Register  Login  Active Topics  Maps  

Michel Thomas 2009 Edition

  Tags: Michel Thomas
 Language Learning Forum : Language Programs, Books & Tapes Post Reply
27 messages over 4 pages: 1 2 3 4 
Juan M.
Senior Member
Colombia
Joined 5710 days ago
460 posts - 597 votes 

 
 Message 25 of 27
04 July 2009 at 5:37pm | IP Logged 
I'll just add that I have completed the Michel Thomas German course -Foundation, Advanced, Builder and Vocabulary- and it is simply excellent. I recommend it unreservedly.

I'm sure it is possible to find fault with anything and that no course is perfect or complete, yet like I've said many times before, in order to learn a language one needs a comprehensive basket of materials that complement and supplement each other, since each of them will have particular strengths and limitations. Within such a basket though, I feel the Michel Thomas courses provide a very valuable contribution.
1 person has voted this message useful



Cainntear
Pentaglot
Senior Member
Scotland
linguafrankly.blogsp
Joined 5822 days ago
4399 posts - 7687 votes 
Speaks: Lowland Scots, English*, French, Spanish, Scottish Gaelic
Studies: Catalan, Italian, German, Irish, Welsh

 
 Message 26 of 27
12 July 2009 at 6:45pm | IP Logged 
Kugel wrote:
Running with the flow of the course I think is harder than periodically checking an outline of what you need to know in order to grasp the next grammar topic. I think this is true especially with the Spanish courses regarding the verbs. The only reason why the MT courses can get away from not having a "cheat sheet" to refer to is because of listening to the 2 learners' mistakes. But why not just go straight to the source instead, not relying on other people's mistakes for recollection of grammar?

Sorry, but a reference grammar is not a "source" of language, it's an artificial repository of it. You find it easy, because you're used to doing it. Not only is it difficult for people who aren't used to doing it, but it risks interrupting the development of fluency by making you too aware of the structure and mechanics of the grammar, rather than just teaching you to do it as quickly as possible. I've met so many people who just can't stop themselves trying to work through various grammar tables in their heads when trying to construct a sentence: there's nothing in most grammar books that aids you in making direct connections between various forms -- instead everything is linked by an abstract structure that was designed for paper, not for the human brain, while Thomas constructs linkages that are near-optimal for the human brain.

Quote:
The Mandarin course repeats every word in English for just about every prompt!
As I've said many a time -- none of the new course authors really understand the MT method: don't use them as examples of why the course is bad or good.
3 persons have voted this message useful



Kugel
Senior Member
United States
Joined 6349 days ago
497 posts - 555 votes 
Speaks: English*

 
 Message 27 of 27
14 July 2009 at 5:56pm | IP Logged 
Cainntear wrote:

Sorry, but a reference grammar is not a "source" of language, it's an artificial repository of it. You find it easy, because you're used to doing it. Not only is it difficult for people who aren't used to doing it, but it risks interrupting the development of fluency by making you too aware of the structure and mechanics of the grammar, rather than just teaching you to do it as quickly as possible. I've met so many people who just can't stop themselves trying to work through various grammar tables in their heads when trying to construct a sentence: there's nothing in most grammar books that aids you in making direct connections between various forms -- instead everything is linked by an abstract structure that was designed for paper, not for the human brain, while Thomas constructs linkages that are near-optimal for the human brain.


I find grammar much more difficult in the realm of deciding what verb to use for a specific idea I want to express, not whether I can remember the various forms from a grammar table. This requires in depth grammar manuals, which often times fail in being too cursorily. MT makes the rules even more simplistic.



Aren't grammar matrices mainly used for "grammatical persons"(i.e. 1st person up to plural 3rd person)? While I wouldn't call a grammar matrix entirely useless, I think it would be wise to stick with one grammatical person, covering most of the 6 tenses, the number more or less depending on the L2, before jumping to another grammatical person. I remember in another MT thread that this was one of the most important features of the program.     




1 person has voted this message useful



This discussion contains 27 messages over 4 pages: << Prev 1 2 3 4 

If you wish to post a reply to this topic you must first login. If you are not already registered you must first register


Post ReplyPost New Topic Printable version Printable version

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 0.2344 seconds.


DHTML Menu By Milonic JavaScript
Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved
No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization.