Status Updates From A Concise Introduction to L...

"As with all technologies, printing presses and computers (see the next section) are ethically and morally neutral, and they can spread inaccurate and purposely untruthful information as easily as they can spread accurate and truthful information."

Finally, something I agree with.

Trigger alert!

"Japanese is represented by three writing systems." No. It's not. It's represented by four, are you unable to count? You mentioned all four in regards to Japanese not three pages ago.

"Romaji is used for the convenience of foreigners." No. NO. That is not true. That is so far from true it's astonishing. It's used for a plethora of reasons, only one of which the above is a very minor one.

And kana don't represent syllables, they represent mora.


But, no one knows what that means, so I can let that go.

And they went on to say "These [kanji] are used for some root morphemes and to clarify homophones—words that sound the same but have different meanings"

uhhhh...no? They are used for content words. Not just root morphemes and homophones. Kanji are used for most nouns, most verbs, and most adjectives. Pronouns and adverbs can be Kanji and can be hiragana.

where on earth did they get that information?

Everyone learns 1607 through required education (middle school)

If they attend through senior high school it's 2136.

University educated people know around 3000. And for really super duper smart and driven people, it's 6355 to pass the kanji examination at the highest level.

So...where'd they get 1850??

Japanese uses1850 logographic symbols....what now?

But what I observed is that 'aida' and the 'kan' in 'jikan' used the same sign. Why should they use the same sign? They are not the same word, they are not even the same morpheme, but they are the same kanji 間. I suppose you could argue that they are the same morpheme as well, because they mean they same thing, they're just pronounced differently depending on if they are alone or in a compound word.

Now, I could be wrong here, or there could be some sort of miscommunication, as I am by no means an expert. But I think it's a bit strong to say a 'signed language is never based on writing'. Because I'm fairly certain that at least one Japanese signed language is based on kanji, or at least they are both based on morphology. That's based on my own observation, which is why you should take it with a grain of salt.