|
 |
How to get to fluency faster | ||
Tags: Fluency | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Learning Techniques, Methods & Strategies |  | |
| leosmith Senior Member United States Joined 6578 days ago 2365 posts - 3804 votes  Speaks: English* Studies: Tagalog | Message 49 of 77 20 July 2008 at 11:04pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
ALG is terrible, from what I've read posted by former students in Thailand, and what I've read on their own website. I'm sure this huge listen-only period would be a very poor method for me. Maybe it will work well for you, but IMO it won't be very efficient for most. I'm surprised that so many people are thinking this long silence period is a good idea. We debated this quite thoroughly in the only listen! thread. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||
| leosmith Senior Member United States Joined 6578 days ago 2365 posts - 3804 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Tagalog | Message 50 of 77 20 July 2008 at 11:23pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
Couldn't have said it better myself;) I disagree with much of what you said, but rather than spending a lot of time addressing each issue, I'll sum up. Different people have different success rates with different language products, methods, techniques, etc. That may not disprove your theory, but it renders it not very useful, IMO. Much more useful is the theory that different people learn differently, because it implies that it's a good idea to try different things to determine what works best for you. I believe in general it's a bad idea to try to force/convince someone to use things that don't work well for them. 2 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||
 Iversen Super Polyglot Moderator Denmark berejst.dk Joined 6731 days ago 9078 posts - 16473 votes Speaks: Danish*, French, English, German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, Swedish, Esperanto, Romanian, Catalan Studies: Afrikaans, Greek, Norwegian, Russian, Serbian, Icelandic, Latin, Irish, Lowland Scots, Indonesian, Polish, Croatian Personal Language Map | Message 51 of 77 21 July 2008 at 6:10am | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
|
I think we should make a clear distinction between silent periods as part of a listen-only (or read-only) strategy and thinking silently for practical reasons. I have never advocated the former, - on the contrary I want to get into thinking as soon as possible. Acquiring passive skils only is a poor substitute for mastering all aspects of a language, and you can only learn active skills by being active. But you can be active without speaking - at least for a time.
It is probably true that this kind of thinking involves subvocalization, but that is just an added bonus that will make it a suitable basis for speaking later. In spite of this thinking is not nearly as physically taxing as speaking, and you can do it for hours without appearing as a psychiatric patient who has forgotten to take his pills. For me these are objective advantages. On the other hand one of the main goals of language learning is to be able to have conversations with native speakers (and sometimes also good secondary speakers, as in the case of English). When I'm travelling I may have to appear like a near aphatic who only speak tarzan-language because that is all that I can manage right now. But I don't like it - I do it to survive. On the other hand I like long conversations where language isn't too much of an obstacle. Therefore I prefer to postpone speaking to other people until I can muster at least a faulty, but reasonably fluid conversation. Teachers are no exception, - on the contrary: if you show any signs of weakness (and of course you do) then zapp! they take over and want to control everything you do. In fact that's their job. So I postpone speaking until I can deal with ordinary conversations with ordinary people instead of teachers. But because of my ongoing internal chatter this is far from being the purely passive absorbtion of language that is implied in the idea about long silent periods. Edited by Iversen on 21 July 2008 at 6:16am 3 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||
| Sunja Diglot Senior Member Germany Joined 6113 days ago 2020 posts - 2295 votes 1 sounds Speaks: English*, German Studies: French, Mandarin | Message 52 of 77 21 July 2008 at 7:31am | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
I don't want to detract from some of the good points you make about silent periods and thinking, but I'd like to respond to your comment about teachers. Yes, I think it's extremely frustrating to get "zapped" in the throes of one's own learning process. I don't advocate any learner to try and speak with someone whose only interest is being the puppet-master. One who is interested in self-study definitely has to find someone patient who's willing to participate in but not control what's being said. We need listeners who are teachers and vice-versa. Regarding the other points, I think it's important to stay away from extremes. There may be longer periods where one doesn't speak (months?), but then I would think in order to keep active, one would need to use the language -- if anything, in order to correct mistakes. One can correct a lot with dialogue drills, even without the aid of another person..well, maybe that would be the intermediate stage there.. EDIT: I think I'd like to turn that into a question. I'm at the intermediate stage and find it difficult to converse. I don't want to be silent, either. It's kind of a false dilemma of mine, a Catch 22. Iversen, if you're still there I'd sure like to have your opinion, how do you go about breaking the silent period? EDIT again: I don't mean to be redundant. I know you just touched it, so let me rephrase: for a language like Japanese that easily becomes destorted when spoken too slowly, I obviously have to wait until I've mastered at least a basic script. With people with more experience coming out of this stage it's probably "halb so wild", but I guess I'd like to see what works best for others before I decide what to do. Edited by Sunja on 21 July 2008 at 8:51am 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||
| Cainntear Pentaglot Senior Member Scotland linguafrankly.blogsp Joined 6039 days ago 4399 posts - 7687 votes Speaks: Lowland Scots, English*, French, Spanish, Scottish Gaelic Studies: Catalan, Italian, German, Irish, Welsh | Message 53 of 77 21 July 2008 at 1:54pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
Who's the fool, me or you? I certainly accept that there is more than one way of learning. I also accept that there might be more than one "best" way of learning. However, I believe that there is a universal "best" way. My mind is open to all these possibilities and open to evidence. Yours, however, is closed. I'd say that's more foolish. Now lets be clear, what I believe is not that there is a single theoretical "script" that every teacher and every learner should follow -- that would certainly be foolish. There are plenty of "script" methods out there and they all suffer a distinct lack of engagement on the part of both the teacher and the learner I believe -- after learning, teaching, discussing, observating and reflecting -- that there is a single "zone" of optimal teaching. There is certainly some room for individual style in this zone, but each would be equally valid and equally broadly applicable. Think of the space of all teaching techniques like a dart board. In the centre of the board is the bulls eye. Every dart that lands in the circle gets the same score (50) -- you don't get bonus points for hitting dead centre with sub-micron accuracy. Teachers now are aiming at the outside of this circle, so their darts are landing quite far apart. Because the techniques are so far apart, of course they appeal to different people differently -- they're on the extremes. But people have a lot in common, and aiming towards the centre addresses less of the differences and more of the similarities. Now I am perfectly happy to accept valid disproof of my theory, but the data currently presented only tells us that the techniques currently in use are not universally optimal. Even if it is not true -- even if there are these distinct "visual", "auditory" etc learners -- it surely makes sense that by moving towards the middle of the circle we can increase the breadth of learners for whom our teaching is effective. Instead, we look at our minority of successes of proof of an extremist theory.
And that is not disproof. You have proof that your teachers do not have an adequate method -- nothing more.
Curiosity is a motivator -- nothing more. I agree that it is one of the most important motivators in human existance. Now, your hatred of teachers -- didn't you find that your teachers killed your curiosity? There's no reason for you to be more curious working solo. Hence it is clear that it is not curiosity that taught you -- it was the material you used and the environment you learnt in. The material and the environment -- that's the difference between learning in school and learning at home.
Of course it makes sense -- it's a description of external observations. But there's a recurring theme in proverbs -- you can't judge a book by its cover, still waters run deep -- judging by appearances is naïve: foolish even. The theory of multiple intelligences assumes that the observed differences are intrinsic and not the result of the environment in which the observation takes place. Lets take an analogy. A football (soccer) coach has three players. Number 1 is a good kicker, number 2 is a good tackler and number 3 is a good runner. Whose kicking does he work on? Multiple intelligences says number 1, because he has a "kicking intelligence". Common sense says numbers 2 and 3 because they need to learn to kick. Same thing applies for tackling and running. So doesn't it make at least as much sense that multiple intelligences is actually evidence of weaknesses that must be addressed in order to improve the individual's ability to learn?
No! Language may be superficially different, but it is only as different as language! What on Earth did I mean by that?!?!? If your frame of reference for language is language itself, then a difference between two different languages is very great -- it fills the frame. If your frame of reference is the universe -- the motion of the planets, the vibrations of molecules, the flight of birds, the flashes of light from a distant nova, the differences are vanishingly small. If language is our world, as it is for most teachers, then we exaggerate the differences and we can find an excuse for anything.
Please name something that only exists in one channel. Even silent movies had a soundtrack. Birdsong is associated with the image of the animal, even if you can't see it. When you speak to someone, he sees your lips move. When you squeeze a bit of cheese in your fingers, you detect a subtle scent in your nostrils. When you sit down to eat a curry, your eyes see the vivid colours and the scent hits your nostrils. When you take a bite, the tastebuds on your tongue are activated -- detecting sweet, bitter, savoury, salty and sour -- and the aromas drift into your nose. "Taste" as we know it is the combination of these two factors. As you start to chew, you hear the food moving in your mouth. Out of the corner of your eye you can see your cheeks and nose moving, and the subtle movements of your entire head. All round your mouth, your nerves feel the texture of the food as it slowly breaks down between your teeth. Then the oils from the spices start to penetrate the skin and the sensation of heat begins to kick in.... The world is multisensory -- fact. So why should anyone be a single channel learner? 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||
| Iversen Super Polyglot Moderator Denmark berejst.dk Joined 6731 days ago 9078 posts - 16473 votes Speaks: Danish*, French, English, German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, Swedish, Esperanto, Romanian, Catalan Studies: Afrikaans, Greek, Norwegian, Russian, Serbian, Icelandic, Latin, Irish, Lowland Scots, Indonesian, Polish, Croatian Personal Language Map | Message 54 of 77 22 July 2008 at 3:20am | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
Good question. For me the ideal way to activate a language is to travel to a relevant country and promise myself only to speak the foreign language (i.e. short time immersion). In practice I sometimes go too early so that I can't fulfill that promise, but I nevertheless find it less embarassing to speak a certain language in a less than perfect way if everybody around me also speak that language. Apart from that it is difficult to make any specific recommandations because it for most people is difficult to predict when you meet foreigners speaking your target language - unless of course you know somebody personally from that language area. Using a system like skype would probably be a good idea if you are good at smalltalk, but I prefer having a fixed subject and I'm dismal at smalltalk. The last resort would be to find a secluded spot somewhere where you can speak aloud for a couple of hours without being dragged away to the nearest asylum. In practice I'm not too scared about breaking the 'silent period' - if I can think (eeh ... subvocalize) in a language it is not a big a step to speak it, and I know perfectly well when I'm ready. Edited by Iversen on 22 July 2008 at 3:48am 2 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||
| Sunja Diglot Senior Member Germany Joined 6113 days ago 2020 posts - 2295 votes 1 sounds Speaks: English*, German Studies: French, Mandarin | Message 55 of 77 22 July 2008 at 3:55am | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
(lol) Yes, I'm used to that -- finding a secluded spot, that is. ;) One of the things I've thought about doing is looking up "Messe Frankfurt" to see if there are any Japanese trade shows going on. I still think it's a big leap until I'm ready for that, but it's a thought. I would prefer that to Skype, simply for the reason that I need more than just a naked voice to interact with. Face-to-face gives me a lot more information to work with -- gestures, facial expressions, etc.. I haven't looked yet concerning Spanish. For some reason I'm not so worried about that. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||
| Iversen Super Polyglot Moderator Denmark berejst.dk Joined 6731 days ago 9078 posts - 16473 votes Speaks: Danish*, French, English, German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, Swedish, Esperanto, Romanian, Catalan Studies: Afrikaans, Greek, Norwegian, Russian, Serbian, Icelandic, Latin, Irish, Lowland Scots, Indonesian, Polish, Croatian Personal Language Map | Message 56 of 77 22 July 2008 at 4:43am | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
|
Your idea about using a trade show isn't bad. I went to a tourism trade fair in Copenhgen in January and found a lot of native speakers of many languages and dialects (for instance a guy from Galicia in Spain who spoke Galician to me, Italian speakers, Spanish, French, German.. you name it). I'm sure that Frankfurt also has this kind of fairs. The good thing about fairs is that you always know the theme beforehand - in the case I mentioned it would be the region those native speakers were representing. Edited by Iversen on 22 July 2008 at 4:45am 1 person has voted this message useful |
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
