Register  Login  Active Topics  Maps  

Strategy: Learn 600 words a week.

 Language Learning Forum : Questions About Your Target Languages Post Reply
167 messages over 21 pages: << Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 15 ... 20 21 Next >>
xtremelingo
Trilingual Triglot
Senior Member
Canada
Joined 5197 days ago

398 posts - 515 votes 
Speaks: English*, Hindi*, Punjabi*
Studies: German, French, Arabic (Written)

 
 Message 113 of 167
13 October 2007 at 1:43am | IP Logged 
Frankeld,

Quote:

So far, technology has not proven to be more than the sum of its parts when it comes to language-learning - organic brains have annoying limitations that are pretty hard to overcome, so intelligently conducted research from preceding decades should be just as valid today.


Research from the 60's in Linguistics is significantly different than research today. Particularly research that pertains to self-study in a non-immersed environment. The research today is different because now we have access to technologies such as VoIP that make Language-Exchange over the Internet possible. Therefore, a style of psuedo-immersion that was not possible in the 60's.

Research is dynamic and will change continually, particularly with advances in technology. The people whom develop this technology are often the innovators that have thought about the possible uses before they decided it would be worthwhile to design and implement.

There is also plenty of technology being developed by scientists that are behind closed doors, and not in the presence of linguists to conduct research. Therefore, it is ignorant to say research exists for just about everything. This is NEVER the case.

1 person has voted this message useful



Linguamor
Decaglot
Senior Member
United States
Joined 5528 days ago

469 posts - 599 votes 
Speaks: English*, German, Italian, Spanish, Swedish, Danish, French, Norwegian, Portuguese, Dutch

 
 Message 114 of 167
13 October 2007 at 2:44am | IP Logged 
mcjon77 wrote:

To do that, we must first define what are the objectives we are trying to achieve with this specific technique.


What I was discussing was the objective of producing target language utterances and sentences - not single words - using target language words that had been memorized without context as native language equivalents, and the problems inherent in this.
      


Edited by Linguamor on 13 October 2007 at 3:06am

2 persons have voted this message useful



edwin
Triglot
Senior Member
Canada
towerofconfusi&Registered users can see my Skype Name
Joined 5374 days ago

160 posts - 183 votes 
9 sounds
Speaks: Cantonese*, English, Mandarin
Studies: French, Spanish, Portuguese

 
 Message 115 of 167
13 October 2007 at 8:17am | IP Logged 
xtremelingo wrote:
I read somewhere that you had attended Ryerson University, ...

xtremelingo wrote:
... you appear to have low-expectations of people you don't know, and on this forum and truly underestimate and make ignorant presumptions about their backgrounds.

No, I did not attended Ryerson or U of T.

xtremelingo wrote:
I am replying to you am I not?

Apparently, yes. Have you tried my method yet? Why not? I need to publish a research paper based on your feedback.
2 persons have voted this message useful



xtremelingo
Trilingual Triglot
Senior Member
Canada
Joined 5197 days ago

398 posts - 515 votes 
Speaks: English*, Hindi*, Punjabi*
Studies: German, French, Arabic (Written)

 
 Message 116 of 167
13 October 2007 at 2:09pm | IP Logged 
Linguamor,
Quote:


In most cases it is better to get beginners speaking sooner, and in my experience this is also what most beginners want. Beginners can begin speaking almost immediately using comprehensible input and directed output techniques.


Interesting. This was one of the first things I suggested when I came to this forum. However, I received criticism for trying to promote beginners to speak sooner -- and was told by other people on this forum that people should wait as long as possible to speak.
1 person has voted this message useful



frenkeld
Diglot
Senior Member
United States
Joined 5853 days ago

2042 posts - 2719 votes 
Speaks: Russian*, English
Studies: German

 
 Message 117 of 167
13 October 2007 at 3:35pm | IP Logged 
xtremelingo wrote:
frenkeld wrote:
So far, technology has not proven to be more than the sum of its parts when it comes to language-learning - organic brains have annoying limitations that are pretty hard to overcome, so intelligently conducted research from preceding decades should be just as valid today.

Research from the 60's in Linguistics is significantly different than research today. Particularly research that pertains to self-study in a non-immersed environment. The research today is different because now we have access to technologies such as VoIP that make Language-Exchange over the Internet possible. Therefore, a style of psuedo-immersion that was not possible in the 60's.


xtremelingo,

I am generally enthusiastic about the use of technology in language-learning, but I am a bit skeptical about its true impact to-date.

There are, after all, just four main language skills, speaking, listening, reading, and writing. Before the advent of the short wave radio and recorded sound, self-learners had to study languages without ever hearing them. Now, having that problem solved was clearly a very big deal, and no one in his right mind would deny that the appearance of cassettes and later CD's changed language-learning forever, and did so in a way that affected available study techniques to their core.

What I am less certain about is what the true impact of the more recent technologies has been to-date. They have certainly increased access to and lowered costs of practicing the four language skills, but they don't seem to have effected a further shift in the available study paradigms that would be anywhere near comparable to what the appearance of cassette tapes had done.


Edited by frenkeld on 13 October 2007 at 3:43pm

1 person has voted this message useful



HTale
Bilingual Diglot
Senior Member
United Kingdom
Joined 5288 days ago

164 posts - 167 votes 
Speaks: English*, Arabic (Written)*
Studies: French

 
 Message 118 of 167
13 October 2007 at 7:20pm | IP Logged 
frenkeld wrote:
xtremelingo wrote:
frenkeld wrote:
So far, technology has not proven to be more than the sum of its parts when it comes to language-learning - organic brains have annoying limitations that are pretty hard to overcome, so intelligently conducted research from preceding decades should be just as valid today.

Research from the 60's in Linguistics is significantly different than research today. Particularly research that pertains to self-study in a non-immersed environment. The research today is different because now we have access to technologies such as VoIP that make Language-Exchange over the Internet possible. Therefore, a style of psuedo-immersion that was not possible in the 60's.


xtremelingo,

I am generally enthusiastic about the use of technology in language-learning, but I am a bit skeptical about its true impact to-date.

There are, after all, just four main language skills, speaking, listening, reading, and writing. Before the advent of the short wave radio and recorded sound, self-learners had to study languages without ever hearing them. Now, having that problem solved was clearly a very big deal, and no one in his right mind would deny that the appearance of cassettes and later CD's changed language-learning forever, and did so in a way that affected available study techniques to their core.

What I am less certain about is what the true impact of the more recent technologies has been to-date. They have certainly increased access to and lowered costs of practicing the four language skills, but they don't seem to have effected a further shift in the available study paradigms that would be anywhere near comparable to what the appearance of cassette tapes had done.


Rather off tangent: may I congratulate you on your use of impeccable English.

EDIT: Guys, I'm 20, and I'm rather certain of the fact that there are quite a few posters on this thread older than I. Given that, I'm quite shocked at some of the childish lack of respect here. I came to this forum to learn about different methods, and I owe it to this website for setting me on my path. However, this thread is a microcosm of where this forum is headed; petty in-fighting.
Fellow language enthusiasts, it's time we stopped the personal angle to our discussions about methods - it's imperative we look at things objectively. If we do so, I (and all other members, for that matter) don't have to sift through the unrelated personal matches that exist in here, and I can ultimately make a decision as to whether this method is worthwhile to employ.
Xtremlingo has presented a method, with its due merits and, with all due respect, with its failings. Although I feel that vocabulary should be assimilated in its natural environment (i.e. sentences, acquiring words through contexts etc.), a degree of vocabulary learning wouldn't hurt. That is, I wouldn't mind now and then learning a few words in the manner Xtremelingo has prescribed (when I'm at basic fluency, for instance).

Edited by HTale on 13 October 2007 at 7:45pm

1 person has voted this message useful



xtremelingo
Trilingual Triglot
Senior Member
Canada
Joined 5197 days ago

398 posts - 515 votes 
Speaks: English*, Hindi*, Punjabi*
Studies: German, French, Arabic (Written)

 
 Message 119 of 167
13 October 2007 at 8:16pm | IP Logged 
Htale,

I agree with you. Unfortunately, there exists a few forum members that have not understood the concept of 'exchange' over the Internet. They do this to other people as well on here.

It is becoming pretty clear, their motivations are intrinsic in their personality, they will disagree just for the sake of arguement.

The most amusing part about the whole thing is, we are discussing memorization techniques, that have nothing to do with linguistics. Whether I choose to memorize vocabulary, sine/cosine ratios, the topic is memorization -- not linguistics.

For some reason, I need to be an expert in linguistics if I want to memorize sine/cosine ratios too now. ;)

Edited by xtremelingo on 13 October 2007 at 8:17pm

1 person has voted this message useful



xtremelingo
Trilingual Triglot
Senior Member
Canada
Joined 5197 days ago

398 posts - 515 votes 
Speaks: English*, Hindi*, Punjabi*
Studies: German, French, Arabic (Written)

 
 Message 120 of 167
13 October 2007 at 8:43pm | IP Logged 
Linguamor,

Quote:

Yes, a memorized word list, like a dictionary, can be an aid to understanding language you have not acquired.


Hmm.. When I say this, how come you find it difficult to agree?

How different is a memorized word-list from memorizing flash-card vocabulary?


1 person has voted this message useful



This discussion contains 167 messages over 21 pages: << Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21  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 0.6563 seconds.


DHTML Menu By Milonic JavaScript
Copyright 2021 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved
No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization.