewhere but I can appreciate that some users wanted/want it so that is fine. Just so long as it doesn’t become a distraction from the grammar side of things.

Also, to the Bunpro staff reading this thread, I know it is a bit negative as it is lots of critical feedback but I use the site daily and I will continue using it so long as it is useful and improving and I do recommend it to others - so, it is coming from a place of love. The recent improved hints was an excellent step forward, for example. Keep up the good work!

13 Likes
#34

I see where the confusion comes from then, thanks for linking some kind of source at least.

I think we need to understand what the problem statement here really is because there’s clearly some disagreement. To do so, we need to identify exactly what result you are trying to achieve (and not just in this conversation, but in the bunpro grammar point in general).

Your claim is that there is only one な with three different usages.

Let’s assume your claim is correct and that, indeed, there is one single な. You already acknowledged (and this is also supported by your linked article) that in 古文 there are three different and very specific usages of it (in modern Japanese we can identify only two of those so let’s focus on them from now on):

  1. Imperative negative (するな！)
  2. Emotional/emphatic particle (美味しいな〜)

What do you think is the benefit from the point of view of a language learner in thinking that these two particles are the same? Let’s analyse what this actually entails in reality:

  1. The meanings are very different
  2. Their grammatical usage is very different (they attach to different parts of speech, they allow different parts of speech to attach to them differently, etc)
  3. They are not interchangeable

Is there anything I’m missing here? How is calling these two particles “the same” going to benefit anyone?

Maybe I can be convinced this is a good choice if you put up a convincing-enough argument to support it from the point of view of a learner.

On the other hand, if you want to stick to this explanation strictly because you want to fit one specific model of your grammar to the whole site, then we have to look at this from a different perspective. You claim that it is the same particle used in different ways. Now you need to define what it means for two particles to be the same.

If you were to ask me, the following is the definition I would be willing to accept.

Two words/grammar points/particles can be considered the same if they fit at least one (or more) of the following criteria:

  1. They mean the same thing
  2. They connect to the same parts of speech (noun, verbs, certain conjugations, adjectives, etc)
  3. They have a shared etymology / they come from the same origin

Now, these two な particles clearly don’t mean the same thing, so the first point is already out.

Point 2 is also out because these two particles are used differently and connect to different parts of speech: The imperative negative connects to 終止形 of verbs (するな！ etc) while the emphatic な can go after non-verbs (美味しいな, etc). On top of that, what is allowed to come after the な itself differs as we saw in my example earlier (よな vs なよ , etc).

The last point we need to look at is the etymology. Your link talks about 古文 and how there’s three different usages of the 終助詞 「な」. Note that it does not claim that all three of them have the same origin nor come from the same word/stem/root/whatever. It’s simply stating that there’s three types of な particle with very clearly different usages (see point 1 and point 2). This is neither necessary nor sufficient evidence that they share the same etymology (Actually many other sources seem to claim they do not, see Etymology 2 and Etymology 4 here). Truth be told, wiktionary might not be a reliable source but so far I haven’t seen any other strictly etymological source that supports your claim. And just to be clear, let me repeat again that the article you shared does not explicitly mention that and is not a source that would support this claim.

So, under these definitions, you cannot claim that those two な are the same particle, just like you cannot claim that 漢字 and 感じ are the same word because they are both かんじ and are both nouns. They have a different meaning, a different usage, and a different origin.

In conclusion, myself personally I’d love to find out that indeed these two な usages stem/originate from a single shared origin (although I still refuse to consider them “the same particle” in modern Japanese but that’s just a matter of perspective), however you need to show a bit stronger evidence than what you shared so far. But, besides that, you still need to ask yourself what benefit does this bring to a learner? And the answer to that is literally none. I can’t honestly see any positive aspect in telling someone that するな and 美味しいな are “the same particle” other than some kind of weird pride in your own internal mental model of grammar (that doesn’t seem to be that well rooted in reality). It’s just doing your own community a disservice.

Extra

So I admit I’m not a 古文 or 漢文 expert but I’ve done some more digging and found some stuff that might interest you. For example this page talks about various 終助詞 including 哉 (かな → だなぁ). Looking further into 哉 on kanjipedia we can find:

①かな。…だなあ。詠嘆の助字。「快哉」

(seems like there might not have been a distinct difference between かな and just (だ)な in 漢文? not sure)

On the other hand if we want to look into the prohibition usage as negative imperative, we can find stuff like this. The example is pretty poignant too:

「…すること」と呼応して禁止を表わす漢文訓読語。…するな。…することなかれ。

and especially the example sentence:

「雷の神、人夫(おほむたから)を犯すこと無(マナ)」

Which seems to imply it might have been 犯すこと無 → 犯すことな → 犯すな but this is entirely my conjecture so don’t take it as a fact.

Regardless, if my understanding is correct and emphatic な came from 哉 and prohibition な came from 勿 then to me that’s some pretty strong evidence that means they are quite different. This is still a big if though.

NOTE: I had more links and references but bunpro forums consider me a “new user” despite being on this platform for 4+ years (but never the forums), so I can’t link more than 3 links per post. Feel free to ask if you want more and I can provide more.

12 Likes
#35

I agree, it’s better to do one thing really well and exceed at it. In an ideal world you would want the best of everything, but realistically it is not likely to happen. I think an appropriate scope is to focus on one thing and get it down really well, then perhaps move on the next big thing to help users achieve fluency.

It really depends on what Bunpro wants to do as a company and how it allocates resources. Japanese grammar is hard and there’s not a lot of great resources to learn it. God know how many SRS vocab solutions there are and it would be very challenging to top the versatile Anki app.

3 Likes
#36

But, besides that , you still need to ask yourself what benefit does this bring to a learner ?

This is an excellent point. I feel that this should be echoed. (And also just excellent high-effort post.)

5 Likes
#37

Hey! I did indeed read your feedback. I even went back and read your onsite feedback to get a better picture of the whole.

I apologize for overlooking the “また「伝達態度のモダリティ」としての「な」を主に扱う関係上、１の禁止の「な」や２の命令・要求の終助詞「な」も除外する” statement within the link Asher shared, as well as for not drawing the connection you were trying to make in your reply.

You are correct in that while the link addresses the various uses of the 終助詞－な, it does point out that based on how it is generally used, it is excluding it from the 「伝達態度のモダリティ」. I have edited my earlier reply to cross out where I misspoke. Sorry for that!

–

Within the content team, we do quite a lot of research into Japanese grammar and the language in general. We have quite a few theories about how or why things are the way they are in modern Japanese. Like many of the existing theories that other’s have speculated upon, there isn’t a lot of concrete evidence or well written papers to support them (I guess that is why they are still theories :joy: ). In this particular case we still strongly feel there is a connection to the 聞き手 - 話し手 relationship even in the prohibitive な and will continue to research and build upon it.

Regardless of the validity of the various theories we speculate on, we did indeed jump the gun by including that speculation within the grammar point write up.

Furthermore, even if one day we did want to sit down to write an academic paper on any given theory and submit it for peer review, if we then chose to include it on the site, it would be best included on a future advanced interest writeup and specifically denoted that it is just a theory based on X, Y and Z.

–

As is, we have updated the Prohibitive な to remove the speculative information and we will add a grammar point that addresses the use of な similarly to how ね is used. Going forward we will keep an eye out and try to avoid including any information that is still only a theory, especially in the introductory writeups.

We do sincerely appreciate the feedback we get from all users, especially the feedback that is hopefully constructive criticism. Thank you for choosing to take time out of your day to help us make Bunpro the best it can be. :bowing_man:

25 Likes
#38

Leaving aside the questionability of including personal theories at all without clearly marking them as your personal speculation for a second, your entire theory hinges on the idea that な’s inherent focus on the speaker somehow indicates a verb as not for the listener.

な, on the other hand, shows that something is for the speaker only, or only the speaker has intimate knowledge of it. This is why it comes across as “don’t” (when used after a verb), as you are literally saying “this (verb) is not for you!”

This entire theory then falls apart once you realize that not every な after a dictionary form verb is prohibitive.
With that in mind your current description of な continues to be incorrect, or at least misguiding.

When attached to the base (dictionary) form of a verb, it has the nuance of strongly demanding that someone ‘not’ do something

Also looking at one of your theories, which also seems like it could be partially responsible for the な ordeal, is frankly anything but hope inspiring. I would argue that even having a theory as clearly ridicilous as this posted by Bunpro staff is problematic, as people are likely to conflate “works for Bunpro” and “know what he’s talking about”. This is especially true thanks to your design decision of replacing staff’s level with the staff badge.

Overall I was already hesitant to recommend Bunpro, but did so anyway because I know it works for a lot of people, but after this whole ordeal, especially learning about your values as a teacher, I will avoid recommending Bunpro as much as possible.

5 Likes
#39

This thread is really reinforcing why I try to avoid speaking Japanese in front of non-native speakers. This is true even here in Japan. It almost always inevitably turns into some sort of weird competition where people start trying to “out Japanese” each other and beat their chest about their Japanese knowledge on the most minute of things.

I don’t want to defend Bunpro, because honestly whatever, but this thread is almost up to 40 extremely lengthy posts arguing about な and conflating it into this INCREDIBLY weird dramatic story about some company-wide collapse of culture.

Over な

Beyond that:

The fact this is something even being complained about is hilarious because it shows a level of voracious toxicity over something so petty. It also just shows a lack of understanding how that number even works.

38 Likes
#40

Totally open to being wrong as often as possible to find a quicker way to what is right.

A lot of extra research has been done in the time since that post, both on etymological history, and the history of the integration of kanji in the language. Note that that post was 3 years ago… The amount of time it takes to complete an undergraduate degree (not something I did in that time, just giving a reference of time for what can be learned in 3 years), and a very… very long time before I started working at Bunpro.

I am not avoiding this conversation because I have nothing to add to it, but because I feel that no matter what I say, it will just result in a revolving conversation that will not help anybody. Whether I am right or wrong, I and the rest of the team that contributes to our ongoing effort to produce quality content are more than happy to wear those mistakes and learn from them. But it is not something that will stop any of us from having our own views. We are just people, like you.

8 Likes