|
 |
Comprehensible Input | ||
Tags: Comprehensive input | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Questions About Your Target Languages |  | |
| slucido Bilingual Diglot Senior Member Spain https://goo.gl/126Yv Joined 6674 days ago 1296 posts - 1781 votes  4 sounds Speaks: Spanish*, Catalan* Studies: English | Message 1 of 14 14 September 2007 at 2:25pm | IP Logged | |||||
|
I have been learning English for 6 years by comprehensible input. Basically reading and ,the last two years, listening. My goal wasn't learning English, but the meaning and studying what I like. One year ago I was aware that I could understand everything I read in English and, after I met our forum, I began with the desire to study more actively English. My method has been more intensive comprehensible input (ebooks, books,audibooks and movies).
What's the difference? It's harder. Listening one interesting audiobook for the content is fun. Listening the same audiobook several times, reading its book and saving words is less fun. It can be hard. Watching an interesting movie in English is fun, but watching the same movie several times, with subtitles in Spanish, with subtitles in English, without subtitles, reading the script, saving words and watching again the movie is less fun, maybe very hard work. And remember I didn't studied grammar and I never travel to English countries. What I want to say is that I think there are different kinds of 'comprehensible input' approaches. My first comprehensible approach was very good. You can learn a lot with little effort, because you don't want to learn the language. The effort is in the subject which is expressed in that language. what is the disadvantage? If your goal is learning languages, I think it's a SLOW method and you don't get any feedback. I can be very good reading and listening, but my output was and is very bad. A lot of misspelling and speech mistakes. My second approach is less good. You can work with interesting material, but reading and listening again the same material, saving words, analysing phrases, can be mortal boring. Maybe you can improve more quickly your reading and listening skills, but you don't get feedback. After one year, when I proofread my writing or my speech I find a lot of mistakes. You can read my last year posts to asses my writing. So, the first comprehensible input approach is better, because it is slow,but sure. For example, if I fed up and boring with learning English, I can give up all my interest to learning English, but I know FOR SURE that I will continue reading and listening English for the content (the first comprehensible approach). Otherwise my conclusion is that first input approach is slow and with the second I am not fully satisfied. I think the first input approach is very important, but it's not enough. I am not sure with the second. Maybe we can replace it for some kind of intensive drilling. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| Linguamor Decaglot Senior Member United States Joined 6617 days ago 469 posts - 599 votes Speaks: English*, German, Italian, Spanish, Swedish, Danish, French, Norwegian, Portuguese, Dutch | Message 2 of 14 15 September 2007 at 12:20am | IP Logged | |||||
|
Don't underestimate what you have achieved. I understood exactly what you wrote above without any problem. I also think your English has improved. Acquiring a language takes time - languages are complex, and there is a huge amount to learn. Errors are a natural and unavoidable part of the process.
I urge you to continue to get as much comprehensible input as possible. Your language will continue to improve. You could also try to identify the things that you are still having trouble with, and attempt to improve using targeted output. With comprehensible input you go from language to meaning. Targeted output starts with meaning and produces output that correctly expresses the meaning that you are having trouble expressing correctly. It is called targeted output because you are targeting your difficulties. One way to do this is to notice and collect examples of your errors, write down your native language equivalent of the meaning you wished to express in English, find out the correct way to express this meaning in English, and then going from the meaning (represented by your native language equivalent), practice expressing this meaning in English. Edited by Linguamor on 15 September 2007 at 2:47am 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| LilleOSC Senior Member United States lille.theoffside.comRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 6690 days ago 545 posts - 546 votes 4 sounds Speaks: English* Studies: French, Arabic (Written) | Message 3 of 14 15 September 2007 at 10:18am | IP Logged | |||||
I think you have to supplement comprehensible input with speaking drills to make progress quicker. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| slucido Bilingual Diglot Senior Member Spain https://goo.gl/126Yv Joined 6674 days ago 1296 posts - 1781 votes 4 sounds Speaks: Spanish*, Catalan* Studies: English | Message 4 of 14 15 September 2007 at 10:43am | IP Logged | |||||
Yes, I think is common sense. I have begun the last week. With proofreading, I have an average of one mistake every 4 words :0) Output with feedback seems basic or maybe I am mentally retarded. I am thinking to send my Spanish writings to proofreading, but I am scared.. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| Linguamor Decaglot Senior Member United States Joined 6617 days ago 469 posts - 599 votes Speaks: English*, German, Italian, Spanish, Swedish, Danish, French, Norwegian, Portuguese, Dutch | Message 5 of 14 15 September 2007 at 10:51pm | IP Logged | |||||
You have to speak to get good at speaking. Comprehensible input provides your brain with the data to learn how the language expresses meaning. Speaking is dependent on that learning. Speaking drills are also a source of comprehensible input. Depending on the type of speaking drill, your responses are dependent on the language you have already acquired or the comprehensible input provided by the drills and stored in your short-term memory. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| Mezzivi Newbie Joined 6347 days ago 36 posts - 36 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, French | Message 6 of 14 16 September 2007 at 3:46am | IP Logged | |||||
|
Could someone provide a detailed explanation of how to make a comprehensible input language program? I have no idea how to make one, and moreover, what it really is.
Thanks. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| Linguamor Decaglot Senior Member United States Joined 6617 days ago 469 posts - 599 votes Speaks: English*, German, Italian, Spanish, Swedish, Danish, French, Norwegian, Portuguese, Dutch | Message 7 of 14 16 September 2007 at 6:41am | IP Logged | |||||
Rosetta Stone is a language program that is comprehension based. I would characterize Pimsleur as a comprehensible input/directed output program. You can design a comprehensible input-rich language learning environment. A comprehensible input-rich environment is one in which you have ample amounts of comprehensible input sources available - audio materials, reading material, radio, tv, movies, native speakers, etc. Sources of comprehensible input means anything that you can listen to or read with understanding in the language. You acquire grammar and vocabulary that you did not previously know as you repeatedly encounter them and your brain processes them for meaning. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| TreoPaul Senior Member United States Joined 6329 days ago 121 posts - 118 votes Speaks: English* Studies: German | Message 8 of 14 16 September 2007 at 10:21am | IP Logged | |||||
|
I am learning German, albiet slowly. I currently recognize a bit over 2500 words. Yesterday I received a copy of "Emil und die Detektiv" which I believe to be at my level comprehensible input. For counter-example, Harry Potter has proven to be too advanced at this point.
I've found I can read "Emil" several ways - sloshing through looking up only enough to make the meaning clear -- a more enjoyable read. Or looking up each and every word I don't know to ensure my assumption of meaning is correct = less enjoyable. I'm not sure which is preferable. The constant stops detract from the "feel" of the language turning it into more of a string of words than a sentence. On the other hand looking up every unknown word will prevent false assumptions and hopefully broaden overall comprehension. Any thoughts? 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. |
