|
 |
Quantity makes the difference | ||
Tags: Learning Strategy | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : General discussion |  | |
| Splog Diglot Senior Member Czech Republic anthonylauder.c Joined 5479 days ago 1062 posts - 3263 votes  Speaks: English*, Czech Studies: Mandarin | Message 113 of 122 16 January 2011 at 11:06am | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
Gatsby wrote:
"...there ARE a lot of holes in yours..." We can all make mistakes, even in our native languages and even if we are well-educated. Blimey, this has confused my brain ... but ... why is it correct? The following make sense to me: "There IS a lot of holes in yours ..." "There ARE lotS of holes in yours ..." But I am struggling with: "There ARE a lot of holes in yours ..." Can somebody explain it to me please? 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| slucido Bilingual Diglot Senior Member Spain https://goo.gl/126Yv Joined 6485 days ago 1296 posts - 1781 votes 4 sounds Speaks: Spanish*, Catalan* Studies: English | Message 114 of 122 16 January 2011 at 12:44pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
I have just used google. I do not know what does this mean, but here are the results. "There IS a lot of holes" 884.000 results. "There ARE a lot of holes" 740.000 results. "There ARE lots of holes" 130.000 results. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Kartof Bilingual Triglot Senior Member United States Joined 4876 days ago 391 posts - 550 votes Speaks: English*, Bulgarian*, Spanish Studies: Danish | Message 115 of 122 20 January 2011 at 4:03am | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
Are is used because the object holes is plural.
Lots isn't a word... Think of "Lots of people do that." versus "A lot of people do that." Only the second sentence is grammatically correct although the first may be more common in speech. 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| hrhenry Octoglot Senior Member United States languagehopper.blogs Joined 4940 days ago 1871 posts - 3642 votes Speaks: English*, SpanishC2, ItalianC2, Norwegian, Catalan, Galician, Turkish, Portuguese Studies: Polish, Indonesian, Ojibwe | Message 116 of 122 20 January 2011 at 4:19am | IP Logged | ||||||||
Completely untrue by any modern dictionary's definition. Lots has been in use for at least a hundred years. R. == 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Raчraч Ŋuɲa Triglot Senior Member New Zealand Joined 5628 days ago 154 posts - 233 votes Speaks: Bikol languages*, Tagalog, EnglishC1 Studies: Spanish, Russian, Japanese | Message 117 of 122 20 January 2011 at 11:32am | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
I've seen this thread last year, but didn't pay any attention as I thought the thread
heading is pretty much an accepted fact, nothing controversial. But I was surprised a few hours ago when I saw that it's now on its 15th page. So I clicked the 1st page and read the original post. My! It started good but didn't end well with me. So I check who the poster is, and it made me smile. It's slucido again! It took me 1.5 hours to read all the pages, but I will not try to comment on most of them. The conclusion he's arrived at sounded to me like snake oil. And I was reminded about this experiment.
Slucido's drawn conclusions that would be different had I've been the one to do it.
He is right in that we must spend time to learn a language. But the 1st conclusion imply that all methods are equally good (provided with input and output). But this isn't really true. Personal experience is my best guide here. I've tried a number of input methods already and some of them doesn't work for me at that point in time: either too boring (especially repetition or word SRS), too time consuming to prepare (sentence mining/10000 sentence method), too advanced sometimes for my level (reading newspapers, poems, specialized journals in my field, etc), too fast (TV, radio) or I'm just too exhausted mentally and physically to focus (night classes). I'm sure others have similar stories too. Does he says here that we carry on with the same method even with these problems? He does not, but that logically follows from his conclusions. He suggests to get motivation and involve emotions in it. But that is exactly the problem with that suggestion. He needs to add motivation/emotion because the method is boring and unengaging. And he suggests to keep doing this inspite of it all. Slucido stresses only the quantity of input/output, but how about the influence of the learner's brains's processing capacity (throughput) on output? Either I would revolt if I am forced to take on more than I can chew, or the quality of my output will decline. And that is the critical part: each person is different in their throughput, that's why we constantly try novel methods. We prefer methods that are in sync with our learning pace, style and level. And I am sure that slucido's best method is also not "don't give up, keep doing" but much closer to "get motivated, whatever method". It sounded more to me not as a method but more as a mantra of persistence and perseverance to learn. He is right in that I must provide continuing sufficient input and output, but he has forgotten that stage between the two is more important: that input is only necessary to improve throughput's processing quality as reflected in the output. Time and duration in other words are a function of the rate my throughput is improving with input. I would even state a counterclaim that duration/time is not the most important factor, but a by-product, in language learning, and reflects the effectiveness of matching the learning method and the learner's mind. This is also called the learning curve. Besides, time is not equal to quantity because each one of us has different processing speed. For me, the best method is that method that suits my personality and level of intellectual competence at that moment. Speaking only of myself, I find that graded readers are there at the top for input method. Words repeat themselves but in an order that makes sense, there's grammar rules practice in there, there's an engaging storyline, I got to think of word meanings in context, etc. Short stories and young adult fiction are also quite good. For output method, I regularly post in my Facebook account snippets in my 4 languages, plus I email in Spanish with my friends. I know that when I advanced further, I would find those others good at that stage (TV, radio, technical journals, etc.) too. At each stage of my learning, methods differ. And this is my style: I like variety. Of course I am open to other methods, and always try them. As they say, the proof of the pudding is in the eating, so how can I say a method doesn't work if I haven't tried it? Plus this is my antidote to boredom, I try new methods but not give emotive dimension to a mind-numbingly boring method. The method in itself at that moment in time fosters excitement.
Now this I would agree with him and would thank him for bringing to my attention. Ok, I will start participating in the Spanish discussion room. Overall, I think we have the same concepts, we just organize/value them differently. Edited by Raчraч Ŋuɲa on 20 January 2011 at 11:48am 4 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| slucido Bilingual Diglot Senior Member Spain https://goo.gl/126Yv Joined 6485 days ago 1296 posts - 1781 votes 4 sounds Speaks: Spanish*, Catalan* Studies: English | Message 118 of 122 20 January 2011 at 1:47pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
Raчraч Ŋuɲa, I do not have time now. Tomorrow I will try to answer. My English isn't as good as my Spanish.
Keywords: Time, repetition (input, output), highly emotional interaction (input, output) How to choose the BEST method FOR YOU (or anyone): Using a Solution-focused approach. Be continued... 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Splog Diglot Senior Member Czech Republic anthonylauder.c Joined 5479 days ago 1062 posts - 3263 votes Speaks: English*, Czech Studies: Mandarin | Message 119 of 122 20 January 2011 at 3:16pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
Isn't "lots" simply the plural of "lot"? My understanding is that one meaning of "lot" is "group, or collection" so "lots" would be "several groups or collections". In which case: There is a [group] of people = There is a [lot] of people and There are [several groups] of people = There are [lots] of people Edited by Splog on 20 January 2011 at 5:15pm 4 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| CheeseInsider Bilingual Diglot Senior Member Canada Joined 4932 days ago 193 posts - 238 votes Speaks: English*, Mandarin* Studies: French, German | Message 120 of 122 23 January 2011 at 2:25am | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
What an entertaining thread :)
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. |
