A word of clarification (in fact my LAST words on this forum) Many of the first aikido shihan had no difficulty making themselves understood in english. These would include Nakazono, Noro, Tamura , Abbe, Tada and others. The reason that little was said is because THAT WAS THE WAY AIKIDO WAS TAUGHT IN THOSE DAYS. I was told that aikido cannot be expressed in words let alone taught by them it is learned through training and through "the pores of the skin." Sayonara koyo
Just to let you know, I'm still working on the glossary in my free time. This weekend has been very busy with training, so I haven't had much of an oportunity to type much. If you are going to learn a real budo, the terminology is going to be in Japanese, whether you like it or not. You might find some senior exponents translating terms in to English, and it does work for those students who aren't that serious about their research into their chosen art. In koryu bugei, terminology is one of those things that are seriously required. Certain techniques or kata are written in Kanji and you might be able to mimic what the name is, but if you don't do the research into the language and all of it's cultural idiosyncracies, you'll never really understand the meanings. (e.g. what is the difference in meaning between these two characters for "uchi", to strike? a.) 打ち and b.) 討ち。 They both mean to strike, but what are the differences? If your teacher gives you an important document that just lists a bunch of techniques or kata in English and Kanji, will you know their significances?) There is a certain satisfaction in learning things for yourself, rather than having it spoonfed to you, however, with the current standards of competence in some budo outside of Japan (and in Japan sometimes!), a little spoonfeeding is needed. Koryu is a bit harder at times, because you have to research into classical characters that are no longer used in the modern language, since texts and scrolls related to that school are usually from periods before the Meiji restoration.
Answers for today's quiz. This particular uchi (打ち) means to strike with the hands. This uchi (討ち) means to strike with a weapon.
Indeed, a question which was irrelevant to the post I had made. And again you've wasted people's time with a pointless post. Bill, it is quite interesting that you say that Abbe Sensei had no difficulty making himself understood in English; Henry Ellis, Derek Eastman and if my memory serves me correctly Hyden Foster have all told me that Abbe would repeatedly say (whilst carrying a shinai) "...my shinai speaks fluent English" precisely because he himself didn't speak English particularly well when he first arrived here from Japan. Quoted from Aikido Journal I'm not suggesting that the Japanese instructors who pioneered the development of aikido here didn't pick-up English language skills over a period of time, what I'm suggesting is that there was a language barrier and this contributed to a reason why specific terminology wasn't used in the early days, and not because the terms didn't exist. I don't doubt that many Japanese instructors used a physical means of teaching rather than verbal, I equally don't doubt that much of the reason for this was exactly because of what you've described however; language barriers existed and, I have several people who were training with Abbe Sensei who've told me so. Kind regards Dave
Hi Prowla Thread isn't daft, some of the pointless contribution from a couple of people however is. HURRAH !!! Exactly mate but I've been saying this all the way through and, like many points I've made in this thread, it gets ignored because, as I said very early in this façade, this debate isn't really about Japanese vs. English, its about two moderators taking issue with me personally, and whilst they'll never admit it, its painfully obvious to anyone who wants to read the content of these individual's posts. Not.. According to both Aikimac and Aikiwolfie who study aikido with minimal Japanese terms. According to a formal rule created and qualified by Aikimac.. I think its time to raise a few points about this information. Firstly the person creating this rule set is a moderator, I don't question this, he is a moderator and entitled to create rules however; it stands to reason that someone creating a rule set on a specific subject for a specific group of people would, take the time to actually qualify the information contained therein for accuracy, after all if its to be taken seriously it needs to be accurate correct ? - Perhaps not, I'll allow you guys to form your own thoughts/opinions. Aikimac is informing anyone reading this set of rules that; ..the 7 most basic aikido techniques have no reasonable English translation. Really... ?? Does Aikimac speak Japanese ? Is Aikimac actually an authority on the subject of Aikido ? The answer to both those questions is a resounding NO! So what qualifies him to tell you me, or anyone else for that matter that the first seven basic techniques in aikido have no reasonable English translation ? Nothing, because it isn't actually accurate. Aikimac also goes on to use "sheonage" as another example within the justification of his rule set, I'd like to point out at this junction of the post, that this technique refers to a four directional throw. Shihonage is the correct Romanised spelling and shi is four in Japanese, not "she" Perhaps this is a typo on Aikimac's part however I doubt it, I have seen him refer to shihonage in this way before (see examples 1 2 3 4 5) and, if "clarity" is what Aikimac wishes to enhance with the creation of his rule set I don't think he's setting a particularly good example, dare I suggest he should look at the clarity of his own understanding of aikido terminology before dicatating to others in a set of rules on the same subject. Here's some examples of shi in everyday language.. shikaku - square shigatsu - April shiki - four seasons ...Perhaps it would be prudent for the content of Aikimac's rule set to be accurate, at the moment it isn't and hardly forms the basis of a credible set of rules for those who do actually understand nihongo (Japanese language) and aikido to a greater extent than the person creating the rules. A point which has been made several times by a number of people through this debate, deaf ears and fallen on springs to mind. Precisely, good point well made mate. I don't think it will be a wasted effort at all, indeed I think it will highlight a number of inaccuracies in the arguments being made against the use of Japanese terms. I've already seen the work that Steve Delaney has done for this forum and I can say, none of the English translations are particularly difficult to understand, either from a contextual or literal point of view. Given that Steve has studied and lived in Japan for a number of years, reads, writes and speaks Japanese, I think it’s a fair assumption that his work will be accurate and helpful. Well... Here's my most controversial and indeed probably my last comment on this forum, I think those who seem adamant that they can learn aikido without understanding or using the indigenous terminology which is associated with it, are lazy in that particular respect and crass to think they can convince those who do understand Japanese terminology, that the language isn't required. To quote a well respected Aikidoka in this thread sayonara Dave
The glossary in the Aikido Resources forum is coming along great. Thanks to all involved, especially to Kogusoku and Dave for contributions. :love:
LMAO... lordy mate you make me laugh.. I told you copying that stuff off the back of a Panasonic TV manual wouldn't work lol.
A surprising thing I have found from teaching aikido in Japan is that the Japanese members of the dojo have just as much difficulty in understanding the meaning of the names of techniques as the non-Japanese members--though they are Japanese native speakers and the names are in Japanese. The names are really short descriptions and are often used in a semi-technical sense. So something like kaiten-nage will not make much sense to a Japanese unless it is understood where the kaiten is. In addition, the names were coined by the students of Morihei Ueshiba, not by Ueshiba himself. This is clear from looking at the Japanese texts of books that appeared in the 1930s under the name of Morihei Ueshiba: Budo Renshu and Budo. In neither volume are any of the techniques named. If you compare this with Aikido, published in Japanese in 1957 by Kisshomaru Ueshiba, there is a major difference. Basic techniques (kihon waza) are presented and terms like ikkyou, nikyou used for the first time. And this is just the Aikikai. Finally, there are also quite a number of techniques that do not have any names at all. So for me, it is a relatively minor issue whether to have the names that exist in Japanese or English. Either way, they are basically shorthand or codewords for elaborate movements that have to be 'internalized'. Best wishes to all,
