|
 |
Vocabulary acquisition at advanced level | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : General discussion |  | |
| luke Diglot Senior Member United States Joined 7204 days ago 3133 posts - 4351 votes  Speaks: English*, Spanish Studies: Esperanto, French | Message 33 of 39 14 November 2014 at 8:04pm | IP Logged | ||
Sounds like a vote against flash cards if I've ever heard one. Hurray! 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| ScottScheule Diglot Senior Member United States scheule.blogspot.com Joined 5227 days ago 645 posts - 1176 votes Speaks: English*, Spanish Studies: Latin, Hungarian, Biblical Hebrew, Old English, Russian, Swedish, German, Italian, French | Message 34 of 39 14 November 2014 at 8:17pm | IP Logged | ||
You can read it that way, but it's actually vote against any technique besides "reading books in a way that was natural and befitting the act of reading itself." You could do things that way, but I see no reason to presume it's the best way of doing so. 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||
| bjornbrekkukot Newbie United States Joined 4721 days ago 25 posts - 58 votes Speaks: English* | Message 35 of 39 14 November 2014 at 8:22pm | IP Logged | ||
I'm not sure where to find it at the moment, but I recently read a scientific study by American scholars that proved a link between writing by hand and improved memory, as opposed to typing. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| bjornbrekkukot Newbie United States Joined 4721 days ago 25 posts - 58 votes Speaks: English* | Message 36 of 39 14 November 2014 at 8:31pm | IP Logged | ||
I learned Spanish—my strongest language—the same way. I never made a single flashcard or wordlist, and now my vocabulary in Spanish is arguably nearly equal to my native English. Often I'll only know a word in Spanish, and will have to look up the English translation. It was after studying Russian for 4 years, and seeing a lack of progress, that I adopted the flashcard system described above. I am not sure why vocabulary in Spanish (and French, for that matter), besides the obvious greater similarities to English, came so naturally and effortlessly, while vocab in Russian and other Slavic languages has proven itself incredibly resistant to the "natural" approach. Edited by bjornbrekkukot on 14 November 2014 at 8:33pm 3 persons have voted this message useful | |||
| ScottScheule Diglot Senior Member United States scheule.blogspot.com Joined 5227 days ago 645 posts - 1176 votes Speaks: English*, Spanish Studies: Latin, Hungarian, Biblical Hebrew, Old English, Russian, Swedish, German, Italian, French | Message 37 of 39 14 November 2014 at 8:55pm | IP Logged | ||
I have the same problem regarding Slavic vs. Romance vocabulary. I think there are two reasons: 1. there aren't as many cognates; and 2. the cognates that are there aren't obvious. Take the Russian word for camel. This took me forever to learn. Vjerbljud. What the hell is that? The Romance plus English translations are easily seen to be similar: French chameau, Spanish camello, Latin camelus, English camel. But Vjerbljud looks nothing like that. So we're obviously not dealing with a cognate. That makes it tough. But wait! It actually is a cognate, just not from where you thought! From Proto-Slavic *velьb(l)ǫdъ, vъlьb(l)ǫdъ, from Gothic (ulbandus), from Latin elephantus, from Ancient Greek ἐλέφας (eléphas). The actual cognate is elephant! But here's the second problem--it is not even remotely obvious that Vjerbljud and elephant are cognates. Yeah, if you look at the path, yeah, it makes sense--one liquid became another, a nasal disappeared, etc. But that's a pretty dramatic set of sound changes in my humble opinion, far more complex that those required to relate English camel to French chameau or Spanish camel. 5 persons have voted this message useful | |||
| ScottScheule Diglot Senior Member United States scheule.blogspot.com Joined 5227 days ago 645 posts - 1176 votes Speaks: English*, Spanish Studies: Latin, Hungarian, Biblical Hebrew, Old English, Russian, Swedish, German, Italian, French | Message 38 of 39 14 November 2014 at 9:09pm | IP Logged | ||
Not surprising. I imagine the harder the method of recording, the more ingrained the memory of doing so. This is why I chisel all my flashcards out of granite. 3 persons have voted this message useful | |||
| Juаn Senior Member Colombia Joined 5344 days ago 727 posts - 1830 votes Speaks: Spanish* | Message 39 of 39 14 November 2014 at 10:48pm | IP Logged | ||
Do you look up unknown words as you would if you were reading something in your native language that you wished to understand thoroughly? While cognates with languages you know of course lend a helping hand, other more distant languages too are built mostly upon a given number of roots, which if you have a good sense of how the language works (derivational affixes, phonological rules, morphology, etc.), can make vocabulary acquisition much more economical. The key element for me is that you must develop an instinctive feel for them, not memorize them as a set of facts. And this can only be achieved through extensive, meaningful engagement with the language. I myself have noticed no difference between my way of approaching French or German, and what I have been able to glimpse from other languages at less advanced levels like Russian, Hindi, Hungarian, Georgian or Japanese. I absolutely believe that to analyze a language rather than engage it on its own terms -that is, semantically, through meaningful discourse- is a hopeless way of actually assimilating it, as opposed to merely collecting facts about it. Edited by Juаn on 14 November 2014 at 11:14pm 4 persons have voted this message useful |
If you wish to post a reply to this topic you must first login. If you are not already registered you must first register
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
