|
 |
The Next Best Thing: Breadth versus Depth | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Lessons in Polyglottery |  | |
| virgule Senior Member Antarctica Joined 6841 days ago 242 posts - 261 votes  Studies: Korean | Message 1 of 8 25 April 2008 at 3:22am | IP Logged |
|
Professor,
First of all, let me thank you once again for your inspiring contributions! I was wondering whether you had any views on what's the second best option when it comes to polyglottery. Let me expand a bit. You are in the enviable position that you seem to be able to spend nearly all your time on studying languages. Many of us have other commitments (or interests), such as work or family. Were you in such a situation, would you strive for breadth or depth? By breadth I mean covering a number of different languages (perhaps different language families), knowing that progress will be slow and perhaps only an intermediate level of mastery will be achieved. By depth I mean focusing on a small number of languages (perhaps one or two), with the aim to bring it to a level comparable to native competence. Of course the two are not entirely mutually exclusive. Perhaps it would help if you imagined being limited to 1 hour a day, and then again to 2 hours a day. Rather than merely asking a question, let me share how I go about it. I have learnt one foreign language to the extent that I now do very little active study in it (I live in the country). There are two languages I focus on. However, when I travel to other places, I always feel like I need to be prepared, so there are other languages that come and go--let me call them additional languages. I try to maintain these additional languages to a certain extent, even though if this means revising vocabulary once a week, or deciphering a few words in a different script from time to time. I believe that this mix works rather well for me, but I really was wondering how you would go about. 1 person has voted this message useful | |
| Kugel Senior Member United States Joined 6539 days ago 497 posts - 555 votes Speaks: English* | Message 2 of 8 27 April 2008 at 6:37pm | IP Logged |
|
I was wondering if one decided to go the breadth route would it be prudent to follow a systematic study on different forms of perception that are used by foreign languages? Is there book, which has the native English speaker in mind, for the language enthusiast that covers all the major aspects and tenses in the popular language families (e.g. Latin, Germanic, Sino-Tibetan, Semitic, and Slavic?)
1 person has voted this message useful | |
| ProfArguelles Moderator United States foreignlanguageexper Joined 7257 days ago 609 posts - 2102 votes | Message 3 of 8 27 April 2008 at 7:01pm | IP Logged |
|
First of all, let me note that I am indeed hardwired to study compulsively all day, every day. The fact that I do this with foreign languages as the object of investigation is almost circumstantial. If they had not grabbed the focus of my attention, I would be better versed in history or theology or philosophy—who knows, given a different developmental environment, I might be a botanist or a zoologist. At any rate, in my wife’s opinion, I am a thief who steals hours of family time to devote to my selfish pursuits and, professionally, my career is certainly suffering because I have not followed the beaten track of publishing innumerable journal articles within the same single specialized range of my dissertation. Sadly and frustratingly, there is little room within established academia for scholars who make continued studying their prime occupation, and I feel that I am paying a price for setting such a precedent.
Still, yes, it is a very rare day when I am not able to give at least 8 hours to language work. What would I do if I only had 1 or 2? I would certainly be so frustrated with this that I would try to steal more! Within these constraints, however, although I would be sorely tempted to go for breadth, I believe I would ultimately come down on the side of depth. Time is only so elastic. I have written before that 15 minutes a day is generally sufficient to maintain a language, but this is not enough to get satisfaction from its exploration. Thus, with 1 hour a day in theory you could have a breadth of 4 languages, and with 2 hours a day, 8. Indeed, if those languages were related and you could somehow get advanced enough, you could put them on a regimen of alternate days without loss. This is what I would be tempted to do for the short term, if I knew that it was a temporary situation and that I would be able to regularly give them more time in the future. However, as a permanent situation, as painfully difficult as it is for me to imagine knowing only 2 or at most 4 different languages, I think I would opt for the greater depth of being able to read, at an advanced level, the literature whose vehicles they are for a more substantial 30 minutes a day each. Still, for the breadth route in terms of aspects and tenses in major families, try Bernard Comrie, ed., The World's Major Languages, Oxford University Press, 1990. 2 persons have voted this message useful | |
| rNajera Triglot Groupie Canada rafaelnajera.com Joined 6138 days ago 45 posts - 60 votes Speaks: Spanish*, EnglishC2, French Studies: Latin, German, Korean | Message 4 of 8 02 May 2008 at 12:51pm | IP Logged |
|
I'm not an expert polyglot by any means (only until very recently I've been trying to learn and improve on many languages at once) but I do have a strong opinion on this. For me it is clear that one should go for depth. I'd rather get myself to the point where I can read the best literature available in 3 or 4 languages, to the point where I can have fairly sophisticated oral and written conversations in all of them, than just being able to order food and ask for the time in 30.
Not only that, I think it's not just a matter of being able to read, write and speak in a language; it's a matter of actually doing it and reaping the benefits of knowing a foreign language. It takes time to read good prose and poetry too; it takes time to watch good movies or to have meaningful conversations with people. In my case, for instance, when I didn't have the time I have now, I couldn't see myself improving my rudimentary German when I still had so many books in French and English that I wanted to read. In the end, of course,it's a matter of juggling between your interests and your obligations, ideally having those two not being antagonistic to each other. Regards, Rafael. 1 person has voted this message useful | |
| Felipe Triglot Senior Member United States Joined 6031 days ago 451 posts - 501 votes Speaks: English*, Spanish, Portuguese Studies: Italian, Dutch, Catalan | Message 5 of 8 28 May 2008 at 1:05pm | IP Logged |
|
I agree that depth is more important. To really say that one speaks a language is much more than just getting by. I would rather be able to have a deep conversation, tell jokes, watch movies, read, do business, participate in cultural activities, and blend in with the people in a few languages than just get by in many.
1 person has voted this message useful | |
 Iversen Super Polyglot Moderator Denmark berejst.dk Joined 6704 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 6 of 8 28 May 2008 at 2:22pm | IP Logged |
|
It is a bit too simplistic to say breadth versus depth. For me it is much easier to get advanced passive skills than to get active skills on the same level, and I don't think that I'm alone in this. OK, that means that I can expect to keep a high passive level in many languages, while my active skills taper off from quite good to almost non existant in the same languages. In other words, even with a limited time at your disposal you can get both width and breadth on the passive side, so that the dilemma really only is valid for your active skills (however one hour daily is a VERY limited time, probably too little to expect great results in any direction).
At the active side I would personally for for the 'basic' level where I can discuss just about anything with native speakers, but not without accent and not without making errors (even a few gross errors) - and not without using circumlocutions to a fairly large extent because of unknown words or idioms. If I really have a lot of exposure to a certain language I will automatically learn more, and I may eventually achieve the elusive 'advanced' fluency. On the other hand a little-used language may become rusty, but hopefully not to the extent that I couldn't start thinking in the language. So in practice I would opt for a compromise between true excellence and versatility on the active side, but be quite uncompromising about my passive level in all of my languages. 1 person has voted this message useful | |
| Iversen Super Polyglot Moderator Denmark berejst.dk Joined 6704 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 8 of 8 30 May 2008 at 4:43am | IP Logged |
|
To Mandy_surfer:
Here in 2008 I have spoken all the languages mentioned under "spoken" on my list except Romanian and Catalan. However I have checked within the last week that I still can understand TV-programs in those two languages, and I can switch to thinking in them so I would also be able to speak them ... though with all the reservations implied in the notion "basic fluency". This illustrates a basic problem, namely that I have few opportunities to speak certain languages, so I have to settle for writing and thinking in them. And forcing myself to think in a certain language is my chief way of making it active, - but normally I prefer not to speak until I can read almost everything I see and understand at least ordinary TV programs. I have tried Prof.Arguelles' shadowing technique, but speaking while I'm listening somehow doesn't feel natural for me. 1 person has 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. |
