Seven principles of input based language learning.

Seven principles of input based language learning.

1) We learn languages by listening, not by speaking.

A new language has words and phrases that are strange to us. Before we can learn to speak the new language, we have to make these strange words and phrases familiar to us. All learning consists of creating new patterns in our brain.  Language learning is no different. We have to listen to the language in order to form these new patterns in our brain. We cannot generate these new patterns from within. They must come from an external source, the native speaker. The greater our interest in the native speaker, or what he or she has to say, the better we can learn a new language.

2) Language learning is a gradual, morphing and unpredictable process.

It takes time to form these new patterns in our brains. The process is not linear, nor is it a step by step process. It is random and unpredictable. Therefore it is pointless to test students on what has been taught.  As more and more new patterns are layered onto our brains, the language gradually becomes clearer and clearer. Some new words and patterns resist our efforts to learn them, until suddenly they just click in.

3) Meaning is easier to learn than grammar.

Words, phrases and meaning are easier to learn than grammar. The reason is that new words and phrases can be associated with concepts we already have. Often grammatical rules in a new language are different from the patterns that we are using for our first language. Even if these new rules are explained, they are difficult to remember or apply, because our established patterns interfere. That is why it is easier to focus on meaning, and listening, and gradually let the language penetrate our brains.

4) When we read, we are also listening and speaking.

Reading is a powerful way to learn languages. When we read in a foreign language we vocalize. We are, in fact, speaking the sounds of the words, and listening to ourselves. We have the added advantage of seeing a visual form of the words, which helps us remember them.

5) Listening prepares us for reading.

As we listen, we gradually get a better and better sense for the sounds and rhythms of the new language. This helps us when we read, and, as pointed out above, when we listen to ourselves read. As beginner and intermediate learners, we should use the same texts for our listening and reading, and avoid doing the one without the other.

6) Learning to notice, and noticing to learn.

The brain learns a lot on its own, naturally, without us noticing. But for some aspects of the language, and often some of the most basic aspects, we need to help the brain to notice. Error correction, including noticing one's own errors, grammar explanations, word and phrase review, focusing on certain phrases while listening, highlighting certain words and phrases in texts, tagging or labeling certain words and phrases, are all ways to help us notice aspects of the language that are hard to remember. Noticing is best done while listening and reading. Deliberate noticing, divorced from listening and reading, should be a minor component of language learning. It is useful in making us more attentive to the language, but does not help us learn as effectively as listening and reading.

7) When we speak we should focus on listening and noticing.

We should start speaking when we feel we have something to say, and want to speak, and not before. It is best to avoid artificial classroom activities like role playing or other situations that involve speaking with non-native speakers. The reason is that speaking is an excellent opportunity to listen and notice how the native speaker uses the language, and to notice the gaps in our own use of the language.

Comments

[victor]

Mostly agree, but what about speaking?

I shouldn't speak? But I want to. Why I have to refuse myself of speaking? Why I must keep silent? I have nothing to say? Maybe. But I can repeat after the announcer while listening and reading. It's easy!

If a beginner would try to strike a casual conversation, he would get into "survival mode". Let him repeat each phrase and sentence while listening. Press the button "pause" and learn out loud! I am not in a classroom setting, I can allow myself speaking.

When I repeat I am in "talking parrot mode", I am absolutely sure in my rhetoric because I talk after native speaker. So I am relaxed and only being in a "lazy mode can hinder me from doing this.

And the last. Do we really want to learn keep silence in a target language? We all can do it without learning.

[Steve Kaufmann]

Number one rule is to do what you feel like doing. If you enjoy your studies you will learn. Talk when you want to talk. Parrot when you want to parrot. Not a problem. It is just that I prefer to remain quiet until I have some familiarity with the language, and have some words.

[Street-Smart Language Learning]

Steve, is this just based on your personal experience, or are you basing it on something more? Krashen maybe?

I'm particularly skeptical of #3. I don't see why your brain would suck in that "hablar" means "to speak" any more quickly than it would that "hablar" changes to "hablo" when "I" am the one who is speaking. Indeed, in cases like these, it seems that it's easier to find grammatical similarities; with words, "to speak" is arbitrary text string A in one language and arbitrary text string B in the next, whereas many grammatical concepts jump from language to language, such as changing the verb based on person in this one.

So I'd love to look at any research results supporting that and the other points you've mentioned above.

[Steve Kaufmann]

It is based on my own experience and on my reading on how the brain learns. Read "The Learning Brain" by Frith and Blakemore or something, that I referred to in an earlier.

I know that in Portuguese we do not say el pais like in Spanish, and we do not say en el pais. We say o pais, and no casa. But "o" and "no" are already taken in my brain for other uses. It is much easier to learn new vocabulary than to learn new structures. It is not difficult to understand the principles, just difficult to remember when you speak or read. Same with cases, conjugations, articles for some people etc.

[Steve Kaufmann]

I meant no pais. In the country is no pais. That is a difficult thing to get used to.

[Igor]

It's a piece of cake to cite a numerous studies supporting this, no problem, except that is not really complete.

[Steve Kaufmann]

Let's put it this way. We all know people who have a large vocabulary in English and cannot get the third person singular write, or the articles, or maintain habits from their native language, or in the case of Chinese people, get he and she wrong.

It has to do with how patterns form in our brain, and how new patterns are acquired. Children, who are still creating the patterns for their first language have an easier time with patterns of other languages.

[Steve Kaufmann]

get the third person singular right..I mean!!!

[victor]

I permanently struggle with the third person but it often win. My writing such an eyesore! What shall I do?

[Kevin Geoghegan]

4) When we read, we are also listening and speaking.

Hmm. I don't think listening and speaking are particularly helpful in that case. Unless you are practising pronunciation or doing some intensive style reading, you probably should try not to vocalise (or subvocalise). Vocalisation gives the brain an added task (pronunciation) in addition to extracting meaning and it has a negative affect on reading speed (and possibly on comprehension). If you also listen to yourself vocalising then you are further diluting the brain's processing power. Why add the extra step of speaking-listening when you can go directly from the visual input to the meaning?

[Min Min (Learn Chinese Every day)]

Nice article. Thanks for sharing. I should apply this to my Chinese learning website.

[David Martin]

hey steve

thought you might like this article

http://blog.taragana.com/health/2009/09/25/brain-can-quickly-learn-a-forgotten-language-again-12512/

cheers

[Steve Kaufmann]

Kevin,
I do not deliberately vocalize when I read in a foreign language. I cannot avoid it. I wonder what the experience of others is.

From my reading on he subject, it seems that the same neurons are activated whether we read out loud or subvocalize or read silently. Writing is the representation of sound. Reading is based on hearing. People who hear poorly have trouble reading.

[Steve Kaufmann]

Thanks David. I am sure that is true.

[Steve Kaufmann]

Victor, as I struggle with cases, verb aspects, motion verbs and other niceties of Russian, I find that I have less time to sympathize with you.

The problem with the third person singular present tense in English is that it is the only example where the verb changes for person in English. Your brain has created its own rule for English based on the idea that the verb never changes form. I would underline every occurrence of the third person singular present tense you come across in your reading, focus on it when you listen, and notice when you get it wrong, as you did in your comment. (it wins). Maybe you can convince your brain to change its English rules.

[Igor]

Kevin Geoghegan said:

"you probably should try not to vocalise (or subvocalise). Vocalisation gives the brain an added task (pronunciation) in addition to extracting meaning and it has a negative affect on reading speed (and possibly on comprehension). If you also listen to yourself vocalising then you are further diluting the brain's processing power."

Kevin check this first please:

200 - 250 wpm) An average reading speed in which the vast majority of the world's readers are positioned for most of their lives. Regression of about 10% of all words read with full sub-vocalization. Occasional concentration problems. Generally understanding more than half of what is read.

Only people who use speed reading reduce their subvocalisation and that's in their native language, but to try to eliminate subvocalisation in a foreign language where you have unknown words and a reading speed of 80-100-150 or anything below 200 wpm is quite illogical.

Steve you surely cannot avoid it, unless you have some brain problems, god forbidden.

[Kenny Ross]

You say that:

When we read, we are also listening and speaking.

Reading is a powerful way to learn languages. When we read in a foreign language we vocalize. We are, in fact, speaking the sounds of the words, and listening to ourselves. We have the added advantage of seeing a visual form of the words, which helps us remember them.

I asked you before if you felt reading out loud helps your listening comprehension. You said you never do that. So my question is you do feel reading out loud helps to improve the language you are studying? Or do you feel reading silently to yourself can have the same effect? I'm just curious.

[Kenny Ross]

Or I should say, do you feel that reading out loud can improve your listening comprehension given that you have good pronunciation?

[Steve Kaufmann]

I rarely read out loud. I might do a little of it just to practice pronunciation. But sub vocalizing has the same effect in terms of activating neurons, apparently. I just read and am conscious that I am also sounding out the language to myself.

[Steve Kaufmann]

Igor, I forgot to ask you what you meant by not complete.

[Igor]

Well, you have an odd number (13, 17, 26) in your "list post" which is sometimes thought to encourage additions. For example “9 tips for …” or “19 tips for …” and ask your readers to submit a tenth in the comments instead of round numbers (eg. 5, 10, 20, 100) which may give your readers a greater impression of authority, so I thought that additions are encouraged, but never mind.

[David Martin]

Personally, I never read out loud in a language I am learning because I find myself listening to my own flawed pronunciation which then sticks in my head rather than the pronunciation of a native speaker.

If you think about the way a child learns to speak, they typically spend a year or more just listening and understanding before they start speaking, and after that they're still just listening most of the time.

I prefer to let my neurons be bombarded by many hours of listening and understanding a language before I even start to speak it or pronounce it, and even then I still spend most of my time listening, sometimes to the same content many times, and sometimes with more varied content.

Initially, you should always spend much more time listening than reading. Reading at the beginning is just a way to gain an understanding of a text before you proceed to listen to it many times, and it should always be accompanied by listening so as not to subvocalise what you 'think' the language sounds like.

I think you should listen to at least 1000 hours of any language before you start using yourself as a model.

[Steve Kaufmann]

All of this is true David, in my view, yet when we read we are vocalizing. As long as we do not read out loud, we are not aware of our poor pronunciation as beginners. We think we are pronouncing the way we hear the language. With time our pronunciation gets better, without really having to focus on it, at least in my experience.

[Gary]

Hi, I teach high school Spanish via primarily input-based methods. I agree with much of what you say, especially the part about language learning being an unconscious, something that goes unnoticed. I've tried to explain this to a couple different colleagues, but if you can't grade it, then many people feel it's not valid.

[victor]

David,

Where did you see a listening child? I never saw such a wonder in all my life. My children had never listened to me at any age, they mostly were running, jumping and screaming. They constantly tried to explain me something even when they didn't know a single word. As I am writing this I am being drawn by sleeve and must go to play. They ask me a lot of questions but never listen to me. Even more phantastic picture is a child reading a book. But it is commonly agreed that children are the best language learners.

David, impose on any child 1000 hours of listening and please report to me what will get out of that.

[Steve Kaufmann]

Victor,
Children listen, and they usually do not speak for at least 2 years. They may not obey,but they listen and hear, and they eventually try to repeat what they hear. They form some language rules based on what they hear, and in some cases they create come up with rules that are wrong,and which are corrected naturally, as they hear more of the language.
They do not go around with iPods but they listen. It is well known that children who do not hear much language when they are young are at a great disadvantage when they start to read and go to school.

[Laurie]

Steve,

You got me thinking about how speaking occurs. My response on my blog...www.heartsforteaching.com/blog

Laurie
www.heartsforteaching.com

[Kenny Ross]

So I have a question based on your observation of reading silently. Do you feel words from a word lists that are made up, by the person learing the language, can be learned without hearing them out loud but saying them in your head given that you know how to pronounce them? I think this is easier with Spanish or Italian but French I feel you have to hear how words are pronounce.

[Steve Kaufmann]

I never have people read out my word lists at LingQ. I have no opinion. It is not something I worry about. It may be something that LingQ members can do for each other in the future.

[David Martin]

'They form some language rules based on what they hear, and in some cases they create come up with rules that are wrong,and which are corrected naturally, as they hear more of the language.'

I agree completely here Steve - children do sometimes form incorrect rules, as in generalizing the past tense and saying "We goed home" instead of "We went home", but these rules are corrected naturally because the amount of listening always outweighs the amount of speaking in the early years and only comes after an extended period of time without speaking.

Some would say, 'Well, those errors are corrected because the child's parents correct them', but if you read Stephen Krashen's book Principles and Practice in Second Language Learning, you will find out that children, based on his research, are not only very resistant to any type of oral correction (that is, they usually disregard the correction and do not repeat it back to the speaker), but that most parents tend not to even correct errors in their children's speech.

I imagine the above-mentioned error is corrected in that the child notices the difference in what he is saying and what the people around him say, and he eventually abandons the deviant "We goed".

By the way Steve, would you mind if I recorded this article and put it in the English Library?

[Marc H.]

Hi Steve,

I was going to ask for some clarification about point #4, but from the comments I can see more clearly what it's about.

Personally I like reading Korean content out loud because in my case it has helped my pronunciation and has helped me to speak more confidently in Korean. Pronunciation in Korean (as it did when I studied some other languages like Spanish and Tagalog) tends to come more naturally to me than many people I know. Native Korean speakers have confirmed this.

However, I like to balance reading out loud with silent reading. I find both to be profitable in their own ways. Additionally, I've been giving more attention to listening, particularly with my MP3 and Korean radio.

Thanks for this post. I have to admit that for a long time I've focused more on output than input. It's only been within the last year or so that I've been giving a lot more attention to the latter. In a way, dealing with several Koreans who know English grammar and vocabulary but can barely have an English conversation has affected my own approach to language study. Better late than never I suppose.

[Steve Kaufmann]

David, you can record whatever you want. The more content at LingQ the better. Thanks.

[Vera]

I translated this article into German. You can find the recording on LingQ: http://www.lingq.com/learn/de/store/lesson/62962

[Vera]

I translated this article into German. You can find it on LingQ: http://www.lingq.com/learn/de/store/lesson/62962

[Gary Donovan]

Comment by Gary
Dear Steve,

Question? How effective was Stephen Krashen as a language learner? Did he, in fact, fulfill your criteria of truly learning two or more foreign languages himself? Did he ever become 'very fluent' in a second or foreign language?
[My understanding is that he did not reach the level of a truly advanced learner in any language. His best foreign language was French but he does not have anything like 'near-native' competency. He was always quite happy to have a "very English type of accent" which is NOT a level that I am happy with for myself or for my students. If the subject was 'tennis' or 'piano', Stephen Krashen would not be proficient enough to show anyone how to do what he was teaching.]

There are a number of problems in second or foreign language learning that are simply not addressed. I will address on one or two of these problems here.

1. When we look at the research on learning another language as an adult, we find a huge number of conclusions are based on learning a language that is 'close' to one's mother tongue -- i.e. an English speaking person learning French or Spanish or German or Portuguese. All of these languages have an immense number of very similar structures and even very similar words. Prefixes and suffixes function in a very similar way, verb tenses are similar, word orders are similar and so on. The basic language knowledge that an English speaker has can be applied with very little modification to learning Swedish, Norwegian, French, Spanish, Catalan, Roumanian, German, Dutch, Flemish and so on. The problem is immensely different when that same English speaker tries to learn a language such as Finnish, Turkish, Vietnamese, Tsuut'ina, Dogrib, Chipeweyan, Navajo, Apache, Beaver, Ket, Tlinget... and so on. Even learning Chinese is immensely difficult for an English speaking person -- and vice versa. An English speaking person expects other languages to have clearly defined words. When he moves into a language such as Apache or Navajo or Tsuut'ina, words are much more fluid creatures. What is important are the verb stems and a large group of very effective prefixes. If one does not look at the structure of the language in a conscious way, listening is not very useful. The English speaking person does not know what to listen for and wastes a huge amount of time getting nowhere.
The same is true of Vietnamese. Since, in reality, none of the sounds of Vietnamese coincide with any of the sounds of English, this creates an immense difficulty for the learner. Listening without specific instruction on WHAT to listen for is largely a waste of time. The adult ear has the annoying habit of transforming any and every sound into a "native language" sound. In the case of Vietnamese, it is essential to make distinctions between more than three hundred different distinct sounds -- phonemes and tonemes. This compares to 38 in Canadian English and somewhere between 40 and 60 in most of the languages mentioned above -- Dutch, German, Spanish and so on. When a new language differs immensely from the native language, some study of grammatical issues seems to be essential. {Very few studies have looked seriously at this problem.}...

2). The rules and principles outlined by Krashen and by you do not take account of the many different ways in which people learn. A person like Gardner has identified what he calls twelve different types of intelligence. Each person has a unique combination of these forms of intelligence. Some people learn very well by beginning to repeat things at an early point in their language learning, others do not. Some people truly enjoy understanding how the grammar of a language functions as they progress, others do not. Through the years I have acquired reasonable competence in a large number of languages including Sanskrit, Marati, Tsuut'ina, Navajo, Vietnamese and Latin in addition to French, German, Catalan, Spanish and Italian. One thing FOR ME is essential -- a profound study of the phonetic structure of the new language so that I can pronounce the sounds correctly and hear them correctly from the start. It is extremely counter productive to learn to pronounce a great many words incorrectly, then embed these bad habits into my speaking patterns so that I have to spend a huge amount of time later covering these bad habits over with 'good habits'. The procedures you recommend in your list of principles are not ones that apply to every person. They do apply to some people when they try to learn a language that is close to the one the speak in the beginning. They do not apply to ALL types of learners and they certainly do not apply to all language learning situations. For an English person learning Vietnamese or Navajo, a significant amount of conscious learning is essential. Conscious learning can become unconscious functioning if we pay attention to what we are doing and recognize that our goal is to produce learners who speak rapidly and accurately -- without having to make an analysis for each utterance -- and who can truly 'hear' the sounds of the new language.

Effective adult learning varies depending the individual styles of the learners as well as on the relative nature of the two languages in question – similarities and differences between the native language of the learner and the language being learned. Theories of learning are very much based on studies that use the dominant North American and Western European languages as the model. They seriously neglect personal learning styles as well as the problems that exist when the mother tongue and the language being learned have extremely dissimilar structures.

Gary Donovan.
Calgary, November 5, 2009.

[Gary Donovan]

Re. Children vs Adult correction of errors.

Children make errors as they learn their first language. It is noted for example, that they overgeneralize past tense forms and say "goed" instead of "went". The comment was made that they do not listen to their parents if indeed the parents even try to correct these errors. It is true that children eventually correct the errors but it is to be noted that they are very much attuned to what other children do and say. There is often competition to be 'top dog' among children. One of the ways of being top dog is to correct another child who says something incorrectly. If one child has a form that is unusual, his peers will often imitate that form and make fun of it. The mutual correction by children of children is both severe and ruthless. Children DO listen carefully to corrections made by other children -- since they very much want to fit in and be like the other children. Intolerance of difference is a prime characteristic among children. The result that as children grow into adulthood, ALL of the children in a certain community are pressured into speaking in exactly the same way. {And when a child does get the form right eventually, how do we not know that the corrections that parents have given them have not played a role in that final correction?]....
Adults do not have this peer pressure to conform. We almost never tell other adults when they have made an error. Krashen's basic assumption was that, as in the case of children, the errors made by adult learners would eventually be corrected. This is simply not the case. The errors, in fact, become deeply embedded in the habitual way of speaking. If we compare this to piano playing, what is suggested is that we allow the student to play the tunes incorrectly with the idea that they will some day change their way of playing and begin to play correctly. It simply does not happen. The fossilized errors become a very serious problem in adult learning. That is the problem with the methods proposed by Krashen. There exists no corrective method in nature for an adult to correct bad pronunciation and incorrect syntax. We need to build into our teaching and learning methods, procedures that will allow the adults to correct the errors before the become solid habits that cannot be over-ridden.
Gary Donovan
November 5, 2009.
gary.avatar@gmail.com

[Steve Kaufmann]

Gary,

Thanks for this detailed comment. I do not agree with most of what you have to say.

I have learned a number of languages from different language groups, including 4 Asian languages, and find the process similar.

I do not believe in 12 different types of intelligence nor in different learning styles. We have different interests and likes and dislikes but our brains learn largely the same way. See this recent article on the subject by cognitive scientist Daniel Willngham. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/answer-sheet/daniel-willingham/the-big-idea-behind-learning.html

I do not think that children spend a lot of time correcting each other's language. Adults are probably more inclined to do so. We eventually notice our own mistakes, or don't and keep making them.

I have never focused on the details of pronunciation, but have assumed that if I spend the first good while only listening, I will eventually be able to pronounce. I think that the repetitive listening to a limited amount of content, with a focus on the intonation of the language will usually help people more than the deliberate and self-conscious study of how to forum the mouth.

My wife is self taught in the piano and just plays the music she likes. She gradually improves because she is motivated. A teacher would definitely reduce her motivation. But that is her.

[Gary Donovan]

Steve,
Thank you for your measured comment on what I said.

Re. Howard Gardner & multiple intelligences: You are right, the problem of multiple intelligences is a tricky one in psychology even though it has been a useful tool in language learning. There is a thoughtful comment on some of the issues at http://www.infed.org/thinkers/gardner.htm. This idea of 'multiple intelligences' can be of use when we talk about the use of poetry, songs and/or music in language learning.

Re: Children being corrected
The way in which children interact with each other and the way in which they come to recognize their errors -- and 'correct' them so they conform to the language community merits a later, careful analysis -- since you do not share my view of the matter.

Re.: Correction of pronunciation
How much importance do you place on accuracy in pronunciation? Is it satisfactory to speak with some rapidity but still have a marked "foreign accent" in L2?
My extensive work with Vietnamese learners of English followed by a learning and speaking tour of Vietnam was most instructive. Since the Vietnamese language has almost no consonant groups and since syllables in Vietnamese generally end in a vowel, Vietnamese people have serious difficulty in saying a word like 'sick" and even more problems with a word like "picks", to say nothing of "sixth" and "sixths". In order to improve their accent, we worked out an extensive series of corrective devices that worked very well but that were not subjected to empirical testing. Over many years, I obtained similar, very positive results, in helping students learn the uvular 'r' sound in French. It is not a question of merely drawing attention to the 'form' of the mouth, but rather a process of providing students with exercises that allow them, step by step, to acquire the muscular skill they need in order to pronounce the words correctly. This process recognizes that language is a 'skill' -- like tennis or piano playing -- and that the required muscular skills can improve by the right kind of practice. All of this, of course, is predicated on the idea that the learners truly value an excellent accent in the language.
Gary

[Steve Kaufmann]

As I said, I do not believe in multiple intelligence. There are different skills, but I prefer to stay with the prevailing meaning of intelligence.

We have, at LingQ, short extracts which concentrate certain sounds, like consonant endings, or consonant clusters that cause trouble for speakers of certain languages. These are read slowly and at normal speed. Repetitive listening and repeating can help. Accent also has to do with attitude, the willingness to let go of one's own cultural background and project in to another.

To me the essence is to be understood.

[Gary Donovan]

Re: Multiple Intelligences revised

Upon review, it seems to me that it is preferable, as you say, to use the word 'abilities'. Gardner's analyses then work out as follows and can have some use in the area of learning language, especially for those who do extensive work in the field.

My comment:
As a teacher of language and as an observer of my own language learning over a very long period, I sought out a convenient shorthand to refer to very different learning capacities of myself and my students and was content to use the term 'intelligences'. At the same time, I was always very skeptical of the concept of 'general intelligence' or I.Q., since people with a high IQ often did not and do not manifest ability to adapt to a wide variety of situations. If we talk about Gardner's eight categories and use words such as ability or competence or capacity, or natural potential we get the following:

1). Linguistic ability/competence/capacity ("word smart"):

2). Logical-mathematical ability/competence/capacity ("number/reasoning smart")

3). Spatial ability/competence/capacity ("picture smart")

4). Bodily-Kinesthetic ability/competence/capacity ("body smart")

5). Musical ability/competence/capacity ("music smart")

6). Interpersonal ability/competence/capacity ("people smart")

7). Intrapersonal ability/competence/capacity ("self smart")

8) Naturalist ability/competence/capacity ("nature smart")

In language learning some of these probably require further refinement. In 5) for example the ability to carry a tune seems to be very different from the ability to recognize and use different rhythmic and intonational patterns in a language.

In my own language learning, I tend to use four of the above and be extremely poor at two of them.

Based on past experience, people often have a very negative view of their own language learning since they have had little success in activities they were asked to do in which they do not have any natural or learned ability. In this case, the first thing to change is the activity itself.

When people try to teach me a language by having me sing songs in the language, I find the activity counterproductive. A friend of mine is exactly the opposite. On the other hand, I very much like memorizing fixed passages such as poetry or parts of a play in learning a language -- some people do not.

Having reviewed some of the literature on the field of 'intelligence', it seems, as you suggest, that the choice of the word 'intelligence' is not the best word when we talk about abilities required or useful in language learning. However, it can be beneficial for learners to find the best methods that suit their own ability mix. The eight areas identified by Gardner can be used as a starting point to better understand ourselves and our own language learning styles.
Gary

[Steve Kaufmann]

I have to admit that I have no interest in this theory. I consider it sophistry, confusion which does not explain anything to the non-initiated. No value. Sorry.

[Gary Donovan]

It is surprising that you consider this discussion to be 'for the non-initiated'. I would have thought that our purpose was to become initiated. As any individual acquires one or more languages, he or she becomes initiated. Those who have studied the literature and those who have used different techniques can share their ideas, experiences and analyses with others. Are you proposing that those who are 'inititated' reserve for themselves the 'right to know' and avoid giving information to the non-initiated?

What then is sophistry in the above? Is it the attempt to understand which types of inherent abilities assist the learners in different ways. {Students who have a very high level of ability in hearing and identifying notes seem to do well at learning a tone language like Tsuu'tina. If our research, testing and methods do not take account of the varied natural abilities of the learners, of what use is the research? These 'abilities' would also include the mother tongue of the learner compared to the language being learned}.

My suggestion is that our research needs to be more refined. As an interpreter/translator working for a period of time with the Legislative Assembly in the North West Territories evaluating language programs in NWT, it became clear to me that we need better and more fine-tuned research that takes account of L2 languages that are 'very unlike the language or languages of the learners". If we are to use ideas given to us by other language learners and/or make use of ideas demonstrated in research, it is crucial that we make fine distinctions. Unless of course one believes that the research itself is 'sophistry'.

[Steve Kaufmann]

I do not believe that this theory is true, nor that it has any relevance for learning or teaching.

[Ahsan Rashid]

I speak five languages and can tell you that reading is far more effective than all other approaches put together. Reading leads to retention and retention leads to recalling. Speaking is all about recalling the right words at right time in their proper order. I personally thing that reading is not promoted in foreign language learning because of some vested interests.