|
 |
A continuation of the endless I/O talk | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : General discussion |  | |
| 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 57 of 126 28 November 2008 at 2:00pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
I agree with you and you agree with me. :-)
Where am I saying methods are irrelevant? Methods are very relevant. We agree, but I am focusing in different features. I have a centered student focus and you have a centered method focus. I focus in features that make people practicing. Edited by slucido on 28 November 2008 at 2:01pm 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Cainntear Pentaglot Senior Member Scotland linguafrankly.blogsp Joined 6010 days ago 4399 posts - 7687 votes Speaks: Lowland Scots, English*, French, Spanish, Scottish Gaelic Studies: Catalan, Italian, German, Irish, Welsh | Message 58 of 126 28 November 2008 at 3:06pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
No -- de todo no. Es posible aprender hablar en una manera anormal. Si las reglas de la clase no son las mismas que las reglas de la calle, las reglas de la clase son malas. El idioma es lo que decimos, no lo que los profes quieren que digamos. No -- not at all. It's posible to learn to speak in an unnatural manner. If the rules taught in the classroom aren't the same as the rules used in the the stree, the classroom rules are wrong. Language is what we say, not what teachers want us to say. Por ejemplo, lo pasivo en unas escuelas es "estar hecho", pero lo pasivo de la calle es lo impersonal -- "hecharse". "Estar hecho" es de latin, no de castillano For example, some schools teach "estar hecho" as the passive, but the passive used in the street is the impersonal form -- "hecharse". "Estar hecho" is from Latin, not from Castillian. La gente dice "hecharse" no a causa de mal educación, sino de naturaleza. Eso es el idioma. People use "hecharse not because of bad education, but to be natural. This is how language works.
Hahahahahaha. It's a joke, because it has a smiley face. That stops it being a cheap insult. Hahahahaha. You are very clever. Edited by Cainntear on 28 November 2008 at 3:07pm 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| dswans Newbie United States Joined 5888 days ago 17 posts - 17 votes Speaks: English* Studies: German | Message 59 of 126 28 November 2008 at 3:14pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
At the very beginning stage (day 1) it is naturally impossible to produce anything self-created in the new target language. However, many language students (myself included) try to produce self-created output too early in the learning process. If there is access to instantaneous correction (i.e. a native speaker), I believe that trying to create your own sentences can be beneficial, even at a very early stage. Otherwise, I think it is best for the language learner to wait until he has had plenty of input and guided output (in some sort of mimicry exercise) before he tries to create anything of his own. Overall, I agree with your argument. The most import aspects of language learning are input, output, and staying the course. However, the question remains: When have we received enough input that we can produce beneficial, self-created output? But, maybe this question belongs to another discussion. I have one final comment of the existence of language errors by natives, of which I am sure I have made my fair share. The following phrase could have very easily come from a native speaker.
However, the phrase is grammatically incorrect, as the word "bad", an adjective, has been used as an adverb. This type of error falls into the category that I believe is called "Non-Standard Usage", and thus would be an error according to standard usage (presumably the usage that most native speakers use). Non-standard usage of this type is quit common among younger children, who also make other mistakes as well. Apparently they have not had enough input and output yet (though I hope they haven't given up learning their language:). Edited by dswans on 28 November 2008 at 3:42pm 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Cainntear Pentaglot Senior Member Scotland linguafrankly.blogsp Joined 6010 days ago 4399 posts - 7687 votes Speaks: Lowland Scots, English*, French, Spanish, Scottish Gaelic Studies: Catalan, Italian, German, Irish, Welsh | Message 60 of 126 28 November 2008 at 3:32pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
No, queríamos que piensas, pero si eres behaviorista, entiendo porqué no puedes: los behavioristas no creen en la importancia de los pensamientos, solo la de los actos. No, we would like you to think, but if you're a behaviourist, I understand why you can't: behaviourists don't believe in the importance of thoughts, only the importants of acts. While a rational human being will entertain thoughts for their own sake, a behaviourist will only engage in thoughts that help change action. Consider: The purpose of thought is to change behaviour. So only thoughts that provide a desired change of behaviour should be entertained. Thoughts that you disagree with can only provide an undesired change of behaviour (in terms of opinion). Therefore you should never entertain the thoughts of someone who disagrees with you as they can only harm. Ergo: The behaviourist is the most closed-minded person on the planet. Except that this is all nonsense -- behaviourism is an experimental framework, not a life philosophy. Behaviourism says that we have to judge psychology by experimentally observed actions, not by theory and conjecture. And in fact that is what all learning methods do: that's what an exam is. The quality of the language is the "behaviour" under observation. Sometimes this quality is measured against subjective terms, but sometimes it's measured against real data for how people speak. It is far more behaviourist to take the latter approach -- normal speech patterns can be statistically derived using corpus studies, and behaviourists love cold hard figures. Your English has not been "attacked" -- I have simply demonstrated how it deviates from the statistical norm in some of the language features statistically determined as most common. If you're a behaviourist, you should be thanking me for it!
Yes, well, in that case you should thank us for pointing out your mistakes, because we're teaching you for free. [/QUOTE] 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| glossa.passion Triglot Senior Member Germany Joined 6320 days ago 267 posts - 349 votes 1 sounds Speaks: German*, EnglishC1, Danish Studies: Spanish, Dutch | Message 61 of 126 28 November 2008 at 3:52pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
As I understand the theoretical construct of reinforcement, it deals with a positive and a negative aspect. They increase or decrease the future frequency of a behaviour. Sorry, but I’m really not able to discuss this construct in English and I would have problems in my native tongue, too. No flattering, just a fact.
Of course I do believe in self-management, otherwise I would not study languages on my own :-) But for me it’s an essential part to recognize my limitations. It’s part of my self-management to realize, what I can do on my very own and when it‘s indicated to draw on someone for adeqate support. Nevertheless I do stay in control of my learning process. For me a language coach is not a typical teacher, more a counsel or assistant, I want him (or her :-) to assist me in my ways of language study like I described in my post before, kind of backing up my results. I would stay in full control and responsibility of my studies and „use“ him to elaborate my language skills. I've never met such a counsel, but who knows... Sorry, I should have quoted the statements I referred to, but only now I realize, that there are some longer posts inbetween. Edited by glossa.passion on 28 November 2008 at 4:11pm 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Cainntear Pentaglot Senior Member Scotland linguafrankly.blogsp Joined 6010 days ago 4399 posts - 7687 votes Speaks: Lowland Scots, English*, French, Spanish, Scottish Gaelic Studies: Catalan, Italian, German, Irish, Welsh | Message 62 of 126 28 November 2008 at 4:26pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
Try this for guided output: http://www.michelthomas.co.uk/SoundFiles/SpanishSoundFile.ht m Fifteen minutes in, and the students' (absolute beginners) guided output reaches a nine-word sentence without having received any single piece of input of a similar complexity. Even if you don't go for the Michel Thomas method, it does prove the potential of guided output in the absence of massive input.
Woah woah woah woah!!!!! You're conflating two different things here. 1) dialectal variation (or in your words "non-standard usage") -- in much of the US, particularly in The South, the distinction between adjectives and adverbs has been lost, so "bad" is used for both. 2) childhood errors -- in areas where the distinction between adjectives and adverbs has been retained, you cannot call the child's error "non-standard usage". (You said "Non-standard usage of this type is quit common among younger children," which is totally incorrect.) The child at this stage hasn't learned the logic underlying adverbs and adjectives. The adult learner doesn't need to go through this process if their home language makes the distinction. An awful lot of infant mistakes are similarly caused by a lack of grammatical structures, so we do not expect to see them in the adult learner. I'm not saying that slucido is making an error here -- I accept that this usage is common among a large population, so is (en una manera) correct. 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 63 of 126 29 November 2008 at 4:08am | IP Logged | ||||||||
I agree. It's possible to use a "how to learn language X" book or "how to learn any language" book or website to look for a guide. If not, a good teacher is a good option. Maybe the best option. It depends on your time or money. Well, I would like to use this option, but I feel guilty. As I said before, I prefer to spend my money with my children. For example, I prefer spending to pay a teacher for them than for me. The best reinforcing option depend on our circumstances, psychology, age, money, time.
Don't worry. I agree with you and I would like the same. We need to deal with our circumstances and possibilities. 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 64 of 126 29 November 2008 at 4:15am | IP Logged | ||||||||
Thank you. I am not saying anything special. My focus is in how to keep practicing OUR favorite method. It's difficult to understand whats controversial about that. Regarding about when we can begin with output, I am very skeptical. Expert opinions are highly contradictory. I think the best advice is: do whatever you feel like. Edited by slucido on 29 November 2008 at 5:34am 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. |
