Memorization and You

[William Camden]

I do believe that there are differences between learners, but not necessarily in a way that follows the diagrams set up by pedagogical gurus. I'm willing to believe that these differences mostly are habits rather than caused by our genes, but also that some traits may have a genetic basis or be caused by random influences during pregnancy or whatever. I can see from people I have worked with that they have different preferencies, but why it is like that is a mystery. It is nevertheless relevant to ask how stable such preferencies are, and what happens if you try to force them or lure them to do things differently.

Take for instance wordlists. For me it is a pleasure to do them, and when I read something in a language where I have done them I can recognize many of the words I understand from my lists so I know that the method works - at least for me. I have even made statistical analyses of my learning where I could measure the effect of doing those lists. On the other hand there are excellent language learners who don't use them and who probably would fall asleep or get severely restless if they tried. Instead they claim they learn while doing conversations or reading novels. Maybe we could be forced to change our habits, but so far I haven't seen any scientific proof that you learn better with a method you hate with a vengeance than with one that suits your current set of habits (or whatever you call them).

This doesn't mean that you ONLY should learn using one method. It is unlikely that there only is one pathway into your brain, and getting your input in several different ways should logically be better than just getting it in one way. For instance I know that my wordlists are efficient when it comes to extending my passive vocabulary, but I also know that I need more than wordlists to make those words active - like for instance thinking silently in a language or writing messsages in my log thread or doing L1 -> L2 translations. But what would happen if somebody tried to force me to do chorusing or classroom style acting? Well, I would hate it, and I would not even want to learn anything from such activities.

So I definitely have a learning style, but it is an open question whether it is caused by my genes, by early experiences with people who tried to make me conform or just from my circumstances in general here and now. And even though I recognize that some of systems set up by learning style protagonists sound plausible I also have found things where they simply don't function properly in my case. For instance one of the systems sorts people into those that focus on details and those that prefer dealing with systems and generalizations. For me that's absurd - I focus on details all the time, but when I do so I have constantly some kind of system in my mind where I try to make those details fit. The distinction is rotten in itself, and it would be a surprise if the use of it could give results that would survive a scientific test.

The basic problem with tests on learning styles is that the usual system with a control group and double blind testing is hard to use on something as complicated and all-encompassing as language learning, and instead the researchers study the effect of limited and concrete actions like showing people pictures of dogs while asking them to remember the word for such an odd creature.

Concerning the memorization of related notions: my experience is that you shouldn't try to learn more than maybe two or three parallel words in one go - like the words for three berries or capital cities of African nations. The main exception from this is when each word is so amply illustrated that you effectively are studying a topic instead of just memorizing words.

I tend to engage in mass memorisation of vocabulary, a process Memrise facilitates. You get a morale boost when you encounter a word you learned in reading or elsewhere. I often back Memrise up by writing new words down in notebooks and/or on Post-its. I have a plastic envelope full of the latter, mostly with Greek but also some Spanish vocabulary.

[reineke]

M is for Memorization

"What lessons can psychology teach us about second language instruction?

In a recent book on the psychology of second language acquisition, Zoltán Dörnyei (2009) draws six practical implications from current research findings, one being that instruction “should be meaning focused and personally engaging” (p.302). Nothing surprising about that, perhaps, but what about his claim that instructed SLA should incorporate an element of rote learning?

Reviewing this book in the latest ELT Journal, Steven McDonough asks “Surely he is not suggesting that learners should learn grammar rules by heart?” (McDonough, 2011, p. 195). Since I don’t yet have the book, I have no way of checking. But in an earlier work on the same subject, Dörnyei (2005) traces the history of rote learning and its relation to aptitude, starting with Carroll’s (1981) claim that language aptitude comprises four constituent abilities, one of which is “rote learning ability”. This is “the ability to learn associations between sounds and meaning rapidly and efficiently, and to retain these associations” (Carroll, 1981, p.105). Accordingly, the Modern Languages Aptitude Test (MLAT), which Carroll had a hand in, includes a rote learning component: “Students have a total of four minutes to memorize 24 Kurdish/English word pairs. Retention is tested by means of a multiple choice test…” (cited in Dörnyei, 2005, p. 37). (Easy if you’re Kurdish, of course!)

Subsequently, Skehan (1998), in his own model of language aptitude, retains an important role for memory, and notes that “memory, although traditionally associated with the acquisition of new information, is also concerned with retrieval, and with the way elements are stored… Fast-access memory systems… are what allow output to be orchestrated into fluent performance” (p.204). It’s not enough to know a lot of words, obviously. You have to be able to retrieve them, and at speed.

Skehan also reviews some case studies of exceptional language learners, and concludes: “To be exceptionally good at second or foreign language learning seems to require possession of unusual memory abilities, particularly the retention of verbal material. Exceptional L2 ability does not seem to rest upon unusual talent with a rule-based aspects of the language, but rather on a capacity to absorb very large quantities of verbal material, in such a way that they become available for actual language use” (p.221).

If memorizing large quantities of ‘verbal material’ is a characteristic of exceptional learners, can less exceptional learners be trained to get similar results?

In a fascinating study of three Chinese learners of English, all of whom were rated as having achieved a high degree of communicative proficiency, Ding (2007) tracks the role that the rote-learning of huge quantities of text played in their linguistic accomplishments. As the abstract reports, “The interviewees regarded text memorization and imitation as the most effective methods of learning English. They had been initially forced to use these methods but gradually came to appreciate them.” What they memorized, as part of their conventional schooling, were entire coursebooks (New Concept English by Louis Alexander, in one case) as well as the screenplays of whole films: “Some of them said that when they speak English, lines from movies often naturally pop out, making others think of their English as natural and fluent “. As one of the subjects reported, “through reciting those lessons, he gained mastery of many collocations, phrases, sentence patterns and other language points”.

Now I have to declare an interest here: my conviction that the role of memory – including memorization – in language learning has been sorely neglected led me to commission a title for the Cambridge Handbooks for Language Teachers (of which I’m the series editor), and I’m pleased to say that the book has just been published. It’s by Nick Bilbrough, and called Memory Activities for Language Learning. I have to say that the book has exceeded my expectations, and triumphantly fulfils its back-cover promise: “Memory Activities for Language Learning explores the cognitive processes of memory and provides a bank of activities to facilitate their development”.

I’m hoping that Nick’s book will (re-)awaken interest in the crucial role that memory plays in second language learning."

https://scottthornbury.wordpress.com/20 ... orization/

[William Camden]

I'm much more a fan of osmosis-type memorization (implicit) than the active stuff. I never drilled anything (i.e., repeated aloud or wrote repeatedly until it stuck) when learning Spanish, and I'm taking the same approach with French. So far, so good. Yeah, I'll look up words when I'd like to use them, but if I forget them a day or two later, I'll just look them up again as needed. My approach is generally to put myself in front of the language while reading or listening to the radio a lot and let things sort themselves out. There are things that I look up repeatedly (e.g., pronunciation guides for plus), but I try not to get too attached to learning whatever I see when I look them up for the rest of my life; eventually it'll sink in if I need it to.

So no, I don't have a super memory, but I have a lot more fun with my approach.

That's the approach I'm taking with Spanish, but that's *after* I had already memorized several thousand words--enough to get the gist of most stories. I'm doing the same with French--cramming the first several thousand words in the frequency dictionary until I can read independently. Then I'll move to osmosis via extensive reading and listening. But I need that base to build on first.

Learners are different but I don't think you can learn a language by osmosis alone. You need to get down those vital few thousand words first. My own methods could be called Iversen Lite, Dictionary Delirium or the Crown Of Verbal Thorns.

[reineke]

Trying to remember something can make people forget, study finds | Daily Mail ...

"The study proved that intentional recall is beyond a simple reawakening of a memory; and actually leads us to forget other competing experiences that interfere with retrieval."

"People are used to thinking of forgetting as something passive," said Dr. Michael Anderson from the University of Cambridge. "Our research reveals that people are more engaged than they realize in shaping what they remember of their lives. The idea that the very act of remembering can cause forgetting is surprising, and could tell us more about selective memory and even self-deception."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... finds.html


Retrieval induces adaptive forgetting of competing memories via cortical pattern suppression.

Abstract
"Remembering a past experience can, surprisingly, cause forgetting. Forgetting arises when other competing traces interfere with retrieval and inhibitory control mechanisms are engaged to suppress the distraction they cause. This form of forgetting is considered to be adaptive because it reduces future interference. The effect of this proposed inhibition process on competing memories has, however, never been observed, as behavioral methods are 'blind' to retrieval dynamics and neuroimaging methods have not isolated retrieval of individual memories...."

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... LDf1UaGSrg

[Voytek]

One of our very helpful and esteemed members has said

Memorisation sucks and it is boring, but once you know it, then you know it right?

But Is this what people find to be true?

When you memorize something is it as if carving in stone and it will always be there?

I am all for memorization but know that I find I need to constantly review the vocab to keep certain information at my finger tips. Is my case the exception and are all you folks able to "know it" for always once you have memorized it?

If you are able to memorize and never forget then I congratulate you. I am just curious where I stand on the continuum for this skill.

Recently I've noticed that I remember far better things which I learnt from context through exposure and looking up words without trying to remember them, than I do thanks to nailing with Anki. It's perfectly understandable to me since nailing doesn't involve any emotions (apart from frustration, I guess) while reading and listening to material you've picked does and that makes the whole difference.

[Voytek]

While you're reading a book you're looking up words due your genuine interest in their meaning and I very rarely feel the same way while rewieving flashcards with Anki.

Ultimately, we're not learning foreign languages to nail words we'll never use but to learn the most useful ones, these which will help us to understand another human being on the daily basis and will give us the tool to communicate "our inner world". I really do not need to know what does the word swarthy mean to convey anything I would want to tell you and if any of you tried to use that word while conversing with me I would kindly ask about the meaning counting on your forbearance.

[aaleks]

Recently I've noticed that I remember far better things which I learnt from context through exposure and looking up words without trying to remember them, than I do thanks to nailing with Anki.

The most of English words I know I learned from books and TV, i.e. through exposure. Frankly, I'm not a big fan of any kind of word lists

[Voytek]

Recently I've noticed that I remember far better things which I learnt from context through exposure and looking up words without trying to remember them, than I do thanks to nailing with Anki.

The most of English words I know I learned from books and TV, i.e. through exposure. Frankly, I'm not a big fan of any kind of word lists

I'm still using SRS'ing because I wanted to try a new approach to languages studying and put it into my learning routine and now I must stick to it for a while to do not waste a lot of my effort but if I start learning a new language I'll definelty don't go with it and I'll take the traditional method of learning by exposure. I've devoted about 1000 hours for creating cards and reviewing them and the results are mediocre. I guess, it's better to use duolingo or sth like that than create own decks since that is very time consuming. I've got 14000 cards in my collection and I've remembered about 10000 of them which gives 10/hour. But the main thing is that I missed a lot of fun SRS'ing instead of enjoying reading and listening to material which would have genuinely interested me.

[Lunox]

And I have some problems with memory because I'm an epileptic.

[reineke]

Boosting New Memories With Wakeful Resting

“Our findings support the view that the formation of new memories is not completed within seconds,” says Dewar. “Indeed our work demonstrates that activities that we are engaged in for the first few minutes after learning new information really affect how well we remember this information after a week.”

https://www.psychologicalscience.org/ne ... sting.html

Testing Improves Memory

"Vaughn stresses that it isn’t just testing, but successful testing—getting the answer right—that makes the difference in memory performance later on. He also admits the study leaves much to be discovered. “We know that repeated retrieval is good for memory. Testing is a modifier of memory. But we still don’t know how that works. We don’t understand the mechanism.”

https://www.psychologicalscience.org/ne ... emory.html


Why you forgot what you were just doing

Have you ever walked into a room and realized you don’t remember what you’re doing there? Yeah, us too. Well thankfully science finally explains why: It’s the doorway’s fault, a new study finds.

https://www.psychologicalscience.org/ne ... doing.html