The Linguist - language learning should be fun

Seven reasons why I would not use Rosetta Stone.

Download the podcast.

Let me begin my saying that I have never used Rosetta Stone. My son, Mark, played professional hockey in Japan for a few years. His team gave him Rosetta Stone to learn Japanese. He tried it and found that it was boring and did not get him very far.

I decided to do some research on the net. Most reviews that I found seemed to have been done by people connected with Rosetta Stone. I am not surprised. Rosetta Stone are excellent marketers for which I salute them. They are not only promoting their product, they are promoting an awareness that people can learn languages on their own.

The best summary of the Rosetta Stone method I found was the following.

The most important component of the Rosetta Stone software-based method is what I call "a four squares screen". The user is presented with a page that shows four pictures of various objects or entities. A prerecorded phrase or word is played back and the user must click on the square that contains a visual answer to the question or best illustrates the concept. If the user answers correctly a little "ding" is heard, a check-mark appears on the screen and the program advances. That's all folks!

So, why does the Rosetta Stone method work? At the very center of the Rosetta Stone approach is the idea of constant encouragement. Every step of the way the user receives positive feedback from the program. Rosetta Stone takes you through a rapid succession of multiple choice questions. Given that there are only four options per question it is not difficult to answer every question even if you don't get it right away. This process turns into a series of gratifying experiences.

This was contrasted with the usual language learning experience where the reviewer felt that we do not know how we are doing.

As a result we have uncertainty, perception of poor performance and general lack of success. A user is much more likely to quit such a course, and it should be known that not quitting is probably the single most important requirement when learning a foreign language

My reaction to the reviews that I read was that I do not think I would want to use Rosetta Stone. Here are seven reasons.

1)  I do not like answering multiple choice questions at the computer. It is not communicating. I might do it once or twice and would not continue. I would not do it daily. I need to connect with a language I am learning daily, in order to learn.

2) Most of my learning activity takes place during dead time. I mostly listen while running, driving, doing the dishes, waiting line etc.. I also read while waiting or as a relaxing activity.  If I had to sit at the computer in order to learn I would not do a lot of studying. I just do not have the dedicated time.

3) I do not believe that I can permanently learn words, whether using pictures or other techniques. I know I am going to forget them. In a way I am not interested in learning the word for "red" or "house". I know that I have to be exposed to so much language content, in audio and text, that gradually it all starts to have meaning. I am not conscious of learning and forgetting specific words, but I know I am doing it. I know I have learned words because I can understand more and more. I know I am forgetting because I am constantly unable to remember the most elementary words.

4) I find it difficult to learn words and phrases that are divorced from a larger story or context. Isolated words and phrases do not connect with my brain. I remember words and expressions as part of larger stories that I remember. I often remember when and where I was listening to many of these stories.

5) When I start learning a language, the gratification that I experience comes from the fact that  I start to be able to tell when words begin and end, and then soon after start to make sense of short episodes that used to be just noise for me. That is all the feedback that I need. I do not find the uncertainty a problem. It is the feeling of the "fog lifting", the uncertainty turning into more and more clarity, that is so satisfying in the study of another language.

6) I learn languages with the goal of being able to communicate, to understand what is said, and to be able to express myself. That is a long road. I have the impression that Rosettta Stone only takes you a very short way. I do not see it as a useful or necessary step.

7) I feel that a lot of listening to interesting content is better start than doing multiple choice questions. I am in a hurry to engage with the language, real language situations, and to let my brain get used to it.

What has been the experience of others? I know that I am not impartial, but I have tried to be honest. I do recommend the "Teach Yourself" series and the "Colloquial" series. I would not recommend Rosetta Stone.

Where I live, a few pictures.

My area is called Eagle Harbour. I often jog in the area while listening to my languages on my iPod.

I usually start my run through Parc Verdun which has old growth trees, and even young trees growing out of old tree trunks. It has a children's park and tennis courts. Note the garbage can which is bear proof.

I often run on a wooded mountain trail with lovely views of the ocean, called the Sea Walk, but sometimes I just run around a large field. I find the grass softer on my joints.

After 10 or 12 times around the field I may run down to Eagle Harbour beach.

Learning Chinese characters and other different writing systems.

I am often asked about learning to write Chinese characters. When I learned them there were no computers and no word processors.

I got a hold of 1,000 flash cards, the most common 1,000. I started with 10 a day and worked up to 30. I wrote or studied characters every, I mean every, day, until I had learned these 1,000 characters.

The flash cards showed the stroke order. I wrote them out on squared paper, down the first column 10 or so times. Then I put the English or pronunciation (Wade Giles in those days) over three columns to the right and picked up the next card, and kept going. Soon I would hit the English of the first card three columns over etc. and have to write it before I forgot it. I kept doing this with the 10, or eventually 30 characters that I was working on. These included new cards and cards that I had already learned and forgotten. I think my retention was less than 50%. After doing this for a while I would review my stack of cards.

After doing this for the first 1000 characters I stopped. From  that point on, when I encountered new characters in my reading I would write them out a few times and carry on. I learned 4,000 characters in 8 months, wrote the exam, where we had to translate newspaper editorials in both directions, write a diplomatic note, and take dictation. My hand writing was not pretty, but I passed.

When I was studying Chinese, and it was a full time occupation, I mostly read and listened a lot. I did write some, but not as much as I listened and read. I have now forgotten how to write by hand. I can write on a computer.

What would I do today?  I do not know. I am not sure I would bother to learn to write by hand. I can read and type on a computer in Russian, Japanese and Chinese, and even a little Korean, but cannot write any of them by hand. It is not a skill I use, and it is definitely a skill you lose if you do not use it, IMHO.

I am interested in the views of others.

A brief description of LingQ

I was just playing around with trying to explain LingQ, what it represents. Here is some doodling. I would appreciate any comments.

For most of human history, people have learned each other's languages without going to school, as people from one small tribe interacted with people from another small tribe.

To learn languages people mostly listened to each other and imitated each other. This went on for over one hundred thousand years.

Our brains kind of got used to hearing words and phrases, noticing certain patterns, and figuring out what it all meant. That is how we learned languages.

Things started to change with the invention of writing.

Writing made it possible to record what was said. That way some people could learn languages by reading, as well as by listening. But that was quite recent, maybe in the 11th hour of our existence as humans.

The invention of printing was even more recent, and it helped spread the written word. But for most people around the world, things did not change. Most people could not read until the previous century.

Our brains remained basically programmed to learn languages by listening, noticing and imitating, and that has not changed.

Somewhere along the line governments decided that everyone should go to school and read text books. Soon people thought that learning only took place in classrooms.

Gradually our view of language learning changed. School teachers, text book publishers, and linguistics theorists took over.

We stopped listening to the languages we wanted to learn. We started listening to teachers and other learners in the classroom  We started doing a lot of tests and exercizes. To a large extent we stopped learning other languages.

But our brains did not change. We still basically need to listen to a language, read it, notice it, and imitate it, in order to learn it.

Fortunately things are changing again, and fast. We are headed back to our roots, but on a global scale. We are once again going to be able to learn languages the way the brain is used to learning, by interacting with other languages, listening, reading and noticing.

The iPod, the Internet, social networking, mobile computing, and perhaps other developments we are as yet unaware of, are removing the barriers of distance and location. There is an explosion of language to listen to, read and imitate on the web. We can download it, share it, exchange it, and take it with us.

We have a chance to connect like never before, with other people and other languages. Maybe not like never before. Maybe, in some ways, like it used to be, tens of thousands of years ago.

This is the kind of language learning power that LingQ offers. Give it a try. You will find libraries of interesting things to listen to and read. You will find efficient learning functions that will help you notice the words and phrases you need, and eventually ensure you remember them.

And, best of all, you will meet friendly people,  to talk to in the languages you want to learn, and who want to talk to you in your language.

Learning to read better. Is there a difference between native and non-native speakers?

To me the best way to learn to read better is to read more. Listening to what you are going to read can help. An efficient method for learning vocabulary can help. But mostly learners need to read more, whether native speakers or not. I really do not see much of a difference in terms of what needs to be done. Just read more!!! But this is not a majority view among teachers. Here is an exchange from the teachers forum where I sometimes comment just to annoy the others. My comments in italics.

............................

from a teacher:

I rarely teach ESL reading literacy (RL) because of my students needing (and wanting) to learn how to decode words. Most often, three learning goals pertain in developing L2 RL: actually learning to hear and produce phonemes that do not exist in their L1;  2) encoding many unfamiliar words in their L2 and sometimes L1, too; and 3) learning the Latin alphabet along with the highly complex English spelling system.  

These three goals, particularly the first two, are, in my limited experience in these settings, what mainly and very importantly, distinguish L1 from L2 adult RL development.

That said, I am currently working with two Cambodian students one-on-one, both with "solid elementary" non-academic Khmer RL. One decodes "quite well" but still struggles with reading comprehension; she understands  much better when I read to her due to her advanced aural comprehension skills. She is now attending Maui CC remedial classes not designed with ESL learners in mind while I help her fill the "gaps."   The other repeatedly attends "beginning" adult ed. ESL classes, follows the oral interactions well, but is helpless when it comes to working with the textbook being used in class and for homework. She and I are currently working with Joan Knights' "Starting Over" literacy program and children's books designed for K-1. I will also develop .ppt slides thanks to initially Hugo's input.

I believe that the affective realm within which we interact is a very positive one. Our relationships are close, we know quite a bit about our respective personal histories (both the good and not so good), and both students are well aware of their learning needs and accept them without any overt resultant signs of self-degradation. We all look forward to our sessions.

The two Cambodian students  would have quite possibly been labeled as LD or placed into special ed. had they been schooled in the U.S. as children.  The more advanced of the two has developed a far greater capacity to focus in a sustained manner,  and my sense is that her remarkably heightened intrinsic interest over time in the subject areas we are working on (language arts, U.S. and Cambodian current affairs,  and math) has gotten the better of what some "experts" might have labeled as ADD, perhaps even ADHD.  The other student is very even-keeled.

I would be very interested in your experiences, including your teaching approaches and materials you work with, specifically with adult ESL students who arrived here as young adults or later and whose RL is very limited at best and who present you with persistent, even seemingly obstinate, pedagogic challenges.

My response:

My experience is that the fastest track to success is to provide the learner with a large selection of material which consists of audio and text. This material should be not too difficult for the learner. The learner can listen before reading, while reading and even after reading and then listen and read again, and again. The learner must be able to choose content of interest to the learner. This cycle will take care of all three goals, unless the learner has a reading disability of some kind.

This is my experience and is in line with the view of Stephen Krashen Does Intensive Decoding Instruction Contribute to Reading Comprehension?. The only difference is that Krashen often overlooks the importance of listening as a part of learning to read.

Teacher's response:

My point was to highlight what I regard to be key differences between L1 & L2 RL development: in the case of L2, AURAL phonemic productive and receptive discrimination; the need to ENcode many everyday words that are not known, in contrast to L1 speakers;   to a lesser degree, learning the Latin alphabet for learners who know another writing system or none at all.

I often have my more  literate students (GLE 3+) listen to audio books prior to reading them. The need to tap into their sphere of interest is most important, as you indicate.

Another teacher:

I think you’re right about these key differences. Have you read the CAELA Network article “How Should Adult ESL Reading Instruction Differ from ABE Reading Instruction?”? It highlights some of these differences and cites some of the research done on this topic. http://www.cal.org/caela/esl_resources/briefs/readingdif.html

Rosetta sure is pulling in the awards.

It’s been a big week for Rosetta Stone.

Earlier this week, the language-learning software company’s CEO, Tom Adams, was named Executive of the Year at the 7th Annual American Business Awards.

Adams has been with the company since 2003. The company went public in April, raising $112.5 million during its IPO.

In addition, the company has announced that its Classroom Version 3 won an American Educational Publisher’s Distinguished Achievement Award. It won the award for its English as a Second Language (ESL)/ English Language Learner (ELL) curriculum for high school students.

“It is a great privilege to be recognized for the excellence of our ESL instruction,” Adams said in a statement. “As the face of America changes and grows more multicultural, Rosetta Stone Classroom is proud to give teachers the tools to do what they do best and provide ESL students around the country with the opportunity to unlock their natural language ability.”

Any kinesthetic language learners out there?

Does this apply to language learning?

 

THE KINESTHETIC LEARNER LEARNS BEST BY DOING.

1. Study in short blocks of time rather than extended periods.
   

2. Take frequent breaks when studying.
   

3. Change locations each time you take a break to help stretch your legs and give you a chance to move about when studying.
   

4. Have as many experimental learning opportunities as possible, such as lab and studio courses, as opposed to straight lecture classes - if you have a choice.
   

5. Consider building models or giving demonstrations to the class as opposed to more traditional written reports or term projects.
   

6. When writing, jot down words whose spelling you're unsure of, to see if it "looks" correct.
   

7. Utilize study groups.
   

8. Role play/simulation
   

9. Engage in field trips.
   

10. Use memory techniques requiring movement - hand gestures.
    

11. Engage in body demonstrations where a motion means a concept.
    

12. Use flash cards.
    

13. Make colored strips of paper that represent different concepts - link those papers together.

I am discussing language learning via the web with a group of ESL teachers. I questioned the ability and usefulness of teaching "collaboration, creativity, problem solving, critical thinking skills etc." on the grounds that it just interferes with language learning. Here is one response.

"I am a language learner. I have learned and continue to learn French and German and I still fail to see how collaboration, creativity, problem solving, critical thinking skills etc., don't help students learn. As a learner, I've had to use all of those skills when learning two new languages - whether I was writing, reading, listening or speaking. As learners, these skills are important and can't be ignored in language acquisition either.   Listening occurs in multiple 'acts' - the two that immediately come to mind are listening for information and reciprocal listening. Both types of listening require that the student be able to problem solve, think critically, access and process information almost in motion - they have to be able to do this while they are listening to a language - listening as part of language acquisition doesn't negate the need for 'skills' but rather a different application of skills. The same can be said for reading. Listening and reading within the language being learned is definitely important but I don't think we lose helping our students use the other skills as well especially if we want them to comprehend, understand and apply what they have read and heard.

I'm not disputing that listening and reading are essential parts, but I don't think they're only parts."

Any comments here?

How do women's bodies matter in adult literacy and basic education?

I recently got this email. This is how some language teaching professionals spend their time.

Call for Proposals

Our Stories, OurSelves: The EmBODYment of Women's Learning
Mev Miller, Ed.D. & Kathleen P. King, Ed.D., Editors

How do women's bodies matter in adult literacy and basic education?
Our Volume 1 -- Empowering Women through Literacy: Views from
Experience (http://www.litwomen.org/publications/empower/) -- focused
on empowering women in the classroom and primarily addressed
intellectual and personal barriers to and growth for women's literacy
learning.

However, we are aware of the many ways in which women's bodies and
whole selves are integral to the womanhood we celebrate, yet are
ignored, or even silenced, in traditional adult ABE, ESOL, and
literacy classes. Even when we do recognize or talk about women's
bodies, these discussions generally focus on sexual violence,
childcare/parenting, or health. Educators and students seek expression
as embodied women, but find these realities difficult to include in
current programs and classes.

The editors seek to gather writings about the many dimensions of
womanhood, specifically related to em-body-ment, as they are
experienced in literacy and basic/developmental educational settings.
We encourage a variety of genres including stories, creative writing,
poetry, articles, drawings, and research.
More details (http://www.litwomen.org/publications/embody/) - Proposal
Deadline: September 30, 2009

More on Krashen and grammar

Here is the podcast.

How much deliberate study of grammar, and word review, and output is necessary. Who knows? Do what you like. And making mistakes does not matter in most situations.

I refer in my talk today to a debate at How to learn any language., and a web site with an interesting perspective on the importance of language schools written by Amorey Gethin. This paper was first written in 1991. A lot has changed since then. For a view on how much has changed check out this video.

Limits to Krashen?

Here is the podcast.Download Krashen challenged

Beniko Mason has some wonderful articles on research on language learning showing that reading is more efficient in language learning than deliberate instruction. I am indebted to Igor the Macedonian for the link.

He will now attack me as I explain why I like to do a little Krashen plus "n". In other words I believe a little speaking and writing and word review, and even a little grammar review, have their place in making the brain more attentive. As long as we do not expect to learn the grammar or the new words, as long as we are not hung up about speaking and writing correctly, these deliberate learning activities help, as long as they do not get in the way of listening and reading.

I also make the point that the interest in the content is more important than making the reading easy. I am not a fan of graded readers, for example, at least for my own learning. A little bit of easy content to start with and then let me at the authentic stuff as soons as possible. I believe that LingQ makes that jump easier, and that is why we developed the system the way we did.

So go ahead Igor, and hit me. I can take it.

Krashen revisited: Reading and Listening.

Here is the podcast: Download Krashen again

Stephen Krashen is controversial. I do not agree with all of what he says. But there is a lot of common sense there, backed up with research. This list of comments about reading is worth looking at. Here he talks about the connection between reading and spelling. Here are some studies that talk about the importance of listening. Here is a discussion about to "teach" listening skills.

I believe that we waste a fortune in training teachers in various skills related to teaching reading, listening, spelling etc,. We should be looking at how to enable learners to spend more time reading and listening to things that they find interesting. As Manfred Spitzer said in his book, the brain is a remarkable learning machine, much better at forming its own rules and recognizing patterns, than absorbing theoretical explanations. Reading and listening should be fun. If we like it we will do it.

Learning styles and Twitter

Here is the podcast
I believe we all learn the same way, but that we have likes and dislikes. Different people like doing different things to learn. Rather than worrying about whether people are auditory learners or visual learners etc. we need to provide the greatest possible range of content and materials and help people learn the way they like to learn. Most of all we need to find ways to keep learners turned on. The enthusiasm of the teacher is important.

I talk about his here, and I question the role of Twitter. I am not against it. I have signed up. I just do not see myself following all these people and reading short messages about what they are doing. But I am willing to learn.

The Internet is the new and real University.

I am enthusiastic about the Internet as a growing and potentially limitless space for learning. That is where we have positioned LingQ. We are not alone. There is a lot of competition. A lot of it is free. That is the place where we have to compete. Of course much of what we offer at LingQ is also free.

Here is a site which provides recommendations for free online education resources all over the web, and also functions as a directory of online colleges and universities for students interested in earning a degree online.

The site also lists free language learning resources. LingQ is on their list in the general category.I would have preferred to see us listed for each language, as LingQ, and as each one of our LingQ Podcasts. But what can you do?

In any case it is a great resource. Learners can go to these sites and import the content and use it at LingQ.

Bilinguals are better (at language learning) ??

Northwestern University did a study to prove that people who were bilingual at an early age are better at language learning. They found that bilingual Mandarin-English or Spanish-English speakers learned a new (artificial) language more easily.

The problem with this study is that it ignores the most important factor in language learning, attitude. I know many unilingual people who learned a second language as adults and learned very well. I know bilinguals who struggle to learn a third language.

It has also been demonstrated that in Canada, children who start French immersion late, (Grade 6) quickly catch up with those who started in grade 1. In the end there is no difference in their French fluency. So, sure, expose kids to languages when they are young, but let's not get carried away. In the UK they start school at age 4 or 5, and in Finland and Sweden at age 7. I think the Scandinavians do better than the Brits on international comparison studies, but then again, how reliable are those studies?

Conclusion, do what you want to do and don't pressure your kids.

In language learning, use it or lose it.

It is often said that in language learning, you either use it or lose it. Here "use it" usually refers to speaking in the language.

I do not find this to be the case. Since I speak and understand 11 languages, I really do not have enough time to use them all in speaking to people.

I find that if the learning process is largely based on input, and not dependent on speaking to people, it is not so easy to lose languages. Furthermore it is easier to maintain them. I have CDs in different languages, books, and of course today there are podcasts. So maintenance is easy. I usually find that when I leave a language for a long period of time, and then go back to it, I am quickly at my previous level. In fact, because I have been acquiring other languages, I find that I have actually improved in the languages that I have neglected.

Maybe people who learn based on remembering grammar rules, or based on speaking the language, are more likely to lose a language they do not use. I do not know for sure.

Is it important to get a good foundation in the language?

I read a review of Rosetta Stone which said that it gives a person a good foundation in the language. I often hear people talk about a good foundation in the language you are learning. I just do not see things that way.

I think that whatever foundation you get in the language will prove to be a foundation made of wet sand. It  is kind of like building sand castles with the waves lapping in.

I find that whatever you learn in the language will have to be relearned many times, whether we are talking about words, phrases, or grammar rules. So I do not think it matters whether you start with Rosetta Stone, Teach Yourself, Assimil, Pimsleur, or LingQ. The first goal is just to get over the strangeness of the new language and to get enough words and phrases so that you can start on the meaningful and interesting part of the language learning journey, listening to and reading authentic content, discovering the culture of the new language, accumulating words and phrases. Eventually, when enough of it has stuck, you can start interacting in a meaningful way with speakers of the language.

Your grammar book and early phrase books are resources that you can, and should, go back to many times. You will be surprised at the things that you thought you had learned and no longer remember.

English has a million words?

English is supposed to have a million words. I was sent this list by a friend.

English    999,985

Chinese    500,000+ (various dialects)

Japanese    232,000

Spanish    225,000+

Russian    195,000 ( should be easy to learn!!)

 

Source: Global Language Monitor

To me this is not very useful information. All languages have words that nobody uses. I find that you need more words to make sense in Russian than in English, but then I have not counted.

An example of people helping people learn.

Chris the Mandarin student was kind enough to mention my blog and LingQ on his blog. There are many people blogging about their language learning experiences, and that is one, just one, of the many ways that the Internet is revolutionizing the way we learn languages. Thanks Chris.

You should not learn languages for fun, says UCLA language professor.

You should not learn a language just for the fun of it, says Michael Heim professor of Slavic languages at UCLA. In an interesting podcast (with transcript) he tells us why.

"I’ve never learned a language just for the sake of learning a language. I don’t think that works. If you are thinking of learning a language and your reason is, oh, it would be neat to speak X, then I think you’re going to have trouble making progress. But if there’s a specific goal you have in mind, then you can tailor your study and your learning techniques to that goal and you will make progress."

Of course I disagree. If you are an American, as he is, and unless you are a college professor, the "fun of it" is often the main motivation. That means the fun of accessing another culture and people, and eventually the fun of visiting places where the language is spoken. In fact very often people with obvious needs to learn a language are unable to learn because they do not see the fun in it.

Professor Heim also said, in this interview

"Chinese by far has been the hardest to learn, and it was one reason why I didn’t go on. It was a cowardly reason because I saw that it would take a lifetime. And I’m right because I know people who’ve done it and it has taken a lifetime."

It does not take a lifetime. I even know of a Swede named Max who learned to speak and read very well in two years, while working and while living in Sweden.

Anyway have a look. He does say a few things that I agree with.