|
 |
Comparing Assimil Russian 1951/1971/2004 | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Language Programs, Books & Tapes |  | |
| phouk Diglot Newbie Germany Joined 5820 days ago 28 posts - 48 votes Speaks: German*, English Studies: Russian | Message 1 of 34 02 May 2009 at 1:13am | IP Logged | ||
|
... or, "The Dumbing Down of Language Courses in Numbers"
Reading this forum, I already knew that the 2004 version of Assimil Russian is generally considered to be somewhat watered down from the earlier versions, but I didn't know how much and thought that the two earlier versions were roughly on the same level. If you think so, too, read on, you may be surprised... Today, I did a chapter comparison of the three versions of Assimil Russian that I own, which are in the German variant "Russisch ohne Mühe": - (c) 1951: Russisch ohne Mühe, author given as A.Chérel, 419 pages, 100 lessons - (c) 1971: Russisch ohne Mühe, authors given as A.Chérel/M.Benoist, 488 pages, 100 lessons (a later print of the same book also lists Bratousse/Balakhonov as additional authors) - (c) 2004: Russisch ohne Mühe heute, authors given as Dronov/Matchabelli/Gallais, 497 pages, 71 lessons In addition to the difference in the number of chapters, the 2004 version is printed in a larger font, and one of the two exercises per chapter is of the "fill in the gaps" variant, which adds relatively little new text and no new words/structures. In contrast, in the 1951/1971 versions most lessons have two exercises of the translation variant, which often introduces additional words and/or sentence structures. As a result, the 2004 versions has not just fewer chapters, but also significantly less content per chapter. Otherwise, the structure of all the books is the same. How different is the chapter content between the books? While the 2004 versions shares very little content between the earlier ones (a couple of jokes here and there, but not full chapters, as far as I saw), there is significant overlap between the 1951 and 1971 versions. About half of the chapters is the same (with small variations), about half is different. Most of the different chapters (about 40) are in the second half of the books, while the first 20 chapters are the same. As a rough measure of the learning curve of the three books, I took a look at which chapters seem to be based on or taken from original texts for russian readers, as opposed to texts written specifically for learners. - The 2004 version has four such chapters, with one chapter each taken from the authors Pushkin, Dostojevsky, Tolstoj and Chekhov. The first such chapter is chapter 65 (of 71). - The 1971 version has fourteensuch chapters from various russian authors, starting from chapter 80. This includes some longer texts split into two, three or even four chapters. Of these, 8 are also contained in the 1951 book, 6 aren't. - The 1951 version has fortytwo such chapters from various russian authors, starting from chapter 57. As you can see, the differences are quite significant. We should keep this in mind when somebody says he has or hasn't had success in learning a language to a certain level with Assimil, without saying which exact edition they have used... As you can also see, the 1951 book has a steeper learning curve than the 1971 book. For example, the 1971 book takes 80 chapters to gradually lead you to the three- chapter text "Прощание" by Chekhov, whereas the same text starts from chapter 59 in the 1951 book. On the other hand, the 1951 book takes you much further. The learning curve of the 2004 book is not quite as gradual as in the 1951 book, as it leads you to the first original russian text in just 65 chapters with less content; it also doesn't take you very far regarding the language level reached, compared to the other two books. So, what should a learner do? You could just try to get all three. Or, for example, try to get a hold of both of the earlier versions (sources for the audio for both can be found somewhere here on the forum). Between these two, you get around 150 individual chapters, 48 of which are taken from original texts for russian readers. This way, you get the more gradual learning curve of the 1971 version, and also have more combined material (including original material) than both of these books alone. If you want to start with just one book, the 1971 version might be a good compromise; you can always get the 1951 version later, if you want. P.S.: Has anybody already had a look at the 2008, 100-chapter edition of "Le Russe" by Melnikova-Suchet/Goussé? Alas, it doesn't seem to be available in English or German yet, and I don't speak French. But I would still be curious as to how it compares. 15 persons have voted this message useful | |||
| Juan M. Senior Member Colombia Joined 5681 days ago 460 posts - 597 votes  | Message 2 of 34 02 May 2009 at 1:25am | IP Logged | ||
|
Thank you very much for your review! It is very informative and illustrative.
In a related question, does your 1971 book look like this? I've been trying to establish whether that copy is a first or second generation course. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| fanatic Octoglot Senior Member Australia speedmathematics.com Joined 6928 days ago 1152 posts - 1818 votes Speaks: English*, German, French, Afrikaans, Italian, Spanish, Russian, Dutch Studies: Swedish, Norwegian, Polish, Modern Hebrew, Malay, Mandarin, Esperanto | Message 3 of 34 02 May 2009 at 1:59am | IP Logged | ||
Both my 1951 and 1971 versions look like your picture. The 1951 version is the only version in English. My 1971 version is printed in German. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| fanatic Octoglot Senior Member Australia speedmathematics.com Joined 6928 days ago 1152 posts - 1818 votes Speaks: English*, German, French, Afrikaans, Italian, Spanish, Russian, Dutch Studies: Swedish, Norwegian, Polish, Modern Hebrew, Malay, Mandarin, Esperanto | Message 4 of 34 02 May 2009 at 2:05am | IP Logged | ||
|
Thank you phouk for your analysis. I have all three versions but hadn't analysed the differences in content. I was more interested in the quality and accents in the audio.
With Russian, my main study was with My First and Second Russian Books and Russian For Everybody and I only used Assimil as a supportive program. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| phouk Diglot Newbie Germany Joined 5820 days ago 28 posts - 48 votes Speaks: German*, English Studies: Russian | Message 5 of 34 02 May 2009 at 2:07am | IP Logged | ||
|
My first generation (1951) book looks like your hardcover (but in blue). The second
generation, 1971 book I have both in a hardcover version that looks exactly the same as the 1951 version, and also in a later printing with a softcover but the same content as the earlier printing. My 2004 version has a softcover, but a different photo on it and the title is "Russisch ohne Mühe heute" instead of "Russisch ohne Mühe". 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| Julie Heptaglot Senior Member PolandRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 6685 days ago 1251 posts - 1733 votes 5 sounds Speaks: Polish*, EnglishB2, GermanC2, SpanishB2, Dutch, Swedish, French | Message 6 of 34 02 May 2009 at 2:34am | IP Logged | ||
|
Thank you for this detailed comparison! I don't know if I'll be able to find the old version when I decide to learn Russian, but it definitely motivates me to start searching :).
1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| josht Diglot Senior Member United States Joined 6228 days ago 635 posts - 857 votes Speaks: English*, German Studies: French, Spanish, Russian, Dutch | Message 7 of 34 02 May 2009 at 2:42am | IP Logged | ||
|
Julie,
I was able to find the German 1971 version online at booklooker.de; I found copies of the English and French 1951 versions on eBay. There are copies floating around, you just have to be persistent in searching. :) 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| Betjeman Groupie Germany Joined 5925 days ago 85 posts - 204 votes Speaks: German* | Message 8 of 34 12 May 2009 at 11:58am | IP Logged | ||
Here is another person who wants to say thanks for this interesting comparison. I have an objection though. Do you really think it is beneficial for the student to have new words and sentence structures introduced in the exercises as opposed to the lessons themselves? I always thought it was an oversight on the part of the course authors when this happens (and it happens in several other Assimil courses, too). In my opinion, the exercises should serve as a means of self-control. How well you do there should reflect your understanding of previous lessons, not your gift oft foretelling the contents of future lessons. Thus, no new material should be added here. Anything else seems like bad teaching to me. 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. |
