Finnish doesn't use <å>, though. It's only used in Swedish names, it's like saying English has <ñ> because some Spanish names have it.>>429
No, Japanese isn't at all related to Chinese¹. Japanese is a Japonic language² while Chinese is a Sino-Tibetan language³. Like others said, kanji⁴ came from China and there are tons of Chinese loanwords in Japanese⁵, but grammatically they have very little in common. Anyone who claims Japanese is "derived from Chinese" has no clue what they're talking about. If what they said is that Proto-Japonic may have been spoken in what's now China, that's possible I guess?
¹ Unless you believe Sino-Tibetan and Japonic are related, but I've never heard that suggested and they have so little in common the only way I could imagine it is at the deepest level of Sino-Austric (a macrofamily of Sino-Tibetan and Austric; Austric itself is hypothetical and usually doesn't even include Japonic), so unknown thousands of years ago.
² Also includes Ryukyuan languages. In the past there were also some Japonic languages on the Korean peninsula, but those have long since gone extinct.
³ Well, languages; there isn't one Chinese language, but rather several Sinitic languages that are mutually unintelligible.
⁴ Well, technically kana also evolved from Chinese characters but they're simplified to the point where it's not obvious and are used so differently that it's just nitpicking to mention.
⁵ Technically not just loanwords since the characters and their pronunciations were imported systematically, so there are also a lot of "Chinese words" coined in Japan.>>442
I prefer physical dictionaries myself, but for a lot of languages digital dictionaries are more convenient and easily available. Specifically with Japanese, I use both equally.
This post was edited by its author on .