Speakeasy wrote:My memory could be failing me here, but I seem to recall the "notes to the student" of one of the FSI/DLI courses describing this phenomenon. I believe that they likened it to two adolescents who, having received a box containing a disassembled bicycle, approached the problem of assembling and riding it. I'm working from memory here and am undoubtedly embellishing the description; however, it went something like this ...smallwhite wrote: I'm very prudent and risk-averse in every imaginable way. Even when I speak early, I only say things that I am 99.9% sure is correct (though of course I could be wrong). So me speaking early doesn't equate to me speaking incorrectly. I imagine that people who are more carefree would make more mistakes? Not just fossilised mistakes but new mistakes as well.
In the first instance, the more boisterous of the two, having no patience for reading the accompanying instructions, cobbled together a more-or-less functional machine devoid of a braking system and, satisfied with the results and, not really knowing how to ride a bicycle but having seen other people do so, simply mounted the machine and launched himself headlong into the traffic. The joy and the freedom of movement that he experienced were immeasurable! It goes without saying that he did not take the time to acquaint himself with the Rules of the Road. Nevertheless, through his numerous mishaps, near misses and accidents, he eventually learned to navigate the streets with relative-for-him efficacy, albeit with continued risk to himself, to pedestrians, and to any other small creatures that might stray into his path. It is not recorded by what manner, and at what age, this carefree (dare we say imprudent) individual left this world.
In the second instance, the decidedly more reserved of the two, ever mindful of the risks involved in piloting a vehicle, carefully unpacked the contents of the box and placed them in a very specific order on the floor. Having familiarized himself completely with the Owner's Manual, he executed several "mock" assemblies and sub-assemblies of the various components, without actually fixing them together. After several trials, and satisfied with his mastery of the concepts, he quickly assembled the bicycle as prescribed. His was a “Show Room” model ready for display. He next acquired a copy of the Rules of the Road. He familiarized himself completely with the safe operation of a bicycle, the various hand signals for indicating his intended movements, ensured that his bicycle was fitted with all of the required safety illumination et cetera and, satisfied with his newly-acquired knowledge, reported to the local Motor Vehicle Office and requested to sit a facultative exam which, despite his anxiety, he passed with flying colours. Confident of his preparation, he embarked on a programme of practical use of his self-propelled vehicle. Following a few week's practice of mounting/dismounting the machine in his parents’ garage, he ventured into the driveway where he spent an additional two weeks gliding down the sloped surface, applying the breaks at the appropriate instant, and learning to direct the machine left or right. Finally, he was ready for the road! With a view to limiting his exposure to the dangers of motor vehicle traffic, for the first two months, he circulated only in the quiet residential streets of his neighborhood. Initially, on the approach of an automobile, he would stop and curb his bicycle. Over time, his self-confidence increased and, following numerous excursions beyond his quiet neighborhood, eventually merged seamlessly with the motor vehicle traffic of his locale. Needless to say, he was never involved in even the slightest incident on the road. And he thoroughly enjoyed the entire experience! It is recorded that he left this world as he had predicted he would and, as expected, all of the necessary arrangements had already been made.
As I recall, the "notes to the student" recognized that, as individuals, we would likely fall somewhere within a broad spectrum delineated by the above opposing examples.
By the way, I am a "textbook example" of the second instance!
First of all, even if we assume that the 2nd approach is entirely effective in preventing the formation of fossilized errors, it's rather easy to see why most people choose learning styles that deviate away from it.
Most importantly , the sheer boredom. Learning a language this way, from the ground up, is extremely boring. One could say that this idea is at the crux of the grammar translation method which, although effective if stuck to, has succeeded in chasing away people from language learning because of bad experiences in school. Maintaining interest is extremely difficult because of the monotony of the work you're forced to do. It's particularly telling that even on this forum, full of largely auto didactic and experienced language learners, few people ever report going through an FSI course from beginning to end in such a systematic manner.
Also, one would have to be fully confident in one's ability to learn this way in order for it to work. Maintaining motivation is especially difficult with such an approach, even for experienced language learners. How about the vast majority of the population who have little or no experience with language learning outside the secondary school curriculum? They get given a choice - the standard grammar translation method in which they work slowly and methodically, avoiding use of the language till 'ready' or a certain charismatic Irish polyglot who offers something else - to speak as early as possible and use the language, to have fun with the language and worry less about grammar or making mistakes. It's not hard to see why people choose to be the guy in the first example and worry less about mistakes, thus running the significant risks of fossilizing mistakes.In essence, the 2nd approach would require a very special breed of person indeed. A person who is fully confident in his ability to learn a language this way, one highly disciplined and resistant to boredom, one who genuinely enjoys tinkering about with the innards of a language and doesn't mind waiting for months, even years, before getting to use the language. He must also be somewhat of a perfectionist, as he would go over each concept over and over until he masters it before moving over to the next one.
Now, even if we were all indeed FSI supermen who could start learning a language this way, it's not entirely guaranteed that we would avoid fossilized mistakes altogether. Take Random Review's observation about native speakers who still have fossilized errors, despite being native speakers. For example in English, we have the failure to distinguish between 'your' and 'you're' or between 'loose' and lose' etc One could argue, that as native speakers of a language, we pretty much start learning the written language quite formally indeed - in school. These errors must have been corrected many times indeed, over the course of a decade and a half, not counting university. Yet they still persist. These people have also taken grammar lessons in their own languages, and sometimes know precisely what the mistakes are and what the correct versions should be. However, the mistakes are made nonetheless. Drills are not a guarantee of correct usage, neither are grammar lessons and corrections.
Surely, this must suggest that the discussion is more nuanced than we think. Perhaps a lack of people adhering to grammar translation is not the only problem, or a lack of quick one-on-one error corrections, or early speaking per se or even skipped grammar lessons. Maybe it's more about the individual himself and how proactive he is to getting rid of errors, or how careful he is with speaking/writing.
Perhaps, a person who starts speaking early but very carefully may run a smaller risk of getting fossilized errors. Such a careful person would also do well in an immersion only environment as he'd self correct when his mistakes are pointed out to him, and he'd also be more likely to keep the corrections in mind when using the language.
In essence, the accumulation and subsequent retention of errors may not lie entirely on the learning style employed but also on the individual.
). It seemed silly at first and just made them laugh at the time, but I've recently spoken to them again, and they say they amazingly never made that error again, and it was all largely down to this amusing image that helped them flag the scenario.
