|
 |
Krashen and beginners | ||
Tags: Natural method | Beginner | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Language Programs, Books & Tapes |  | |
| Cainntear Pentaglot Senior Member Scotland linguafrankly.blogsp Joined 5829 days ago 4399 posts - 7687 votes  Speaks: Lowland Scots, English*, French, Spanish, Scottish Gaelic Studies: Catalan, Italian, German, Irish, Welsh | Message 9 of 39 23 February 2011 at 10:16am | IP Logged | |||||
There's very few things that have to be memorised word-for-word, but putting things into tables hides that. Most languages have strong internal logic, and tables encourage learning things as discrete items, rather than a realisation of that logic. Eg Gaelic The definite article: why is it "am" before B,M,P or F? For the same reason we say "combination" rather than "conbination", "commerce" rather than "conmerce", and "compartment" rather than "conpartment". Most learners already know this. So we don't need the table -- we still consider the article as "an", but undergoing a regular sound change. The article lenites all feminine words. The reason that only some forms have a * is that they are the only ones that come before a lenitable consonant, with the exception of "an t-", but how does the T hide the S? Arguably by lenition. As T is naturally aspirated and SH is an aspirant, initial TSH is the same as initial T. Why is there a form a'? Simple - like the "am" thing, it's down to sound. "N blocks lenition of D and T", they tell us. Again, this rule hides the logic. Some people will present the "homo-organic rule": N is in the same part of the mouth as D and T, so lenition is harder than full pronunciation -- lenition was originally a "short-cut", a lazy pronunciation. You never lenite when it's physically easier not to. As I say, there's logic there. EG 2 - Spanish. classical tables would be like hablo hablamos hablas habláis habla hablan But logically "hablas" and "hablan" follow from "habla" -- information which is hidden in the table, encouraging rote memorisation of the endings. This makes irregular verbs harder, because I can't think of a single verb where this rule doesn't hold for the present tense. The rule also holds (IIRC) for every tense and aspect except the positive imperative and the preterite indicative, so it's a very useful and productive rule -- no need for memorisation. 2 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||
 Iversen Super Polyglot Moderator Denmark berejst.dk Joined 6521 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 10 of 39 23 February 2011 at 2:01pm | IP Logged | |||||
|
I can't see that we disagree on these points. Actually I directly suggested looking for a structual logic even in morphological tables (within the limits set by the facts). In the Nominative/Accusative Singular in Irish lenition is ultimately a device based on ease of sound production, but it is used selectively to mark the distinction between Masculine and Feminine nouns after a definite article (with certain initial consonants - other rules apply with other initial sounds). In the genitive case the article "an" is the same with a Masculine noun, but now with Lenition. In the Feminine you find instead the same article as in the plural, "na", and there is no lenition.
The point is that instead of learning all combinations of articles and initial consonants and genders by heart you isolate the factors that vary: choice of article, sound rule or not (there are also other rules in play) and gender, and then you notice the pattern of combinations - plus the fact that what happens at the beginning of an Irish noun has preciously little to do with what happens at the end of it. It would be difficult, but possible to learn all possibilities one by one and MAYBE notice a pattern, but when somebody has done the dirty job for you and written a grammar, then it would be silly not to profit from it. 3 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||
| Arekkusu Hexaglot Senior Member Canada bit.ly/qc_10_lec Joined 5199 days ago 3971 posts - 7747 votes Speaks: English, French*, GermanC1, Spanish, Japanese, Esperanto Studies: Italian, Norwegian, Mandarin, Romanian, Estonian | Message 11 of 39 23 February 2011 at 4:10pm | IP Logged | |||||
Nah, a nice table is a good way to present all the info so you can draw your own rules and conclusions. Sometimes, you can't actually find hard-fast rules, but only tendencies, and tables allow you to see that. 3 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||
 jeff_lindqvist Diglot Moderator SwedenRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 6727 days ago 4250 posts - 5710 votes Speaks: Swedish*, English Studies: German, Spanish, Russian, Dutch, Mandarin, Esperanto, Irish, French Personal Language Map | Message 12 of 39 23 February 2011 at 7:14pm | IP Logged | |||||
I fully agree. If somebody can explain something to me in a sentence or two instead of countless examples over the years, I prefer the explanation (even if I don't "master" it immediately). If I have a basic idea what to look for and to pay attention to (and to some extent - "why"), (I hope!) I'll find it everywhere in texts I read or audio I listen to. 5 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||
| CS Groupie United States Joined 4946 days ago 49 posts - 74 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Icelandic, Latin, French | Message 13 of 39 23 February 2011 at 9:38pm | IP Logged | |||||
Again the obsession with morphology. The verbal systems differ substantially between Greek and Latin alone, so I'm not sure how much can really be said to carry over from one inflected IE language to another. And English has aspectual distinctions even if they have to be expressed with multiple words (oh no the analytic languages are dumbing everything down!). And the poor Chinese, how do they learn any other languages at all? (sarcasm) 2 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||
| Elexi Senior Member United Kingdom Joined 5383 days ago 938 posts - 1839 votes Speaks: English* Studies: French, German, Latin | Message 14 of 39 23 February 2011 at 9:47pm | IP Logged | |||||
|
I thought Krashen's main point was that a conscious knowledge of grammar too early on forces what he calls the internal 'monitor' to be too active, thus preventing spontaneous verbal communication. If I recall his theory, it is that we need to be able to find a method of speaking effectively to communcate (without pristine grammar , which live speech generally lacks) without the monitor when we are speaking and applying the full monitor when we are reading and writing. In his view (IIRC) reading amd writing should comes later as this mirrors what happens with children.
Personally I can see something in the monitor thesis - I have been in the position where thinking out the sentence has taken longer than the time aloted in a communicative scenario to say it, or where a mistake has sent my mind into chaos in orgainising my sentences - but in reality most of the time, the more you speak with natives, the more the 'monitor' switches off. In my opinion, this is true whatever method you use to acquire the language. Edited by Elexi on 23 February 2011 at 9:50pm 5 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||
| dragonfly Triglot Senior Member Russian Federation Joined 6297 days ago 204 posts - 233 votes Speaks: Russian*, EnglishC2, Spanish Studies: German, Italian, Mandarin | Message 15 of 39 23 February 2011 at 10:05pm | IP Logged | |||||
|
Naturally, there are restrictions to Krachen's theory, as to any theory, I'd say. His ideas of comprehensible input in a low-anxiety setting seem rather sound to me. But I consider grammar the skeleton of a language and can't ingnore it.
As a teacher I'm interested in what to do with the beginners, in the classroom included. I watched some videos on youtube and now understand how he proposes to introduce vocab and structure (here, for example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiTsduRreug). But it is impossible in self-study. 2 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||
| Cainntear Pentaglot Senior Member Scotland linguafrankly.blogsp Joined 5829 days ago 4399 posts - 7687 votes Speaks: Lowland Scots, English*, French, Spanish, Scottish Gaelic Studies: Catalan, Italian, German, Irish, Welsh | Message 16 of 39 24 February 2011 at 1:32am | IP Logged | |||||
As Iversen says:
I go further. Most grammar books are designed for paper, not for the mind. A grammar designed for paper doesn't make the rules unmissable -- you are forced to draw your own rules and conclusions... which may be wrong. Far better if the patterns are taught explicitly than spread across multiple tables. 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. |
