As I'm going over Lesson Two, I'm realizing that it might behoove you and your readers more, if you (and this is just a minor suggestion) clarify exactly what script you're using, to write "Kana" and "Roomaji".

The section I refer to is this: Japanese is written with a mix of Kanji 漢字 (Lesson 3) and native syllabaries called Kana かな. English letters (Roomaji ローマ字 can actually also be seen in some words.

Here, as (as far as the characters go) neither Katakana or Hiragana have been formally introduced Ithe individual syllabaries, that is), it would be tougher for your readers to not only make out each syllabary, but know exactly why you're using one system over the other.

If it's alright, and while I'm still working (I AM on vacation, y'know 8)), I'd like to suggest that you indicate which script you're using, in a nonessential clause.

For example: "Japanese is written with a mix of Kanji 漢字 (Lesson 3) (that's already done well, in pointing out the appropriate section, since it's not this lesson's purpose) and native syllabaries called Kana かな (written in Hiragana). English letters (Roomaji ローマ字 [written in Katana]) can actually also be seen in some words."

Maybe nothing close to verbatim, but a sort of change; the reason I bring it up being: as you go over the two systems later -カタカナ is mainly used to write words from other languages. & Hiragana is the primary syllabary and is associated with native vocabulary. it'll or it should become apparent as to why you've written "Kana" and "Roomaji" in those respective forms, instead of in all Katakana or all Roomaji. If not, well, you could reiterate why you made the clarification above (e.g., "Hiragana is the primary syllabary and is associated with native vocabulary. '[Hence, my writing "Kana (かな;)" in Hiragana: it is not a loan word.] '"

One more small thing: You title the Hiragana section with Hiragana, but the Katakana section with Katakana. It's not consistent, but I'm not sure if you did that on purpose or not. Either way, the next line, for Katakana "カタカナ is mainly used to write words from other languages." ...can it not be written as "Katakana is mainly used to write words from other languages."? It's consistent with how you started the Hiragana section off, and it's not redudant, considering you just wrote that above, and it's not clarifying anything yet, as you have not formally introduced the Katakana.

Just a few small things that I would mention. Having known no Japanese, when I first started with this site, I still got by, but I believe these changes would eliminate a lot of potential confusion.

I see your point. I have adjusted it to something that I hope solves this problem. 

Thanks. I'll adjust, likewise.