Article: Students fall short on Vocabulary (General discussion) Language Learning Forum

Article: Students fall short on Vocabulary
Tags: Class Learning \| Number of words \| United Kingdom (UK) \| CEFR Language Levels \| Press Article \| Vocabulary learning
Share with: Delicious Digg reddit Facebook StumbleUpon
Language Learning Forum : General discussion

319 messages over 40 pages: << Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 25 ... 39 40 Next >>

Cavesa
Triglot
Senior Member
Czech Republic
Joined 4805 days ago
3277 posts - 6779 votes

Speaks: Czech*, French^C2, English^C1
Studies: Spanish, German, Italian

Message 193 of 319

22 April 2014 at 5:46pm | IP Logged

Elexi, the point I'm trying to make is not "enviromentalism shouldn't be discussed", quite the opposite. The textbooks and similar sources do not make you discuss it, they present only one point of view which you are supposed to parrot. That is what I dislike, especially as the textbooks are meant to go into hands of children and teenagers as well who are therefore taught not to question the presented views.

The enviromentalism is just one exemple. There are several such "neutral" topics which are presented in a totally unbalanced way.
2 persons have voted this message useful

emk
Diglot
Moderator
United States
Joined 5328 days ago
2615 posts - 8806 votes

Speaks: English*, French^B2
Studies: Spanish, Ancient Egyptian
Personal Language Map

Message 194 of 319

22 April 2014 at 6:46pm | IP Logged

Serpent wrote:

emk wrote:

So I think all those not-quite-political topics are simply a consequence of trying to find something that fits in the gap between B1 travel/survival topics ("I'm sorry officer, I didn't see the no parking sign. Please don't give me a ticket.") and C1 academic topics ("Maupassant divides literature into two primary schools: that which is fantastic, exaggerated and moving, and that which is more strictly realistic.")

Hm is the french C1 that academic?

Here are the first two paragraphs of one of the DALF C1 sample exams:

Quote:

Après les écoles littéraires qui ont voulu nous donner une vision déformée, surhumaine, poétique, attendrissante, charmante ou superbe de la vie, est venue une école réaliste ou naturaliste qui a prétendu nous montrer la vérité, rien que la vérité et toute la vérité.

After the literary schools which wanted to give us a vision of life deformed, super-human, poetic, touching, charming or superb, came a realist or naturalist school which claimed to show us the truth, nothing but the truth, and the whole truth.

Il faut admettre avec un égal intérêt ces théories d'art si différentes et juger les oeuvres qu'elles produisent uniquement au point de vue de leur valeur artistique en acceptant a priori les idées générales d'où elles sont nées. Contester le droit d'un écrivain de faire une oeuvre poétique ou une oeuvre réaliste, c'est vouloir le forcer à
modifier son tempérament, récuser son originalité, ne pas lui permettre de se servir de l'oeil et de l'intelligence que la nature lui a donnés.

It is necessary to admit with an equal interest these theories of art so different and to judge the works they produce uniquely from the point of view of their artistic value while accepting a priori the general ideas from which they are born. To contest the the right of a writer to make a poetic or a realistic work is to want to force him to modify his temperament, to recuse his originality, to not permit him to make use of the eye and the intelligence that nature gave to him.

[...2 pages of text...]

Guy de MAUPASSANT, préface de Pierre et Jean (1887)

Quel est le but poursuivi par Maupassant dans ce texte ?
1. Défendre la notion de progrès en littérature.
2. Analyser et comparer des écoles littéraires.
3. Affirmer la supériorité d’une école littéraire.

What is the goal pursued by Maupassant in this text?
1. Defend the notion of progress in literature.
2. Analyze and compare two schools of literature.
3. Affirm the superiority of a school of literature.

[The correct answer here is (2), but it's clear that Maupassant prefers the realist school. In fact, I would personally describe this text as "claiming to be a fair comparison, but not really," and would be happy to argue that (3) is actually pretty reasonable answer, too, assuming C1 reading skills. You do need to second guess the examiners a bit, and there were times when my tutor and I both disagreed with the official answer on a B2 practice exam.]

Believe me, with a text like this, I'm really glad to be studying a Romance language. In Egyptian, this much abstract language would be an utter massacre. In fact, judging from the footnotes in translations of Egyptian works, nobody's 100% comfortable with certain kinds of really abstract arguments in Egyptian.

Serpent wrote:

And as you know I passed. I think they genuinely care more about my language knowledge than whether I give the "right" answers.)

One handy test-taking trick is to ask yourself which position is easiest to actually defend. On my oral exam, I scored 18/25 (my weakest section). But I deliberately picked my position ("Paris should have London-style congestion charges") because I was better prepared to talk about environment and quality of life (on the pro side) than the economic effects of tolls (on the con side).

Anybody who sits the DELF B2 should know words like "pollution," and quality of life can be discussed using lots of typical B1 vocabulary. They give you 30 minutes of prep time, so it's worth thinking this stuff through when you're sketching out your presentation's structure.

Cavesa wrote:

I agree there are few topics that are suitable for the B2 as it is designed. However, combination of the textbook approach (always one side of the argument, never the other) and how the exam went (basically, a monologue is required, not discussion) makes me wonder what trully is expected of a B2 learner.

My exam was a 10-minute presentation, and a 10-minute Q&A section. And even though we were all laughing a bit during the Q&A, occasionally the examiner would get an evil twinkle in her eye, and ask me something like, "So that's an interesting proposal, but won't it have a really negative impact on the poor who work in the city? How would you address that?"

My response, to gain a few seconds: Je peux me débrouiller en français, mais je ne peux pas résoudre tous les problèmes du monde! "I can get by in French, but I can't solve all the world's problems!"

First examiner: Laughs.

And then, a bit haltingly and less idiomatically than I would have liked: "Well, we could always impose more taxes on the rich, and give some of that money to the poor. There's a price for protecting the environment; this isn't an easy problem."

Second examiner: Stops smiling, makes another terrifying little note that I can't see.

When I was taking my online probability course from a French university (that I had to quit after 5 weeks because the work load was huge), I ran into the same attitude pretty often: Give people really hard challenges, but allow them to flounder a bit now and then. And I definitely didn't see any kind of systematic political biases on the test: Usually you could answer either way and still defend your positions.

Anyway, getting back to the original topic, an upper-level university student majoring in French should be able to eat these kinds of things for breakfast. (Assuming they get the English-speaker discount.) They certainly shouldn't be reading French literature in English translation, or struggling to understand lectures in French, both of which were mentioned by the study author.

Edited by emk on 22 April 2014 at 6:54pm
3 persons have voted this message useful

montmorency
Diglot
Senior Member
United Kingdom
Joined 4624 days ago
2371 posts - 3676 votes

Speaks: English*, German
Studies: Danish, Welsh

Message 195 of 319

22 April 2014 at 9:08pm | IP Logged

emk wrote:

Either this study is garbage, or British foreign language instruction is
simply awful.

Both parts of that sentence are probably correct, and from experience, I know that the
second part is correct, if we are talking about secondary school.

Edited by montmorency on 22 April 2014 at 9:09pm
1 person has voted this message useful

jpmtl
Diglot
Groupie
Canada
Joined 3798 days ago
44 posts - 115 votes

Speaks: French*, English
Studies: Spanish, Russian

Message 196 of 319

22 April 2014 at 9:16pm | IP Logged

I did a conversation exchange in Spain with a guy who was doing a Masters degree (to be an English teacher). One of his optional units was French Business and despite his level being A1 at best (I couln't even have a basic conversation with him), it seems like it wasn't an issue as the level of the other students was just as low.

Edited by jpmtl on 22 April 2014 at 9:17pm
1 person has voted this message useful

s_allard
Triglot
Senior Member
Canada
Joined 5226 days ago
2704 posts - 5425 votes

Speaks: French*, English, Spanish
Studies: Polish

Message 197 of 319

22 April 2014 at 9:44pm | IP Logged

Cavesa wrote:

...

I think s_allard misunderstood emk's point here, which I share. There is not a list of things you need to use (such
as the pronout en). But if you don't use any advanced grammar, stick to easier sentence constructions and just
efficiently use basic grammar to avoid anything more complicated, you are not going to get that many grammar
points at a B2 exam. You can speak efficiently with natives using just basic grammar and vocabulary if you are
creative and bold about it but you are not going to fool examinators at an advanced exam.

I don't think I misunderstood emk's point here. In fact, it's my point that is being misunderstood. I never said
"don't use advanced grammar, stick to easier sentence constructions or use basic grammar to avoid anything
more complicated." Please, read what I said. I simply said that nothing is mandatory and that there are many
ways to say things.

This is the big problem in this discussion. People assume that if you don't use a grammatical feature then your
performance must be weak and poor. Where does it say that you have to use specific points of grammar? Where
does it say that you have to use specific vocabulary words? Nowhere. Now, the real question is can you speak in
an adequate fashion with the resources you have. If you do not use a certain feature, it's because you've probably
figured out a different way of saying the same thing.

This reminds me of an interview I had with the director of a local university Spanish department. I had prepared a
list of great expressions I wanted to use during the conversation. One was. "para más inri" 'to make matters
worse'. Unfortunately for me I was never able to use it. On the other hand I was able to get in "un lustro" 'a
period of five years". What exactly did this prove? Not much, and all the more so that I had forgotten a very basic
Spanish word "usuario." I actually felt foolish. Here i was with some great vocabulary whilst make a vary basic
mistake.

Please don't misunderstand me. I'm not saying don't use what you know. I'm saying that the tests do not specify
what items to use and there are multiple ways of sounding elegant and sophisticated.

I have to add that the quote I really like from Cavesa's post is this: "You can speak efficiently with natives using
just basic grammar and vocabulary if you are creative and bold about it but you are not going to fool examinators
at an advanced exam." Are we not to assume that the examiners are natives?

1 person has voted this message useful

montmorency
Diglot
Senior Member
United Kingdom
Joined 4624 days ago
2371 posts - 3676 votes

Speaks: English*, German
Studies: Danish, Welsh

Message 198 of 319

22 April 2014 at 9:50pm | IP Logged

Jeffers wrote:

Gemuse wrote:

emk wrote:

s_allard wrote:

While boning up on my English vocabulary I came across the following
passage in the April 15 edition of the Guardian:

"He probably bragged about it in the pub and somebody will shop him and then unless he
owns his own hedge fund he's probably out of a job."

Well, that's a moderately rare usage of the word "shop", but most well-read adult
anglophones should certainly know it. Usually it shows up in newspaper reporting about
white collar crime.

Really? I've never heard of that usage.

It's pretty common in the UK. I never heard it before I moved here. But it's a pretty
good example of a word whose meaning is clear enough from the way it's used.

I'd guess it was originally criminal slang, later popularised by crime fiction.

Similarly "The (old) Bill" (the police), "felt his collar" (arrested someone) "done
porridge" (served time in prison). etc, etc.

Quote:

There is occasionally a risk involved in inferring the meaning of a word from context.
It is possible to misunderstand it completely. My favourite example of this is the
word "hirsute". (I won't give away the meaning until the end.) When I have come
across the word, it has usually been alongside "wise"; for example, "My grandfather was
a wise and hirsute man." I recall seeing the word twice in the Guardian newspaper, and
both times it was clearly being used as a synonym for wise. However, the word means
nothing of the sort. I assume the journalist came across the word in a similar context
to the one I read it in, and assumed the words were being used together as synonyms
instead of looking it up. Now to satisfy your curiousity, I'll reveal the meaning:
The word actually means "hairy" or "shaggy", but the people referred to in the articles
were relatively smooth men.

There is definitely an art to learning by context. People seem to assume it's easy, but
I don't think it necessarily is.
3 persons have voted this message useful

s_allard
Triglot
Senior Member
Canada
Joined 5226 days ago
2704 posts - 5425 votes

Speaks: French*, English, Spanish
Studies: Polish

Message 199 of 319

22 April 2014 at 10:10pm | IP Logged

emk wrote:

...
Anybody who sits the DELF B2 should know words like "pollution," and quality of life can be discussed using lots
of typical B1 vocabulary. They give you 30 minutes of prep time, so it's worth thinking this stuff through when
you're sketching out your presentation's structure.

Cavesa wrote:

I agree there are few topics that are suitable for the B2 as it is designed. However, combination
of the textbook approach (always one side of the argument, never the other) and how the exam went (basically, a
monologue is required, not discussion) makes me wonder what trully is expected of a B2 learner.

Thanks again for this snippet of the kind of interaction one can have in a CFER exam. Notice that the little
sentence to gain time is a great little opening gambit. No subjunctives, no fancy constructions. No fancy words.
Should he have said "je ne peux" without the "pas"? That would have been more sophisticated. Or even: "je ne
puis" to be really very formal?

A C2 candidate answering this question might use something even more sophisticated such as: "Certes, je me
débrouille en français mais de là à résoudre tous les problèmes du monde, il y a loin de la coupe aux lèvres."

The only problem with the last answer is that if you don't get it right you fall flat on your face.

All of these variations do not alter the fact that the emk's original is a great way to start the answer.

What kind of technical vocabulary does one need to argue emk's position here? All of the technical
vocabulary is probably given in the article that the candidate has to read. Assuming of course that the vocabulary
was understood.

I would think the emk probably shoehorned in some subjunctives, y's and en's for good measure. Why not?

Edited by s_allard on 22 April 2014 at 10:12pm
1 person has voted this message useful

montmorency
Diglot
Senior Member
United Kingdom
Joined 4624 days ago
2371 posts - 3676 votes

Speaks: English*, German
Studies: Danish, Welsh

Message 200 of 319

22 April 2014 at 10:13pm | IP Logged

In spite of what I said earlier, I will say something in defence of the average British
school student who finds themselves at the end of A levels, with one or more language A
level to their credit and at the start of some sort of language-related degree:

For the first 5 years of their school life, and particularly focusing on the 4th and
5th year of secondary school (years 10 and 11 in the current school year naming
scheme), bright kids will be expected to take 10 or more GCSE's, and so will have only
1/10th at best of their school time available for (say) French.

Because increasingly children are "taught to the test", and in any case, human nature
being what it is, even the brightest of kids will only learn what they have to learn
under those conditions.

In "the sixth form" (years 12 and 13 in the modern scheme), bright kids will be
encouraged (probably) to take at least 4 A levels, and so will only spend at most 1/4
of their time-tabled time on (say) French. At this level, they have a certain amount of
private study time allowed in the time-table, and if their long-term goal is languages,
they will hopefully be able to spend some holiday time in the TL countries, but this
depends on a lot of things, like parents' income.

And even when they get to university, they are not just going to be studying (say)
French - it will be French and another language, or maybe even a family of languages,
or something else entirely.

I'm not saying it's any tougher for UK pupils and students than those of any other
country, but this discussion at least started out by focusing on their weaknesses, and
I would say that it's not entirely surprising, especially as, sadly, I don't think
"foreign languages" are actually valued highly within the UK (in spite of much lip
service to the contrary.

I think things could be, and should be, vastly improved, but I'm not too hopeful at the
moment.

2 persons have voted this message useful

This discussion contains 319 messages over 40 pages: << Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 Next >>

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 0.4063 seconds.