Spanish in 3 months....

[Iversen]

Speaking about memorization (not exclusively of Spanish words):

When I do wordlists I have to memorize the wordpairs in each group, and during that phase all tricks are allowed - but I mostly use sound associations based on the beginning of the words. If I have based a list directly on a dictionary the alphabetical order is part of the process, and then I may remember a word by its neighbours. Sound associations can point in two (or more) directions: towards the target language or your own (or a third language you know well), but they always have to have some semantic component. One important caveat is that you don't need to cover the whole word or find a perfect 'partner' to a foreign word - it takes time and may not always be possible, and that's why I mostly just find an association that covers the beginning of the foreign word. Etymology is also relevant, but only when you can see the connection - as between French "cheval" and Spanish "Caballo" (and add the information that both words go back to the vulgar Latin term for an old decrepit jade, "caballus").

You might think that I as an amateur some-kind-of-artist might use images a lot. I don't - I do associate to the word "cheval" while I'm thinking in French, but a moment later I'm think in Danish and then it's "hest". How can that help me to remember Czech "kůň"? And when I'm painting or drawing something then I mostly don't think in words, but in directly in images. So to memorize words my preference is .. other words.

[emk]

One important caveat is that you don't need to cover the whole word or find a perfect 'partner' to a foreign word - it takes time and may not always be possible, and that's why I mostly just find an association that covers the beginning of the foreign word.

Interesting!

So far, I've learned a lot of my base vocabulary from either Assimil or from audio cards with L2 audio, L2 text and L1 text. (Which are basically the same thing.)

For a moderately difficult word like acabar or conseguir, my major goal is (1) to know that the specific word in question exists, (2) to have some vague idea how to spell it, and (3) to have some vague idea of one meaning. Once I have that, I can recognize the specific word when reading (or sometimes listening), and I figure out what it means in that context. So the precise spelling, any irregular stems, and the detailed meaning can be refined by doing more reading or listening.

[Cainntear]

Speaking about memorization (not exclusively of Spanish words):

When I do wordlists I have to memorize the wordpairs in each group, and during that phase all tricks are allowed - but I mostly use sound associations based on the beginning of the words. If I have based a list directly on a dictionary the alphabetical order is part of the process, and then I may remember a word by its neighbours. Sound associations can point in two (or more) directions: towards the target language or your own (or a third language you know well), but they always have to have some semantic component. One important caveat is that you don't need to cover the whole word or find a perfect 'partner' to a foreign word - it takes time and may not always be possible, and that's why I mostly just find an association that covers the beginning of the foreign word. Etymology is also relevant, but only when you can see the connection - as between French "cheval" and Spanish "Caballo" (and add the information that both words go back to the vulgar Latin term for an old decrepit jade, "caballus").

Which leads to a deeper thought:

If memorised words are to become internalised, it's important that the mnemonic acts as a "recall cue" -- i.e. something that supports the spontaneous recall of the word: eg if you're trying to learn the name of stone printmaking, you might use Lithuania as a mnemonic based on the first syllable. When you go to "look up" the word in your memory, you remember that you associated it with Lithuania, and the first syllable of Lithuania is enough support to make you recall "lithography" without having to go into any further logical analysis.

"I don't understand why the pony is sitting on the mat" doesn't really do that. By picking one important feature of the word (whether like in Iversens case the beginning of the word or otherwise the stressed syllable), you are essentially memorising a list of words that theoretically give you the whole thing, but only after conscious thought. The whole process of looking up the word is laborious, cos while the image of a pony sitting on a mat could become a cue over time, the fact that your supposed to be looking for a pony sitting on a mat for "to understand" isn't a particularly easy association... as opposed to an image of an old timey Baltic printer's workshop.

Now I say "important feature", but I think Iversen's absolutely right to just go with the start of the word. How many times have you had a word "on the tip of your tongue"* and then as soon as someone says the start of the word it just jumps straight into your head? It's pretty well accepted that this is a real phenomenon that you just don't get with the middle of words.

[ * For the benefit of non-natives, you say something is "on the tip of my tongue" when you have a concept you want to say that you know you should have a word for, but you can't quite find the word. ]

You might think that I as an amateur some-kind-of-artist might use images a lot. I don't - I do associate to the word "cheval" while I'm thinking in French, but a moment later I'm think in Danish and then it's "hest". How can that help me to remember Czech "kůň"? And when I'm painting or drawing something then I mostly don't think in words, but in directly in images. So to memorize words my preference is .. other words.

I saw something in Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art that kind of blew my mind. The author pointed out that images can be iconic... and words are icons... and writing is a drawing of a word. He was (IIRC) pointing out that very cartoony images are more iconic, hence closer to words, and highly detailed images are less iconic, so more representative of a specific thing.
A photograph of me is a photograph of me, but a stick figure on a toilet door is an icon representing all men, all women, or all disabled people regardless of sex and/or gender.

[Granrey]

I'm currently in the initial months of my 2nd year of studying french of my own using multiple apps, books, podcasts etc. for at least one hour per day. Level B1/B2 depending on the test I take.

I recently started to learn portuguese as well.

I can at least say that in my current situation lacking speaking partner, not living in a society where I could use it, and without a high necessity to speak the language. I have recently realized this will take couple more years at the very least. So maybe 5 to 6 years total.

Also I realized a lot of the things people recomend and say to do, simply don't work for me.

On the good side, I owe an apology to the french people. I used to think and say they speak fast and had a very strong nasal sound (quebec). I can pretty well at the moment separate lots of the words from each other when they speak, though I don't understand much yet (25 to 50%). I don't think they speak fast anymore.

So I realized while I might know a lot of the words they are using but simply I just don't recognize them due to lack of familiarity, wrong pronunciation in my head. Then if you add the words that I don't know in the same sentence, plus idioms. Then the language is incomprehensible for me.

In regards of YouTube polyglots who motivated me to study languages based on their fake videos. I do have sweet and sour feeling for them that while they lied in how easy it was, still got me into a journey that way longer, I can at least see a light at the end.

But again, the light kind of keeps moving.....it remind me the movie graveyard of rats from Guillermo del Toro in Netflix