Did the Listening-Reading method work for you?

General discussion about learning languages
Online
User avatar
jeff_lindqvist
Black Belt - 3rd Dan
Posts: 3135
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2015 9:52 pm
Languages: sv, en
de, es
ga, eo
---
fi, yue, ro, tp, cy, kw, pt, sk
Language Log: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=2773
x 10462

Re: Did the Listening-Reading method work for you?

Postby jeff_lindqvist » Tue Aug 17, 2021 1:01 pm

This forum isn't mentioned on that page. Is the lady in the top-right corner is the same person we're talking about? Somehow I doubt it. There is a reference to Phi-Staszek on the page (one of many aliases used). Interestingly enough - HTLAL is called "How Do I Learn Any Language".

"With the commitment of 20 minutes a day(...)"

That doesn't sound like siomotteikiru.
3 x
Leabhair/Greannáin léite as Gaeilge: 9 / 18
Ar an seastán oíche: Oileán an Órchiste
Duolingo - finished trees: sp/ga/de/fr/pt/it
Finnish with extra pain : 100 / 100

Llorg Blog - Wiki - Discord

jeffers
Blue Belt
Posts: 848
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 4:12 pm
Location: UK
Languages: Speaks: English (N), Hindi (A2-B1)

Learning: The above, plus French (A2-B1), German (A1), Ancient Greek (?), Sanskrit (beginner)
Language Log: https://forum.language-learners.org/vie ... 15&t=19785
x 2774
Contact:

Re: Did the Listening-Reading method work for you?

Postby jeffers » Tue Aug 17, 2021 2:00 pm

german2k01 wrote:
Le Baron wrote:
german2k01 wrote:On topic, I understood a lot of words through L-R but passively. Not every word I can recall from memory. The mere fact that my mind could recall a specific word from the book and used it correctly in a totally different situation in a spontaneous conversation was commendable. But yeah going through "The trial" in four days and understanding everything in German both spoken and written is going "over the top".

For all its worth, I enjoyed the method because a) I can understand the book and enjoy it even though If I try reading it without any crutch I may struggle and not even end up reading the book. That is a plus point for me. However, how much this language gets acquired is kind of debatable. I have no definite opinions about this.


I may be mistaken, but wasn't it that you wanted to have speaking proficiency in your target language? Or am I confusing you with someone else from LingQ? Since you're actually in Germany you have a golden situation in front of you and it may well be that excessive book-bound stuff (though every learner needs some book work) is making you good at that rather than good at functional German.

I don't know if I'll be shot down or what for saying it, but the very best thing you can do is just talk with German people, day-in, day-out. Any ordinary course method provides a springboard for that. I realise the pandemic has slowed all that down, but now is the time!


One thing I have observed is that I can spit out what I have acquired. I still do not know how to express certain things whether due to a lack of vocabulary or a lack of grammar knowledge. Whatever little I spoke I acquired through watching movies and reading books which is not much, to be honest. I still feel I have to keep getting more inputs. I always get this advice "since you are living in Germany keep talking with local Germans." I mean how? I tried speaking but I feel that my brain has not still known how to express certain things in the German language.


Perhaps you should give Benny Lewis' methods a try, since you are in the country. From what I understand, he begins with a standard tourist phrasebook, learns something from it and then goes out and practices that thing. So for example, learn how to order a coffee and cake, how to ask how much it is, and a few related things, then go to a cafe and use it. Or, since you have access to some older people to speak to, figure out some questions you'd like to ask them, figure out how to ask them the questions in German, and then go and ask them the questions. Build it up a bit at a time.

And when they ask you a question you don't know how to answer, tell them "I will tell you tomorrow", and then figure it out when you have the chance.

The problem (well, one problem) with L-R is that it is much too broad for day to day conversational situations.
1 x
Le mieux est l'ennemi du bien (roughly, the perfect is the enemy of the good)

French SC Books: 0 / 5000 (0/5000 pp)
French SC Films: 0 / 9000 (0/9000 mins)

User avatar
luke
Brown Belt
Posts: 1243
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2015 9:09 pm
Languages: English (N). Spanish (intermediate), Esperanto (B1), French (intermediate but rusting)
Language Log: https://forum.language-learners.org/vie ... 15&t=16948
x 3631

Re: Did the Listening-Reading method work for you?

Postby luke » Tue Aug 17, 2021 2:20 pm

Found a document that I think is by the originator and asked Professor Google to translate.

http://users.bestweb.net/~siom/martian_ ... adamia.pdf

I've retranslated, reformatted, reworded freely in this "quote".

This is the part I found on "how long will I have to study using this method"? This was not selected as a polemic, only trying to make sense of the original author of the system. Some of this new information for me.

google.translate+luke wrote:12. Workload
Each skill (listening, reading, speaking, writing) requires an incubation period during which the right amount of data must be delivered to the brain. During this period, efficiency does not seem to increase, a person feels uncertainly - keep working!

The periods for individual efficiency are as follows (average values):
a. Understanding texts by ear: You will understand texts with a given level of difficulty in a natural way (based on what you already know with the help of your ears). Listen to about 20-30 hours of the recording doing "listening-reading". This is the length of recorded texts, not the number of working hours.

b. Pronunciation: You will be able to correctly repeat every recorded word and short sentences behind the tape - 30-40 hours of
exercises for phonemic hearing and base (speaking, movements of speech organs).

c. Speaking: You will be able to speak correctly at a given difficulty level if:
1. you pass the incubation period in listening
2. you learn pronunciation
3. you repeat after the tape, recite, re-translate and tear it apart
3 to 5 hours of recorded text at this level.

All three periods are approximately 200-250 hours of work, provided:
You work in accordance with the "Study Plan" page and "A few remarks on learning"
You meet the conditions on the "We assume" card
You do not have any bad habits.

The more difficult texts you bring to the workshop from the very beginning of learning (preferably a novel with full cover), the faster you will use a language at a higher level of proficiency. The longer the texts for "Listening-reading", the better - because of the idiolect of the author.

Probably need to translate "Study Plan", "A few remarks on learning" and "We assume" as well.

The text appears to be associated with a workshop. Pronunciation seems to be handled independently of what we typically refer to as "Listen-Reading". In other postings, she talked about "minimal pairs", etc. We can't get that from a novel. The author might be referred to as "Staszek-Phi-Staszek" from the copyright and a "makes you aware" promise ;)

Will close this with one other tiny quote from the first page:
1. Physiological learning conditions:
Sleep, health, relax. See: "The path of health, or Hygiene"

If sleep deprivation comes up in that section, I'll be surprised.

I'm sure others have already done this "translate" thing, but for me it's helpful.

I'm just using "she" out of convenience, based on some pseudonyms and stuff "she" said :)
5 x

User avatar
Le Baron
Black Belt - 3rd Dan
Posts: 3511
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2021 5:14 pm
Location: Koude kikkerland
Languages: English (N), fr, nl, de, eo, Sranantongo,
Maintaining: es, swahili.
Language Log: https://forum.language-learners.org/vie ... 15&t=18796
x 9389

Re: Did the Listening-Reading method work for you?

Postby Le Baron » Tue Aug 17, 2021 2:52 pm

Let me preface this by stating clearly that I am in favour of reading (both fiction and non-fiction; in favour of listening; in favour of listening+reading. Like anyone else I don't know the exact mechanism behind how comprehension/understanding 'clicks' after a period of exposure and practise.

Perusing that article linked above this jumped out at me:
In her book “How I Learn Languages”, Kató Lomp, a Hungarian translator and interpreter who was fluent in 16 languages, described how she quickly expanded her vocabulary by reading foreign-language texts. She didn’t even use bilingual editions but translated unfamiliar words using a dictionary.

Who on this forum doesn't read books in their target languages, looking up unknown words? Hasn't this been the normal meat and veg of language learning since...maybe not forever, but a very long time in the history of mass literacy? This quote, placed at the top of the article as a first example is not even the special method as outlined! It's just 'reading books'! In the same way a lot of people read books even in their own languages; especially study texts.

I just read the original htlal post from that link. There's a bit more information there as to how this is approached. There are things that ring true: long-term exposure, becoming familiar with the idiolect of an author, repetition... There are, however, also some vague and doubtful claims and statements. Such as:
The key factor in learning a language is EXPOSURE, that is how much NEW text you will be able to perceive in a unit of time. There is a physical limit here, you can’t understand any faster than the text reaches your brain. That is why you ought to SIMULTANEOUSLY read the translation and listen to the original recording: that provides the fastest exposure.

Under what mechanism does exposure in this sense equate to 'the fastest exposure' (and then learning + retention)? What does it even mean? The book takes as long as it takes, a given reader's actual comprehension of it is a variable. A given reader's comprehension between two languages is a rather wild variable! The assumption here is that if you 'understand' this in one language, you will understand it in another by means of simple (and repeated) comparison. I won't knock out loads of boring examples, but I'm referring to the issue of translation versus transliteration, which is what causes the obstacle in the first place. Anyone here will know that the rendering of common phrases for introducing and linking sentences can be highly idiomatic and also they multiply according to the multifarious and unpredictable ways of constructing them. Also word choices (especially in fiction) can differ markedly from ordinary language use; including poetic license, in how they are employed and how the sentences are constructed. This will differ according to how an idea is translated. This is partly why you can't simply pick up a book you've read in another language, and even know well, and proceed to just read it in another language. Mapping these ideas between very different languages which include different ways of perceiving ideas, for cultural reasons, is also at play.

What I see missing is the element of why. The commonly-known input methodologies - Assimil, Pimsleur etc - don't just rely on stating things in two languages, they point out what is going on from a position of them knowing and you not knowing. They are likely aware that e.g: 'I was really overjoyed to see her...' could be anything from: 'J'ai vraiment ravi de la voir...' to 'J'étais fou de joie de la voir' or 'j'ai surkiffé de la voir !' So you get the standard version, plus explanations about alternatives and what you might well encounter in situ.

Translations build the same ideas differently, so very often you can go over the same thing in two languages, knowing that they express the same idea, but not knowing why, or in fact how they do so; which is crucial for being able to use it. In this respect I start to see similarities between being shown how to swim and being told how to swim - or being put into the water and saying 'now swim!'. Like those crazies who think babies have magical swimming knowledge if you just turf them into a swimming pool; yet we put fences around ponds so toddlers don't drown...
And last but not least: conversing is not learning, it is USING a language, you will NEVER be able to say more than you already know.

Yes and no. It certainly is using the language, but the idea that you must always first have this massive storehouse of input to be able to do it to any useful degree is totally without foundation. You need to know and recognise words, that's unquestionable, but you don't need to know a lot of words you'll find in literature. Almost every activity has a learning-through-doing component to it because it is generally not possible to appreciate the difference between knowing (about) something and employing it/putting it into use. A lot of what you don't know in conversation is gleaned FROM conversation and listening to what and how people say things, including both words and the many ways of constructing the language, both common and uncommon. The process runs both ways.

If anyone reading hasn't already fallen asleep, I'll sum up:

1. Reading is good. It is the source of many words and many constructions in your target language. Listening is also good for the same reasons, plus the additional factor of hearing pronunciation you can imitate.
2. Comparing a book in a target language to your native language might be like comparing your 'favourite food' to another person's 'favourite food'; the central idea is the same, but the details differ and might do so to the point of compromising the definition of 'favourite'.
3. You can accumulate a lot of input, but this does not automatically translate into being able to use it (for either reading or speaking). a given person's particular memory and ability to retain and process information will differ for various reasons.
4. The 'efficiency' claim in the methodology is unfounded, it is merely stated. It might well be applicable in particular cases, but the ability to separate this out from the gains made by other exposure and learning over time will be very complicated. I don't believe anyone starting a language and using this as the chief method will learn X language in a relatively short period and that it will be 'more efficient' (for that is the claim made).

Since I believe in putting one's money where one's mouth is, I am going to make an unscientific attempt with this method. I will acquire a target language translation of a book I know well, plus a closely-matched audio of the target translation (for I believe this is the method, correct?). Or perhaps it is the original text in the target language + audio, and a translation for me to be able to penetrate the general idea of it? Either way I will do the experiment and test several hypotheses. Mindless stubbornness in the face of positive results is not my thing. I am also in favour of easing any workloads and if I see that I am wrong in my assessment I will say so.
6 x

german2k01
Green Belt
Posts: 467
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2021 8:16 pm
Location: Germany
Languages: English, Urdu, and German
x 573

Re: Did the Listening-Reading method work for you?

Postby german2k01 » Tue Aug 17, 2021 3:06 pm

She also claims that after doing 300-400 hours of L-R the sentences were flowing out of her mouth. She also said that she did not write anything in English for 3 years yet she was writing perfectly well on forum posts all due to doing L-R. Her premise is that "input" alone will take care of speaking, reading, and writing.
0 x

User avatar
lusan
Green Belt
Posts: 463
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2015 1:25 pm
Location: Greensboro, NC, USA
Languages: Spanish(Native)
English (Naïve)
French(Intermediate)
Italian(Intermediate)
Polish(In Alcatraz)
x 985

Re: Did the Listening-Reading method work for you?

Postby lusan » Tue Aug 17, 2021 3:15 pm

german2k01 wrote:She also claims that after doing 300-400 hours of L-R the sentences were flowing out of her mouth. She also said that she did not write anything in English for 3 years yet she was writing perfectly well on forum posts all due to doing L-R. Her premise is that "input" alone will take care of speaking, reading, and writing.


Hard for me to believe that Input is a magic pill. Such a thing does not exist.
Last edited by lusan on Tue Aug 17, 2021 3:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
1 x
Italian, polish, and French dance
FSI Basic French Lessons : 10 / 24 17 of 24 goal

User avatar
luke
Brown Belt
Posts: 1243
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2015 9:09 pm
Languages: English (N). Spanish (intermediate), Esperanto (B1), French (intermediate but rusting)
Language Log: https://forum.language-learners.org/vie ... 15&t=16948
x 3631

Re: Did the Listening-Reading method work for you?

Postby luke » Tue Aug 17, 2021 3:27 pm

This is the first part of the paper with apologies to to the author, Staszek-Phi-Staszek. I understand why translators include a mea culpa with their work. I {inserted a note} here and there. My goal is to make it easier to understand without changing the original intent.

http://users.bestweb.net/~siom/martian_ ... adamia.pdf

google.translate+luke translating Staszek-Phi-Staszek wrote:Staszek-Phi-Staszek, inclined to frolic, realizes:

I. What does it mean to know the language?
II. What does it mean to learn a language?
Welcome to Republika Thought.


The following remarks are part of a larger whole and need not be understood without further explanation.
Treat them as an introductory pill (I hope not to induce sleep) to clear the mind.

Each term and point is described in more detail in other chapters, here only the quintessence.

Templates for language learning texts can be found in the "Sample materials" file or at the end of this file (same content). {not included in this post}

If you are interested in learning several languages ​​at the same time, have a look at the "! 0! Miss Daisy, sweet polyglot."

Keywords: language skills, subsystems (elements, language)
"Listening-reading", efficient operation, text, exposure, housing, incubation period, idiolect

I. What does it mean to know the language?
1. Language skills:
1. reception: understanding spoken and written texts, i.e. listening and reading
2. broadcasting: producing your own texts, i.e. speaking and writing
3. translation - requires a thorough knowledge of the foreign language and one's own language as well as the culture of both nations, as well as mastery the field of knowledge in which you want to specialize

2. Subsystems (elements, language in the narrow sense):
1st pronunciation (no pronunciation no way)
2. vocabulary
3. grammar
4. discourse (= rules for building texts)

Reception always from the content (texts) and well ahead of broadcasting;
transmitting only after learning to receive (at least listening comprehension),
because then it is easy, from elements to content (from sounds, through words and sentences to texts).

II. What does it mean to learn a language? {II is the majority of the rest of the document}
Learning a language is a trivial thing, but the whole thing is hellishly difficult, because it is called the art of living.

1. Physiological learning conditions:
Sleep, health, relax. See: "The path of health, or Hygiene" {perhaps a reference to another text - but sleep comes first}
You can write language into your brain through your eyes and ears at the same time .

2. Psychological learning conditions:
A person remembers quickly and for a long time only what he understands and what gives him joy as well and blends in with his personality.
See: "A Few Notes About Learning", "Motivation, or wanting", "Carrier wave"

3. Praxeological conditions of learning: goal, means of achieving the goal, correctness control
Efficient operation = Maxi in mini, i.e. maximum results in minimum time with minimum effort means.
See: "Time - Efficient Action" {Praxeology = The Science of Efficient Action}
Exposure = number of texts (of appropriate quality) received with understanding per unit of time.
This is the most important criterion for efficient language learning.
Best measured by: length of a recording divided by the time it took to comprehend.

4. You learn a language by receiving and imitating correct patterns (learn from masters); the best are the texts of educated native speakers (good writers, scientists, journalists) delivered by actors.

Why text?
Texts are easy to experience emotionally, easy to understand, easy to remember, easy to guess new words from context,
the most frequently used words are repeated many times in different contexts;
it is easy to understand grammar through enormous non-mechanical exposure to language,
easy to recreate, learning elements of language is much easier when we start with the content, and the content is only texts,
good text can be listened to (and read, repeat after recording, etc.) repeatedly without weariness, discovering new meanings -
and accordingly structured revision is a very important part of learning. {the same text can be used in a variety of ways to learn different aspects of the language - since it is a text that "clicks" with the student, they can use it over and over without being bored}

Because only texts contain IDIOLECT.
Idiolect. Each person has their own individual, unique language: their own pronunciation, favorite vocabulary, phrases, grammatical structures - the frequency of these are specific to that individual's writing and discourse.
In longer texts idiolect can be measured (grasped) in the first 10-20 pages, then the idiolect begins to form a pattern.

Therefore, the longer the text, the easier it is to understand the next parts. (In short texts the idiolect does not fully appear.)
At the same time, you are protected from boring reruns, the text is not a broken record, but rather a cute refrain or variations on a theme.

As you might guess, long novels are best learning.

5. Declarative knowledge (expressed in words) and
procedural knowledge (habit, correct use with minimal participation of consciousness)
Using language is both. With texts, you express the content dressed in words (declarative knowledge), but you use language elements (procedural knowledge) habitually (you don't think about sounds, intonation, meaning of words, grammar rules). {you need automaticity}

6. You already know your native language, you already have an idea about the surrounding world, people and yourself. {take advantage of what you already know}.

7. All learning must be individualized, because everyone is different and learns in his own way.
(Even if you are walking to school, if you want to be able to really know the way, you have to learn it yourself)

Having regard to the above points:
You will reach your goal most effectively (= all language skills) through the so-called "Listening-reading" of authentic texts delivered by actors.

Texts should be prepared in such a way (see "Housing") that enable independent work and correctness is controlled.

"Listening-reading" = listening to the recorded text while reading - following the translation (preferably interlinear verbatim) with the eyes and attempting to assign the meanings of the words, phrases, sentences you hear in your own head.

Try to stay ahead of the recording by reading the text in your native language with your eyes, so that you know in advance what the recorded text means. Assign meaning to the sentences and words immediately {as you hear them} without constantly pausing the recording.

It may seem daunting at first, but you will gain proficiency relatively quickly. If you read quickly with your eyes and you are skilled in learning, you shouldn't have much trouble. You can focus for a long time, you are interested in the text, the translation into your native language is quite accurate, and you are listening carefully.

Only fully recorded books are suitable for "listening-reading", unabridged (because only then can you use them to create your own {parallel} texts - you just need to find the right books).

The easiest way is to get audiobooks in English, Russian, German and French. They happen to be in other languages ​​too, but you may have serious trouble finding them.

Efficient operation ensured by {is this about creating parallel texts?}:
1. minimum time - you can't physically type {listen-read?} faster anymore. 1 hour recording = 3 hours work {first listen-read of a book may require 3 times through to get a good "I understand what the narrator is saying" feeling}
(after getting into practice and with a good translation, 1 hour of recording = 1 hour of work) {subsequent recorded books may only require one time through?}

2. feedback - self-control of correctness is possible at any time {you can make your own "course corrections" if you are getting off track}

3. Best quality and time saving study materials
See: "Housing", "Text"

The share of "listening-reading" in success (= all language skills) is at least 70%,
the next 20% is repeat after recording up to recitation, {shadowing}
the remaining 10% is for the rest of the activities.

Generally people say: I want to talk! They forget that means taking part in a conversation - a conversation mainly uses listening comprehension.

Besides, you will never learn to speak without listening and without learning your pronunciation.

(Deaf people do not speak because they cannot hear!).

Speaking means "taking" sounds, words, sentences and texts out of the brain. What will you take out if you put so little in?
You can only synchronize your tongue with your head by listening and reading - there is no other way.

The first commandment in learning to speak: Do not speak, do not read (only follow text by reading while at the same time listening to the recording), do not write until you have learned to understand freely by listening and have mastered pronunciation. And this is a commandment that is broken all the time, which is why people generally know languages ​​very poorly.

If you listen a lot and intensively, speaking will come by itself and you won't know when. {it will surprise you when it comes - you won't be forcing it}

It is best to do a "Storm" of listening: listen to a huge amount of new books, lectures and broadcasts from the radio (BBC Radio 4), by the way you will learn not only language, but also a lot of different knowledge will jump into the bowl {your skull}.

The most common mistake in learning to speak is trying speak too early, when you are not ready for it yet, when you haven't listened to a large number of texts and you haven't learned pronunciation.

Understanding written texts, i.e. reading, (at least for alphabetic languages), is trivial when you do "listening reading". For languages ​​such as Chinese or Japanese, properly structured "listening-reading" saves thousands of hours hard work, learning becomes very enjoyable and no more difficult than learning English.

There are "experts" who say that you should not use your own language when learning a foreign language. What a (not sorry) bunch of crap! Of course, this {"crap"} is spread by publishers of monolingual textbooks for "the whole world", that is for nobody (they sell, as is usual in advertising, illusions-pictures, instead of content and methods of their own work);
and teachers do the same thing, because it is in their interest to "sell" their explanations in these textbooks. The level of teacher training in modern language studies is even more sad.

Of course, your native language is only a bridge, it is mainly used to convey meanings until you learn to perceive a ({now} non) foreign language without any additional help. {natural listening}

Meaning:
1. Native language equivalent, approximates the meaning of the original.
2. The meaning becomes fully clear only after contact with a large number of texts as well as situational contexts "in life".

See: file 0010 MISS POLONIA a MR English.

A side note:
The reverse of this method has proved very effective in teaching children to read in their own language. The child listens to a text that he understands and at the same time he looks at written text. Ideally, texts should be created by the children themselves, and then written by adults in sufficiently large font and recorded and not censored. (I remember a little less than four-year-old who only wanted to read when the texts were full of "shit" and "ass", otherwise he was not at all amused. Censorship leads the child to stop trusting adults, he begins to lie and ceases to be himself.)

Children often have their favorite fairy tales, poems, etc., they can also be used successfully.

It's necessary to forget about teaching letters, for children they are completely abstract and burdensome, you should start with the content that makes them happy. It is extremely effective - a man is born as a learning machine, if he is only given freedom, is not instructed, punished, but praised and treated as an equal. It is also important for parents to read and talk to their children about the books they read with joy, otherwise the child will not be getting the right message.

Second comment in passing: The ability to read in the native language is of decisive importance in the assimilation of any knowledge. Because most people (especially young people) are not fluent in reading, "listening-reading", if done diligently, can contribute to a significant increase in language skills in one's own language, and thus in the ability to think, feel and perceive oneself and others
people and the world.

The rest of the document continues:
https://forum.language-learners.org/vie ... 51#p193451
Last edited by luke on Tue Aug 17, 2021 7:16 pm, edited 14 times in total.
4 x

german2k01
Green Belt
Posts: 467
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2021 8:16 pm
Location: Germany
Languages: English, Urdu, and German
x 573

Re: Did the Listening-Reading method work for you?

Postby german2k01 » Tue Aug 17, 2021 3:38 pm

My question is if anyone knows the answer. How many novels/books should one do L-R before "speaking" will "surprise" me automatically?
0 x

Online
User avatar
jeff_lindqvist
Black Belt - 3rd Dan
Posts: 3135
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2015 9:52 pm
Languages: sv, en
de, es
ga, eo
---
fi, yue, ro, tp, cy, kw, pt, sk
Language Log: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=2773
x 10462

Re: Did the Listening-Reading method work for you?

Postby jeff_lindqvist » Tue Aug 17, 2021 4:21 pm

I think that something like the Kafka example gives you an idea. The book should be long enough to give you a feel for the author's style, but not so long that there's no time to read it and listen to it again. Books like Anna Karenina or War and Peace are possibly too long if you want to maintain the intensity, and L-R it again. And want a broader vocabulary.

If 250-300-400 hours is what it takes, then maybe nine-ten "The Trial" books. Intensively.

Franklang, anyone?

The more intense the reading, the faster the person races ahead, the better. In this case, the more superficial, the more relaxed the manner of reading is, the better, strange as it may seem. Then the very volume of material starts to work for you; quantity turns into quality. Thus, the only thing that’s required from a reader is reading not thinking about a foreign language as something that for some reason should be learned, but thinking about the content of the book.

If you read really intensively, the method should work. The biggest mistake anyone makes when studying a foreign language is that they do it little by little, not jumping into it head first. Language is not mathematics; one doesn’t need to learn it, one needs to get accustomed to it. It’s not about logic or memory; it’s about experience and skill. It rather resembles a sport that one should practice according to a certain schedule, because otherwise there’ll be no result. If you start reading in a foreign language at once and do it a lot, then fluency is only a matter of three or four months (for beginners). If you read little by little, it’s just agonizing and slow. Language, in this sense, is akin to an icy hill – you have got to move fast if you want to get to the top of it. As long as you can’t reach the top you’ll be sliding down each time. If a person attains fluency in reading, they will never lose that skill or forget the vocabulary, even if they don't use it for several years.
5 x
Leabhair/Greannáin léite as Gaeilge: 9 / 18
Ar an seastán oíche: Oileán an Órchiste
Duolingo - finished trees: sp/ga/de/fr/pt/it
Finnish with extra pain : 100 / 100

Llorg Blog - Wiki - Discord

User avatar
Iversen
Black Belt - 4th Dan
Posts: 4768
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2015 7:36 pm
Location: Denmark
Languages: Monolingual travels in Danish, English, German, Dutch, Swedish, French, Portuguese, Spanish, Catalan, Italian, Romanian and (part time) Esperanto
Ahem, not yet: Norwegian, Afrikaans, Platt, Scots, Russian, Serbian, Bulgarian, Albanian, Greek, Latin, Irish, Indonesian and a few more...
Language Log: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1027
x 14962

Re: Did the Listening-Reading method work for you?

Postby Iversen » Tue Aug 17, 2021 5:29 pm

Le Baron wrote:(...) Who on this forum doesn't read books in their target languages, looking up unknown words? Hasn't this been the normal meat and veg of language learning since...maybe not forever, but a very long time in the history of mass literacy? This quote, placed at the top of the article as a first example is not even the special method as outlined! It's just 'reading books'! In the same way a lot of people read books even in their own languages; especially study texts.(...)


When I was new to Modern Greek I did own a few textbooks (an old TY and one in Swedish by a Mr. Mystakidis), but just a few pages into this last one I got the insane idea to learn Greek by translating a guide to Rhodos into Danish instead, only with the help of a dictionary. OK, I'm a stubborn person so I did get through it, but it was definitely too early, and I wasted a lot of time on flipping through my dictionary, which at the time was an ancient German Langenscheidt that still used the orthography from before Papadopoulos. It was a valiant effort, but probably not worth the time expenditure, and now where I can produce bilingual study texts by using machine translations of short articles I can't see the point in translating whole books - unless you do it for somebody else, of course. It would be too easy (albeit timeconsuming) to do it in my best languages and too cumbersome to do it in the weaklings.

Translating isn't reading, but when I read about Lomb Kató's way of 'reading' books in new languages with just a dictionary to help her, I feel that this task is as cumbersome as making translations - definitely not something that can be compared to reading for pleasure in a reasonably strong language.

Whether doing L-R is harder or easier probably depends on how much information you expect to pick up along the way. If you just follow the stream it can't be too hard, whereas you can make it hard if you expect to pick up single words or whole sentences, let alone grammatical patterns from the stream.
2 x


Return to “General Language Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: alaart, jeff_lindqvist, sirgregory and 2 guests