>>1612318
as if. learning proper english to an acceptable level (i.e. blending in) is not trivial. just phonology alone is enough of a kick to the balls (e.g. strong and weak forms, dealing with clusters, unreleased plosives, devoicing, multiple accepted pronunciations for some words). then you have the gorillion phrasal verbs with a zillion meanings, which are highly reminiscent of jukujikun since all too often the words have little to do with the meaning (e.g. phone it in? oh yeah it has to do with journalists in the '30s calling the office to break a story to the editor because they're too busy chasing after their next scoop and can't be assed to write a proper article. you can totally tell that at first glance right. also see mail it in)
>>1117508
because japanese is infamous for having shit learning materials (and the good stuff doesn't get much publicity), and the massive hole has yet to be filled. while there's an astronomical amount of interest, the learning curve is unforgivingly steep, leading to high drop-off rates and a constantly renewing stream of clueless dopes ready to get duped.
basically, there are no go-to sites to check whether something is grammatical and sounds natural. furthermore, there are very few explanations on
WHY stuff is used (the dojg try in this regard but they're not quite enough), resources differentiating similar words (e.g. 方向 vs 方位 vs 方角 vs 方面) are scarce. you have dictionaries of synonyms for this purpose, but surprise surprise they're monolingual
above all, the biggest hurdle is not having people you can consult to tell you how they'd go about expressing certain ideas coupled with an inability to guess due to english and japanese being so far apart (野次馬(onlookers when there's a tragedy)? wtf is that? wtf do you mean "you're right" is あなたの言うとおりだ?). something as trivial as "this is for you" or "how does it work?" turns into a nightmare in japanese.