Saim wrote:leosmith wrote:Self talk
Although I rarely do this, I understand the benefits of it, and he explains them pretty well – you can do it any time, it’s free, less stressful, etc., when compared to conversing with a human. However, I don’t feel that this is necessary if you have a human, and he seems to indicate that this is a required step to get to the point where you can talk to people, or should be used to supplement real conversations, or something like that. That’s where we disagree.
Funnily enough, Krashen believes self-talk is the product of acquisition but doesn’t accelerate it (since that would be “learning”, which can never do anything other than affect the language monitor).
Yep, and I do think Krashen's kind of the start of the mindset that leads us to this point.
Krashen's "acquisition learning distinction" kind of implies that studying means "learning", and if Krashen's point that learning doesn't work was to stand up to scrutiny, that fact that studying would only lead to learning would therefore imply it doesn't lead to language skill.
And then the corrupting logical follow-on from this appears:
If studying can't work, then by definition anything that
does work can't be studying, so we have bro science influencers in the language sphere pointing to 40-year-old papers that don't actually give any data (if they point to any papers at all) and then adding "real world experience" that disagrees with the 40-year-old paper and then twist and reanalyse so that an illogical argument sounds sensible if looked at in a totally superficial fashion -- ie. "study doesn't work; this works; therefore this isn't 'study'."