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 121 of 126 04 December 2008 at 4:40am | IP Logged |
slucido wrote:
frenkeld wrote:
Wouldn't you then say that an approach that allows you to learn your target language before you are dead is objectively better than the one that doesn't? |
|
|
You don't need to resort to dead.
You have an objectively worse method when it doesn't have input or output or it's so boring that you lose intensity. |
|
|
True, he doesn't need to, but he can and he is perfectly correct to. There can be many types of objectively worse. You are focusing exclusively on one. He is saying that there are others.
If we took a pair of twins and gave them different methods for learning Kiswahili, and they both died at the same time, and twin A could speak Kiswahili perfectly and twin B couldn't Kiswahili, and both had put in equal time with the method...
... would you agree that twin A's method was "better"?
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 122 of 126 04 December 2008 at 8:33am | IP Logged |
Cainntear wrote:
slucido wrote:
frenkeld wrote:
Wouldn't you then say that an approach that allows you to learn your target language before you are dead is objectively better than the one that doesn't? |
|
|
You don't need to resort to dead.
You have an objectively worse method when it doesn't have input or output or it's so boring that you lose intensity. |
|
|
True, he doesn't need to, but he can and he is perfectly correct to. There can be many types of objectively worse. You are focusing exclusively on one. He is saying that there are others.
If we took a pair of twins and gave them different methods for learning Kiswahili, and they both died at the same time, and twin A could speak Kiswahili perfectly and twin B couldn't Kiswahili, and both had put in equal time with the method...
... would you agree that twin A's method was "better"? |
|
|
You are hypothetically speaking, but I am speaking about scientific facts. We are talking about this lack of scientific evidence from the very beginning...
Where are those studies? I would like to know.
If you have scientific evidence about any best method, let us know.
1 person has voted this message useful
|
ChrisWebb Senior Member United Kingdom Joined 6262 days ago 181 posts - 190 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Korean
| Message 123 of 126 04 December 2008 at 11:10am | IP Logged |
I have a theory that in general their are 3 basic components to success in most endeavours;
1/ That the person is persistent in his/her endeavour ( for whatever reason ).
2/ That the person monitors his approach and is willing to adapt it over time both to eliminate what is not working for him and also to cfind and capitalise on what will work well.
3/ That a person is willing to take from the work already done by others what has been found by others to be useful. This includes at the least trying out methods that others have found to be helpful.
I think Slucido probably admits 1 and 2 but for some reason is rejecting 3. Unfortunately rejecting 3 is likely to lead to missed opportunities and a deal of unnecessary work. Reinventing the wheel ( or even trying and failing in the endeavour )is not likely to be productive.
Edited by ChrisWebb on 04 December 2008 at 11:11am
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 125 of 126 04 December 2008 at 2:37pm | IP Logged |
ChrisWebb wrote:
I have a theory that in general their are 3 basic components to success in most endeavours;
1/ That the person is persistent in his/her endeavour ( for whatever reason ).
2/ That the person monitors his approach and is willing to adapt it over time both to eliminate what is not working for him and also to cfind and capitalise on what will work well.
3/ That a person is willing to take from the work already done by others what has been found by others to be useful. This includes at the least trying out methods that others have found to be helpful.
I think Slucido probably admits 1 and 2 but for some reason is rejecting 3. Unfortunately rejecting 3 is likely to lead to missed opportunities and a deal of unnecessary work. Reinventing the wheel ( or even trying and failing in the endeavour )is not likely to be productive. |
|
|
I accept the three points, but my focus is in point one and two.
Why?
I think people waste a lot of time talking about how to learn languages and not studying them and I think the wheel has been invented.I think it boils down to:
1-Learn a word.
2-Learn a sentence.
3-Repeat point one and two.
If your target language has another alphabet, you can add: learn the alphabet or its signs.
From other point of view, learning languages boil down to: listen, read, speak and write...again and again.
Regarding experiences, tricks and the work already done by others, I reckon they are very useful, but more from a motivational point of view. For example: If you just talk about your experience in this forum, it is a good method. Sure you can get good ideas that you can try using a trial error process. Nobody denies that, but I think its usefulness rely on motivational factors.
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 126 of 126 04 December 2008 at 2:53pm | IP Logged |
By the way, I think this new professor Arguelles video is very interesting.
Foreign language learning without a method
http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=TMTHnGVxiP0
Enjoy it.
1 person has voted this message useful
|