62 messages over 8 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next >>
amethyst32
Diglot
Senior Member
United Kingdom
Joined 5650 days ago
118 posts - 198 votes 
Speaks: English*, Spanish
Studies: Portuguese, French
| Message 33 of 62 19 March 2011 at 2:51am | IP Logged |
s_allard wrote:
Since this idea of reading or listening to incomprehensible input seems to pop up regularly here, I'm really curious to see if there are people who seriously believe that someone, let's say a beginner, should slog through an incomprehensible book in the target language and hope to glean something by the end. Honestly, I think this is masochism. It's like those who advocate listening extensively to incomprehensible audio. Why do this when it is so much more effective to actively engage in reading with the help of a grammar book and a dictionary?
|
|
|
Well, I used ordinary learning methods when I was beginning with Spanish (classes at uni and Michel Thomas CDs) but I also read and listened to tons of incomprehensible input. It wasn't masochism because I like the sound of Spanish and besides, comprehension wasn't the aim; I did it just to build familiarity with the real language the way it's used in the real world by native people. After doing this for just a few weeks, I noticed that my regular studies began to feel as if I was re-learning something that I already knew - like a deja vu affect. My teacher asked me if I'd been having speaking practise outside the class because my accent had improved so much (yet I wasn't speaking at all, only listening a lot), and instead of struggling through assignments I was getting high marks. I think grammar is important; it's definitely a short cut and as a bonus I enjoy it, but I believe that my own progress with Spanish would have gone at far more pedestrian pace if I hadn't used L/R to supplement my studies. I'm pleased to say that lately, I still listen to the the same radio stations and read the same websites, but now I *do* understand them. :-)
3 persons have voted this message useful
| tractor
Tetraglot
Senior Member
Norway
Joined 5454 days ago
1349 posts - 2292 votes
Speaks: Norwegian*, English, Spanish, Catalan
Studies: French, German, Latin
| Message 34 of 62 19 March 2011 at 4:35am | IP Logged |
jazzboy.bebop wrote:
koba wrote:
tractor wrote:
koba wrote:
How did you learn your first
language? You learned it intuitively listening to it from your parents and people around you, that is, just listening,
listening and listening. That's basicaly how methods like Assimil work, although there's still some grammar
explaination every 7 lessons. |
|
|
No, it is not how you learnt your native language, and, although the marketing may claim they do, Asimil and
other courses work radically different from how children learn their first language. A child does not just listen. A
child practises a lot and a child uses several years to reach an acceptable level. Assimil does not teach you by
making you listen endlessly to incomprehensible input. It gives you translations. It gives you grammar notes
every single lesson. It employs a gradual progression. |
|
|
I disagree that Assimil is a grammar based course. It gives you literal translations,
but it also points out what you need to know in the grammar notes, which, of course,
come very handy because it helps you to get a more fully understanding of what you're
saying instead of just repeating. Of course a child practises a lot and takes more time
to develop his/her language skills, but what I'm saying here, intrinsecally, is that
intuitively, that is, by listening, you can get a feeling of the language and start
understanding a lot of constructions, grammar structures that would be explained to you
in grammar books, you wouldn't need them.
|
|
|
Agreed. It seems to me that the passive wave is what really makes the courses quite
different from most others. You first just need to learn to understand the sentences
and what they mean. At the time of learning the dialogues passively you look at the
grammar notes you don't think about it as much as in other courses. You get used to
learning the dialogues and just understanding them and learning enough of them that
when it comes to actively reproducing the language and looking at the grammar again,
the grammar notes make more sense as you can link what they say with what you've
already learned and it falls into place more quickly than learning the grammar without
much content to link it to at the time of learning. |
|
|
I agree with what you write here, and it's not contradicting what I wrote:
a) A child does not learn by "just listening, listening, listening".
b) The Assimil method is not "just listening, listening, listening". It uses comprehensible input (you're given
translations and grammar notes) and employs a gradual progression.
Edited by tractor on 19 March 2011 at 11:05am
1 person has voted this message useful
| s_allard
Triglot
Senior Member
Canada
Joined 5431 days ago
2704 posts - 5425 votes
Speaks: French*, English, Spanish
Studies: Polish
| Message 35 of 62 19 March 2011 at 5:06am | IP Logged |
amethyst32 wrote:
s_allard wrote:
Since this idea of reading or listening to incomprehensible input seems to pop up regularly here, I'm really curious to see if there are people who seriously believe that someone, let's say a beginner, should slog through an incomprehensible book in the target language and hope to glean something by the end. Honestly, I think this is masochism. It's like those who advocate listening extensively to incomprehensible audio. Why do this when it is so much more effective to actively engage in reading with the help of a grammar book and a dictionary?
|
|
|
Well, I used ordinary learning methods when I was beginning with Spanish (classes at uni and Michel Thomas CDs) but I also read and listened to tons of incomprehensible input. It wasn't masochism because I like the sound of Spanish and besides, comprehension wasn't the aim; I did it just to build familiarity with the real language the way it's used in the real world by native people. After doing this for just a few weeks, I noticed that my regular studies began to feel as if I was re-learning something that I already knew - like a deja vu affect. My teacher asked me if I'd been having speaking practise outside the class because my accent had improved so much (yet I wasn't speaking at all, only listening a lot), and instead of struggling through assignments I was getting high marks. I think grammar is important; it's definitely a short cut and as a bonus I enjoy it, but I believe that my own progress with Spanish would have gone at far more pedestrian pace if I hadn't used L/R to supplement my studies. I'm pleased to say that lately, I still listen to the the same radio stations and read the same websites, but now I *do* understand them. :-) |
|
|
Well, I'm not sure if this person's experience of reading so-called incomprehensible input while taking a class and after having used various methods is really what we are talking about here. I totally agree that quite early in one's language studies one should start listening or reading authentic materials even is some of the meaning is lost.
But this is not the same as saying you can start a language just by reading a ton of material in the language with the hope that something will stick. Let's say you want to learn Mandarin, do you borrow a book in Mandarin from the local library and "read" it from cover to cover? Then every day you listen to an hour of Chinese television. How much Mandarin will you know in six months? Good luck. I certainly would not recommend that approach. Now, if that works for some people, I'm impressed.
The example of Mandarin is pretty far-fetched, I admit, but I suggest this is the case with any language, although the presence of many cognates will make certain languages easier to recognize. In that same vein, why would speakers of Portuguese take classes in Spanish when they can just pick up a Spanish book and start reading right away? Sure, the Portuguese-speaker will see many resemblances between the two languages, but they are still different languages.
2 persons have voted this message useful
| Cainntear
Pentaglot
Senior Member
Scotland
linguafrankly.blogsp
Joined 6012 days ago
4399 posts - 7687 votes
Speaks: Lowland Scots, English*, French, Spanish, Scottish Gaelic
Studies: Catalan, Italian, German, Irish, Welsh
| Message 36 of 62 19 March 2011 at 10:46am | IP Logged |
amethyst32 wrote:
| Well, I used ordinary learning methods when I was beginning with Spanish (classes at uni and Michel Thomas CDs) but I also read and listened to tons of incomprehensible input. It wasn't masochism because I like the sound of Spanish and besides, comprehension wasn't the aim; I did it just to build familiarity with the real language the way it's used in the real world by native people. After doing this for just a few weeks, I noticed that my regular studies began to feel as if I was re-learning something that I already knew - like a deja vu affect. My teacher asked me if I'd been having speaking practise outside the class because my accent had improved so much (yet I wasn't speaking at all, only listening a lot), and instead of struggling through assignments I was getting high marks. I think grammar is important; it's definitely a short cut and as a bonus I enjoy it, but I believe that my own progress with Spanish would have gone at far more pedestrian pace if I hadn't used L/R to supplement my studies. I'm pleased to say that lately, I still listen to the the same radio stations and read the same websites, but now I *do* understand them. :-) |
|
|
You could call that a "balanced diet". What we're talking about here is learning from input only. That's not a balanced diet.
2 persons have voted this message useful
| Cainntear
Pentaglot
Senior Member
Scotland
linguafrankly.blogsp
Joined 6012 days ago
4399 posts - 7687 votes
Speaks: Lowland Scots, English*, French, Spanish, Scottish Gaelic
Studies: Catalan, Italian, German, Irish, Welsh
| Message 37 of 62 19 March 2011 at 10:47am | IP Logged |
koba wrote:
| I disagree that Assimil is a grammar based course. |
|
|
Then try to complete an Assimil course without reading the notes or the "revision lessons" (consolidated grammar lessons that actually sometimes introduce new vocabulary too). I doubt it will be easy....
1 person has voted this message useful
| tractor
Tetraglot
Senior Member
Norway
Joined 5454 days ago
1349 posts - 2292 votes
Speaks: Norwegian*, English, Spanish, Catalan
Studies: French, German, Latin
| Message 38 of 62 19 March 2011 at 11:18am | IP Logged |
Cainntear wrote:
koba wrote:
| I disagree that Assimil is a grammar based course. |
|
|
Then try to complete an Assimil course without reading the notes or the "revision lessons" (consolidated grammar
lessons that actually sometimes introduce new vocabulary too). I doubt it will be easy.... |
|
|
Assimil teaches grammar, and this is especially evident when you look at their older Without Toil courses. The notes
and the revision lessons are essential to the Assimil method. On the other hand, and as Lingoleng said, Assimil does
a good job in "hiding" the fact that it is grammar based. This means that if you compare it to a traditional
grammar-translation based course, such as the old blue and yellow Teach Yourself books, or to a "grammar-
drilling" based course such as FSI, Assimil does not seem very grammar oriented.
2 persons have voted this message useful
| s_allard
Triglot
Senior Member
Canada
Joined 5431 days ago
2704 posts - 5425 votes
Speaks: French*, English, Spanish
Studies: Polish
| Message 39 of 62 19 March 2011 at 12:59pm | IP Logged |
I'm beginning to think that the debate here is morphing into that other hoary subject of learning without formal study of grammar (or anything). People usually refer to the way children learn languages naturally and supposedly effortlessly just by sheer exposure. As a matter effect, that is the very theme of the latest marketing campaign of that infamous product known by its initials R.S.
Then there is the idea of immersion. If, heavens forbid, you were to find yourself in a Mexican jail for a year, you would probably learn to speak a fair amount of Mexican Spanish underworld slang without any formal study.
Many people, especially immigrants, do learn languages to some extent spontaneously. One has to very careful here to describe what kinds of language skills are learned this way.
When you look at the actual processes of so-called spontaneous learning, you quickly see that this is a far cry from the idea of learning a language just by reading an incomprehensible book in your living room.
1 person has voted this message useful
| jazzboy.bebop
Senior Member
Norway
norwegianthroughnove
Joined 5419 days ago
439 posts - 800 votes
Speaks: English*
Studies: Norwegian
| Message 40 of 62 19 March 2011 at 1:11pm | IP Logged |
tractor wrote:
jazzboy.bebop wrote:
koba wrote:
tractor wrote:
koba wrote:
How did you learn your first
language? You learned it intuitively listening to it from your parents and people
around you, that is, just listening,
listening and listening. That's basicaly how methods like Assimil work, although
there's still some grammar
explaination every 7 lessons. |
|
|
No, it is not how you learnt your native language, and, although the marketing may
claim they do, Asimil and
other courses work radically different from how children learn their first language. A
child does not just listen. A
child practises a lot and a child uses several years to reach an acceptable level.
Assimil does not teach you by
making you listen endlessly to incomprehensible input. It gives you translations. It
gives you grammar notes
every single lesson. It employs a gradual progression. |
|
|
I disagree that Assimil is a grammar based course. It gives you literal translations,
but it also points out what you need to know in the grammar notes, which, of course,
come very handy because it helps you to get a more fully understanding of what you're
saying instead of just repeating. Of course a child practises a lot and takes more time
to develop his/her language skills, but what I'm saying here, intrinsecally, is that
intuitively, that is, by listening, you can get a feeling of the language and start
understanding a lot of constructions, grammar structures that would be explained to you
in grammar books, you wouldn't need them.
|
|
|
Agreed. It seems to me that the passive wave is what really makes the courses quite
different from most others. You first just need to learn to understand the sentences
and what they mean. At the time of learning the dialogues passively you look at the
grammar notes you don't think about it as much as in other courses. You get used to
learning the dialogues and just understanding them and learning enough of them that
when it comes to actively reproducing the language and looking at the grammar again,
the grammar notes make more sense as you can link what they say with what you've
already learned and it falls into place more quickly than learning the grammar without
much content to link it to at the time of learning. |
|
|
I agree with what you write here, and it's not contradicting what I wrote:
a) A child does not learn by "just listening, listening, listening".
b) The Assimil method is not "just listening, listening, listening". It uses
comprehensible input (you're given
translations and grammar notes) and employs a gradual progression. |
|
|
True on both points, I was more just agreeing with Koba on the idea that Assimil
wasn't - at least a normal - grammar based course where you learn the grammar as you go
along and are not meant to proceed until the grammar has been learned, rather than
disagreeing with your own points. I think I was half asleep when I wrote my post so I
hadn't read properly what you wrote yourself at the time.
Edited by jazzboy.bebop on 19 March 2011 at 10:18pm
1 person has voted this message useful
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum - You cannot reply to topics in this forum - You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum - You cannot create polls in this forum - You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 1.3604 seconds.
DHTML Menu By Milonic JavaScript
|
Language Learning Forum : General discussion
Printable version
