Register  Login  Active Topics  Maps  

Defining the Speaking Threshold Kernel

 Language Learning Forum : Learning Techniques, Methods & Strategies Post Reply
28 messages over 4 pages: 1 2 3 4  Next >>
s_allard
Triglot
Senior Member
Canada
Joined 5190 days ago

2704 posts - 5425 votes 
Speaks: French*, English, Spanish
Studies: Polish

 
 Message 1 of 28
11 October 2014 at 3:35pm | IP Logged 
Some time ago I stated here at HTLAL that with 300 around unique words of active vocabulary one could start
speaking French.

When I first floated this idea here, all hell broke loose, and my idea was the object of much scorn, ridicule,
derision and contempt. I was told in so many different ways that with 300 words, all one can do is grunt, point,
make awkward sentences using many circumlocutions and, according to one poster, jump up and down like a
crazy monkey. At times, I've been accused of being a troll in disguise.

But I don't hold a grudge, and I'll let bygones be bygones. I've moved on. In fact, with some colleagues and
friends I created a somewhat pompously named Polyglot Speaking Kernel Working Group.

For a set of languages - American English, Peninsular Spanish, Latin American Spanish, European French,
Québécois French, Brazilian Portuguese, Italian, German, Russian and Mandarin - we are attempting to define a
minimal set of words that contain all the necessary building blocks - the linguistic knowledge - necessary for a
user to start building complete sentences and interacting with native speakers. Depending on the language and
the definition of the word, this set is in the range of 300-400 words. The focus is entirely on speaking and not
on reading or listening. The question is: What does it take for a learner to get up and speaking in the language?

What has become apparent is that counting words is very misleading. Although for purposes of presentation and
measurement, we have to make do with words, in fact we are working with units of meaning and grammatical
micro-structures. These structures are embodied in these words. It's what is lying under the words that is
important.

I've deliberately used the words "linguistic knowledge" to emphasize the fact that I'm talking about much more
than learning a bunch of words. This is where people get mixed up. They think that I'm talking about memorizing
the first three hundred entries on some word-frequency list in French. In my opinion, this is useless.

What is interesting for us in this idea is that it highlights the key elements for detailed study if speaking soon and
properly is a high priority. One must of course systematically acquire new active vocabulary over and above the
threshold but one must also regularly work on the kernel to deepen the knowledge of the basics.

The big problem we have had so far is finding sets of transcripts of authentic simple conversations. There is a
ton of material for news programs, radio interviews, artificial conversations or people reading written texts but,
surprisingly, few examples of native conversations along the lines of what is available in French from France
Bienvenue.

The number one objection to this sort of speaking threshold idea is that you never know what your interlocutor
will say. People imagine all kinds of scenarios in which the native interlocutor will spring some horrible linguistic
surprise on the innocent learner who can only use 300 words.

For example, one can imagine that the sales person behind the counter in a store may want to talk about the
latest developments in medical robotics when you try to buy something. What are you going to do with 300
words? If that's the case, you're stuck. You probably won't be able to do much more than make an excuse for
your limited language skills.

But in the vast majority of cases, your interactions will be limited to the equivalents of: Have you been served?,
Are you being taken care of?, How can I help you?, Anything else?, etc. Given the context, you should not have
any problems understanding all these forms even if they are not all part of your active vocabulary.

The point is that you mustn't be afraid of going into a store simply because you don't know what the salesperson
will say to you. Neither should you hesitate because you don't know all the names of the items for sale. This is a
great opportunity to learn how things are called. Even native speakers don't know the names for many things

If the interlocutor uses a word that you don't know, you simply ask what does it mean. This can be overwhelming
of course if the subject gets very technical, but it most simply everyday interactions this is not a big problem.

The number two objection to this idea of a small threshold core is that one cannot speak in a sophisticated
manner with only these words. This is far from true. Discussing certain topics is difficult because of the lack of
vocabulary, but the existing words can be used in very sophisticated ways by skilled speakers. The limitation is
with the speaker and not solely with the inventory of words.

For example, in French the simple preposition DE takes up three pages in my Grand Larousse de la Langue
Française with 53 different nuances of usage plus a whole paragraph on Locutions diverses with de.
And this is entirely different from the forms du, de la and des that are covered separately. There's a lot
of linguistic power underneath those two letters.

I'm not working on French myself but I've received permission to list in the next post a preliminary version of
such a kernel for French.
2 persons have voted this message useful



s_allard
Triglot
Senior Member
Canada
Joined 5190 days ago

2704 posts - 5425 votes 
Speaks: French*, English, Spanish
Studies: Polish

 
 Message 2 of 28
11 October 2014 at 3:50pm | IP Logged 
Preliminary version of a French 301-word Speaking Threshold Core

Breakdown by functional category:
Verbs     56
Nouns     121
Adverbs     15
Adjectives 45
Pronouns 27
Connecting words 37
     
Total     301

Keep in mind the following points:
1. Many verbs can be easily transformed into nouns either by derivation or simply by use of a determinant article.
2. Nearly all adjectives can be made into nouns by using the determinant article.
3. Many verb gerundive forms and past participles can be used as adjectives and nouns.
4. Certain forms, like the connecting words like DE, À and the pronouns AUQUEL have many variant forms that
are not listed here.
5. A number of word forms can appear in multiple functional categories, e.g.en the preposition and en
the pronoun.

Verbs wrote:

acheter, aider, aimer, aller, arriver, atteindre, avoir, boire,changer,
commander,commencer,comprendre,connaître,continuer, coucher,coûter,     
démontrer,dépendre,devenir,dire,donner,dormir,durer,éclat er,écouter,entendre,entraîner,
essayer,être,expliquer, faire,falloir, finir,habiter,in téresser,laisser,laver,manger,
passer,peser,porter,préférer,prendre,préparer,prier,profi ter,     
        raconter,regarder, rester ,savoi r,tent er,tro uver,varier,vivre, voir,vouloir

                                                                                                                 
    
Nouns wrote:
                                 
     la baguette, la campagne,la carte,la chambre,la chance,la chanson, la chaussure,la chemise,la cuisine,la
discipline,la face,la famille,la fille, la forme,la gare,la maison,la mère,la nouvelle,la passion,la peau,la personne, la
qualité,la raison,la réservation,la robe,la salle,la soeur,la télévision,la tête,la ville,la voie, la voiture,l'accident,l'an,
l'année, l'argent,l'autobus,l'aventure,le bain,le billet,le bien,le café,le cas,le centre,le chapeau,le charme,le
cinéma,le cours,le crédit,     le début,le déjeuner,le dimanche,le dîner,le fils,le frère,le fruit,le gramme,le haut,le
jeudi,     le jour,le jus,     le kilo,le lit,le livre,le lundi,le magasin,le mal,le manteau,le mardi,le matin,le menu, le
mercredi,le métier,le métro,le nord,le pain,l'examen, le pantalon,le parent, le père,le petit-déjeuner,le peu,le
problème,le professeur, le programme, le progrès,le quartier,le rapport,le rendez-vous,le repas,le restaurant,le
sac,le salon,le samedi,le sport,le sud,le supermarché,le tarif,le tort,le tout,le besoin,le train,le travail,le type,le
midi,la vacance,la fois,le voyage,le vélo,le visage,le soir,le vendredi,le vêtement,l'eau,l'enfant,l'est,
l'étude,l'exemple,l'extérieur,l'intérieur,l'ouest


                                                                                                               
Adjectives wrote:

  absolu,accessible,autre,cent,chaud,cher,cinq,cinquante,c lair
,dernier,deux,deuxième,dix,douze,efficace,faux,froid,
grand, grillé, huit,neuf,onze,     
particulier,petit,premier,quarante,quatorze,quatre,quatrièm e,quelque,quinze,récent,seize,sept,six, 
soixante,ton/ta/tes,treize,trente,trois,troisième,un,vieux, vingt,vrai


                                                                                                                            
        
 
Adverbs wrote:

assez,
beaucoup,   bien,finalement,ici,jamais,là,la -bas,la-haut,longtemps,mal, notamment,toujours, très,
vite,vraiment     
    
                                                                                                                
      
 
Pronouns wrote:

auquel, ça,ce,ceci,cela,celui, elle,elles,en,eux,il,ils,je,la   
,le,lequel,lui,moi,nous,on,quelqu'un,soi,te,toi,tu,vous,y 
   


   
Connecting words wrote:
     
à, à côté, alors, après, au revoir, avant,bonjour,chez, combien,com me,d'accord,dans,de, depuis,
donc,enfin,ensuite,et,hein,la, là,le,mais,même,ne pas,non,ou,oui,plus,puis,quand,qu'est-ce
que,quoi,si,vers,voici,voilà



Edited by s_allard on 11 October 2014 at 4:05pm

4 persons have voted this message useful



Serpent
Octoglot
Senior Member
Russian Federation
serpent-849.livejour
Joined 6357 days ago

9753 posts - 15779 votes 
4 sounds
Speaks: Russian*, English, FinnishC1, Latin, German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese
Studies: Danish, Romanian, Polish, Belarusian, Ukrainian, Croatian, Slovenian, Catalan, Czech, Galician, Dutch, Swedish

 
 Message 3 of 28
11 October 2014 at 6:03pm | IP Logged 
s_allard wrote:
I've deliberately used the words "linguistic knowledge" to emphasize the fact that I'm talking about much more than learning a bunch of words. This is where people get mixed up. They think that I'm talking about memorizing the first three hundred entries on some word-frequency list in French.


a week ago:

Serpent wrote:
I doubt anyone thinks you're claiming that it's enough to learn 300 words and no grammar. You mention grammar all the time because that's what the learners you know offline struggle with. And you fail to understand that many HTLAL'ers are very different from them - we use a variety of methods, and many of us love grammar and/or linguistics too.


In fact, the counter-argument may be the opposite from what you claim. Apart from multilingual environments like Quebec, good grammar is useless if you only know 300 words. And perfecting 300 words like that is overkill for most learners.

Quote:
If the interlocutor uses a word that you don't know, you simply ask what does it mean.

This assumes that you have another language in common and even that you've had enough exposure to be able to repeat the word. And asking for a specific word without switching the whole conversation into a different language does require a lot of confidence with the grammar and vocabulary you do know. Sometimes it's just easier to learn more words, so that you were less likely to need to ask.

Let me stress that I do wish I had known this prior to my trip to Malta last year, where I wanted to practise Italian. But you never pointed out that this is mostly relevant for multilingual environments, and the main benefit of knowing your kernel well is that you can produce a favourable impression and people won't switch to another language until you hit the limits of your knowledge. However, it was emk who made me understand that, while you were busy proving how universal your approach is.

Edited by Serpent on 11 October 2014 at 9:44pm

3 persons have voted this message useful



Doitsujin
Diglot
Senior Member
Germany
Joined 5080 days ago

1256 posts - 2363 votes 
Speaks: German*, English

 
 Message 4 of 28
11 October 2014 at 7:39pm | IP Logged 

Serpent wrote:
s_allard wrote:
If the interlocutor uses a word that you don't know, you simply ask what does it mean.

This assumes that you have another language in common and even that you've had enough exposure to be able to repeat the word. And asking for a specific word without switching the whole conversation into a different language does require a lot of confidence with the grammar and vocabulary you do know. Sometimes it's just easier to learn more words, so that you were less likely to need to ask.

Actually, it might theoretically work for relatively simple and easy-to-define words as long as the hypothetical language learner loves solving word puzzles and only encounters educated native speakers who love reading thesauri for fun.

A real-life example is the (monolingual) Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English, which uses a 2000 word defining vocabulary to define all of its 45K+ headwords.

But even the most educated and willing native speaker will probably have a hard time defining words using a defining vocabulary of only 300-400 words.
1 person has voted this message useful



AlexTG
Diglot
Senior Member
Australia
Joined 4398 days ago

178 posts - 354 votes 
Speaks: English*, French
Studies: Latin, German, Spanish, Japanese

 
 Message 5 of 28
11 October 2014 at 8:10pm | IP Logged 
The choice of nouns seems arbitrary and culturally dependent, and clashes with the
universality of the rest of the list. Instead of taking wild stabs at what nouns speakers
might need when they start out why not stay true to the concept of a "kernel" and
only include words relevant to all human speech: la chose, le mot, le lieu, le jour, la
personne etc?

Edited by AlexTG on 11 October 2014 at 8:27pm

2 persons have voted this message useful



Serpent
Octoglot
Senior Member
Russian Federation
serpent-849.livejour
Joined 6357 days ago

9753 posts - 15779 votes 
4 sounds
Speaks: Russian*, English, FinnishC1, Latin, German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese
Studies: Danish, Romanian, Polish, Belarusian, Ukrainian, Croatian, Slovenian, Catalan, Czech, Galician, Dutch, Swedish

 
 Message 6 of 28
11 October 2014 at 8:52pm | IP Logged 
I'd much rather listen to poor grammar than explain the words without translating.

As for Longman, I used to love their dictionaries when I was 11-15, but I'm sceptical now. I remember how I randomly found the word "blatant" and considered it incredible that any language has a word for such a concept. Only years later did I realize that my native language also has a perfectly suitable word, and that I had completely misunderstood the vague definition. Found it now: something bad that is blatant is very clear and easy to see, but the person responsible for it does not seem embarrassed or ashamed. I remember even asking my dad if he can think of a Russian word that fits, and he also didn't. Also, my vocabulary was definitely larger than 2000 by that point, so I would've benefitted from a more accurate description.

Of course that's just one word, but it isn't even particularly rare, and I'm sure there are many more words that can't be defined adequately with a "simple English" dictionary or similar.
1 person has voted this message useful



Jeffers
Senior Member
United Kingdom
Joined 4669 days ago

2151 posts - 3960 votes 
Speaks: English*
Studies: Hindi, Ancient Greek, French, Sanskrit, German

 
 Message 7 of 28
11 October 2014 at 9:10pm | IP Logged 
s_allard wrote:
Some time ago I stated here at HTLAL that with 300 around unique words of active vocabulary one could start
speaking French.

When I first floated this idea here, all hell broke loose, and my idea was the object of much scorn, ridicule,
derision and contempt. I was told in so many different ways that with 300 words, all one can do is grunt, point,
make awkward sentences using many circumlocutions and, according to one poster, jump up and down like a
crazy monkey. At times, I've been accused of being a troll in disguise.


Oh my. Nobody argued that you couldn't speak with only 300 words. I doubt a single person said you couldn't. But people began to ask questions like, can you pass a B1 test with 300 words, you said yes, and then the arguments began. I've pointed out before that your position changed several times, and you responded that it's a good thing to be willing to change. I do agree, but then you could have admitted that somebody said something sensible, and you decided to adjust your position. Allowing that, you still shouldn't be surprised when people are confused by what you mean when the position keeps changing.

You started with a good idea: people should start speaking sooner rather than wait until they have thousands of words. Then in response to questioning you frankly went to extremes to stick to your number, which remained the same for beginners and for takers of C1 exams (excepting the words they obviously already know...)

Actually, I doubt anyone will have much to argue against in your latest version, for which you should thank all of those spouters of derision and drivel for helping you to sharpen your concept. Nevertheless, your latest version is dripping with sarcasm and is frankly asking for objectors to raise their heads above the parapet. Nobody suggested a salesperson would be bringing up medical robotics; your section about the salesperson is both irrelevant and an attempt to ridicule those who have argued against you. The real issue between you and those arguing with you is what you mean by "speak".

As I said, most of what you've said here makes sense, and I think the kernel concept is a great tool for a teacher or student. My only objection to the concept is the idea that there is a "threshold". Students shouldn't speak before? (I sense you would say students should speak from the first lesson). Why does it have to be so large? I could order a cup of coffee in a cafe, respond to a few basic questions, and settle the bill with a couple dozen words.

10 persons have voted this message useful



robarb
Nonaglot
Senior Member
United States
languagenpluson
Joined 4819 days ago

361 posts - 921 votes 
Speaks: Portuguese, English*, German, Italian, Spanish, Dutch, Swedish, Esperanto, French
Studies: Mandarin, Danish, Russian, Norwegian, Cantonese, Japanese, Korean, Polish, Greek, Latin, Nepali, Modern Hebrew

 
 Message 8 of 28
12 October 2014 at 12:12am | IP Logged 
s_allard wrote:

we are attempting to define a
minimal set of words that contain all the necessary building blocks - the linguistic knowledge - necessary for a
user to start building complete sentences and interacting with native speakers. Depending on the language and
the definition of the word, this set is in the range of 300-400 words.


If you're looking for the true minimal set that will allow someone to start building complete sentences, it's far
fewer than 300 words. You just have to define a domain of things that will be discussed. I have even heard of a
language learning method (blanking on the source) that does this by defining a set of objects, actions and
locations for absolute beginners and then talking about them (Now, this is the cup. Move the cup to the right,
etc.)

s_allard wrote:

...interacting with native speakers ... The focus is entirely on speaking and not
on reading or listening.


This is contradictory. You have to listen to interact with native speakers.

s_allard wrote:

The big problem we have had so far is finding sets of transcripts of authentic simple conversations. There is a
ton of material for news programs, radio interviews, artificial conversations or people reading written texts but,
surprisingly, few examples of native conversations along the lines of what is available in French from France
Bienvenue.

I have a really hard time seeing how this is relevant. Isn't it obvious that no matter what you put in your kernel,
you will find that authentic simple conversations use mostly words in it, sometimes words not in it but that could
be equivalently expressed with words in the kernel, and once in a while a word that could not be easily
substituted using the kernel? And if the conversations are not simple (e.g. radio interviews) the proportion of
items not in the kernel will go up?

What you really want to show is that you can build sentences and interact meaningfully in a reasonable situation
using only items in the kernel. Maybe you define a goal (e.g. compliment someone on their shoes, ask them
where they bought them and if they are comfortable). Then you build the relevant sentences to accomplish the
goal, and you see if it can be done with the items in the kernel. That seems like the way to investigate the
original claim.

s_allard wrote:

Some time ago I stated here at HTLAL that with 300 around unique words of active vocabulary one could start
speaking French.

When I first floated this idea here, all hell broke loose, and my idea was the object of much scorn, ridicule,
derision and contempt.

As Serpent pointed out above, most of the scorn for your arguments involved other positions you've taken other
than the uncontroversial one that starting to talk with native speakers when your active vocabulary is less than or
equal to 300 is something that one can do. There have been posters who've ridiculed even this idea, but the
posters who've most consistently debated with you disagree with them even more than we disagree with you.
Their position is a straw man.

s_allard wrote:

For example, one can imagine that the sales person behind the counter in a store may want to talk about the
latest developments in medical robotics when you try to buy something. What are you going to do with 300
words? If that's the case, you're stuck. You probably won't be able to do much more than make an excuse for
your limited language skills.

But in the vast majority of cases, your interactions will be limited to the equivalents of: Have you been served?,
Are you being taken care of?, How can I help you?, Anything else?, etc. Given the context, you should not have
any problems understanding all these forms even if they are not all part of your active vocabulary.

I've had experience not understanding what a cashier said to me in Germany, even though my German
comprehension is not that bad. This happened because it was the first time I'd ever been to Germany, so
naturally I wasn't used to hearing the things cashiers tend to say. I don't think it was a vocabulary problem, it
was just unfamiliarity with the situation, and she didn't speak so clearly. I'm OK with this. Surprisingly it turns out
that reading a novel is easier for me than doing the relevant talking around buying a loaf of bread in Germany.
(The actual bread was bought, no problem.) If I stayed in Germany for a longer time and bought groceries ten or
twenty times I'm sure I'd get really good at it, since my underlying German level is more than good enough.

Conversely, sometimes these types of verbal exchanges are so trivial as to be uninteresting in the context of
language learning. I don't know about other places, but in American cities a lot of people aren't very talkative. I
often buy things and say nothing other than "Hello... uh-huh, OK, no thanks. ... ... Thank you!"

Let's not waste time arguing about what you can and can't do with 300 words. A simple demonstration would
suffice: pick a couple situations and write some sample sentences that would be appropriate in those situations,
using only words in the kernel. We don't need to argue the meaning of speaking "well" or about "complex"
things--we can just look at the sort of sentences you can make, and what sorts of things are out of reach.

I do not think the kernel is a bad idea. I do wish you would be more clear and to-the-point about how it's used
and why it's useful. What differentiates it from a simple frequency list?



Edited by robarb on 12 October 2014 at 12:17am



5 persons have voted this message useful



This discussion contains 28 messages over 4 pages: 2 3 4  Next >>


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 6.4531 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.