More or less an year ago I decided to learn japanese for various reasons.

It mostly boils down to the desire I want to challenge myself but also because i have grown up reading manga, watching anime (before they were called anime in the mainstream so this reveals a bit of my age i suppose...) and I thought "how cool would it be to just pick a manga and read it in the language it was originally written? and wouldn't it be even cooler one day to go to Japan and speak with them in their language?"
That's more or less... it. That's the reason i have decided to take this "hobby".

Actually a couple of months after learning the first grammar rules i also thought "how hard could that be?" and i just got crushed by a little doraemon story. I understood the word "Nobita" :\

Anyway, so here i am now... In a month I'll try to pass the JLPT N5, the very super basic exam I'd like to pass just to prove myself that I can do it and I can move on to the next level.
I know that i could just skip it and keep on studying but after an year i feel i need a sort of... I dunno... a sort of token given from others. And if doraemon has proved something is that my mind alone cannot be trusted :)

I have seen that some of you know this language and I suppose, some of you have already tried and passed this exam.
So... any suggestion?
Is there anything i need to pay attention in particular? Anything i need to consider? Some hidden rule i do not have to break?
Something i should focus on in the last few weeks?

I'm open to suggestions because i keep on studying after dinner for an hour or so but, honestly, i am starting to feel a bit of tension.

p.s. I suppose my Achilles heel is the listening and comprehension. While i can read at a normal speed, I understand them only when they speak slow and sometimes, when a word is not immediately recognized boom... i just lose the flow trying to remember what that word meant and if i have ever heard it before.

Hi all. I am currently an early career academic. I really enjoy the 'classic' books in my field, but I have noticed that articles are often dull. I know this is probably due to the conventions of articles as well as the norms of various journals, but surely it need not be this way.

Does anyone have some examples of academic articles that are lively, exciting to read, engaging? I am not looking for any specific subject matter, but rather academic articles where it is clear the author has really honed their voice and is not afraid of being fun or playful.

Working on my graduate degree and desperately need to get better at writing. I want to write and publish a lot but my grammar and general style is quite bad. The allure of AI is forever present but I resist it to maintain my own skill.

Edit: Thank you for all the kind replies.

Hi!

I just watched the TV show Widow's Bay (highly recommended). One episode explored the classic trolley problem and got my mind rolling over its fascinating nuances. I see this problem was already discussed on tildes, but hope a 2026 revisit is worthwhile.

The episode promoted not pulling the lever. It argued that we can't stop all the horrible things that happen in the world. But we can control our own moral status:

"The runaway trolley is life. The lever is me... if I pull that lever it's a choice and I'm choosing to kill that person. I could never do that."

and this lovely message:

"The world is violent and mercurial. It will have its way with you…We live in a perpetually burning building, and what we must save from it all the time is love."

As sweet as that is, I find that interpretation lacking. To me, the physical act of pulling the lever isn't the core moral signal. Not pulling it isn't a get-out-of-responsibility-free card. There's still a violent outcome. That outcome happened because you made the choice to allow it. While you're not responsible for the scenario, you're still responsible for the outcome because it was entirely on you what the result would be.

I think my interpretation matches the "utilitarian" argument, which also hints at "the ends justify the means." I'm not, more generally, willing to get behind "the ends justify the means". But there is important nuance here. Sometimes we must cause harm for greater good and inaction in hard circumstances is its own moral trap. So I'm not sure what I think.

Also enjoyed exploring the variants at https://neal.fun/absurd-trolley-problems/. How would you handle them?