Memorization and You

General discussion about learning languages
Cainntear
Black Belt - 3rd Dan
Posts: 3469
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2015 11:04 am
Location: Scotland
Languages: English(N)
Advanced: French,Spanish, Scottish Gaelic
Intermediate: Italian, Catalan, Corsican
Basic: Welsh
Dabbling: Polish, Russian etc
x 8662
Contact:

Re: Memorization and You

Postby Cainntear » Mon Mar 06, 2017 8:21 am

reineke wrote:
Gianfranco Conti wrote:In a fluent foreign language learner with a sizeable vocabulary repertoire, the way words are stored in their L2 mental lexicon will be pretty much the same, except that there is another very important association, the one between an L2 word and its L1 (and L3,L4, etc.) translation(s). So the word ‘dog’ in the brain of a speaker of Italian, French and German will be connected with the words ‘chien’ , ‘cane’, hund, etc.

Consequently, when spread of activation occurs in search for the word ‘dog’ in one language, say ‘French’, all the words in the other languages will be activated too (Parallel activation theory); all languages one speaks will be activated simultaneously with different levels of activation, with the language in use being the most activated, and the weaker language(s) being the least activated.

Which is why the phrase "no translation, not even mental translation" is so dangerous. If you activate the meaning, you cannot help but activate the L1 word. Anyone learning the word meaningfully can't prevent the translation, and anyone who orevents the translation is preventing themselves from learning the meaning.

In view of the way words are organized in our brain, these may be some useful teaching strategies:

In any given lesson we ought to teach words that are as closely related as possible at semantic and grammatical level. This is often done by textbooks.

Hmmm... Isn't there a lot of evidence that introducing closely related vocabulary leads to confusion between them? Nation quotes figures from studies showing that it can take up to 50% extra time to learn vocab this way. Anecdotally, I remember doing the original SaySomethingInWelsh, and open, close, door and window were introduced and practised together. I was forever talking about shutting doors when I was supposed to be opening windows etc. What was frustrating about this was that all the words were pretty obvious to someone with my background on a conscious level (ffenest, fenêtre; drws is only a short step from door; agor is open, I was studying with the Open University -- y pryfysgol agored; and cae starts with C).
3 x

Cainntear
Black Belt - 3rd Dan
Posts: 3469
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2015 11:04 am
Location: Scotland
Languages: English(N)
Advanced: French,Spanish, Scottish Gaelic
Intermediate: Italian, Catalan, Corsican
Basic: Welsh
Dabbling: Polish, Russian etc
x 8662
Contact:

Re: Memorization and You

Postby Cainntear » Mon Mar 06, 2017 8:27 am

Iversen wrote:But there is a basic flaw in this argument, namely that it doesn't matter where the picture comes from or whether the learner can relate to it - so in principle any picture of a dog should help visual learners to remember the word "canis" in Latin. But in my experience the imagery that really supports memorizing has to be either chosen by the learner him/herself or at least occur in some natural setting - such as in a shop, where you learn the name of a fish while looking at it (or a restaurant where you eat it). If the picture is just forced upon you it will become 'a thing more to remember'.

I think you're talking about something different from the study, though. The study wanted to look at the use of the visual channel. Once the learner starts engaging in creating their own imagery, there's a far more complex and involved process going on than just "using the visual channel", so you wouldn't prove anything about a visual learning style that way.
1 x

User avatar
reineke
Black Belt - 3rd Dan
Posts: 3570
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 7:34 pm
Languages: Fox (C4)
Language Log: https://forum.language-learners.org/vie ... =15&t=6979
x 6554

Re: Memorization and You

Postby reineke » Mon Mar 06, 2017 1:37 pm

Cainntear wrote:
reineke wrote:
Gianfranco Conti wrote:In a fluent foreign language learner with a sizeable vocabulary repertoire, the way words are stored in their L2 mental lexicon will be pretty much the same, except that there is another very important association, the one between an L2 word and its L1 (and L3,L4, etc.) translation(s). So the word ‘dog’ in the brain of a speaker of Italian, French and German will be connected with the words ‘chien’ , ‘cane’, hund, etc.

Consequently, when spread of activation occurs in search for the word ‘dog’ in one language, say ‘French’, all the words in the other languages will be activated too (Parallel activation theory); all languages one speaks will be activated simultaneously with different levels of activation, with the language in use being the most activated, and the weaker language(s) being the least activated.

Which is why the phrase "no translation, not even mental translation" is so dangerous. If you activate the meaning, you cannot help but activate the L1 word. Anyone learning the word meaningfully can't prevent the translation, and anyone who orevents the translation is preventing themselves from learning the meaning.

In view of the way words are organized in our brain, these may be some useful teaching strategies:

In any given lesson we ought to teach words that are as closely related as possible at semantic and grammatical level. This is often done by textbooks.

Hmmm... Isn't there a lot of evidence that introducing closely related vocabulary leads to confusion between them? Nation quotes figures from studies showing that it can take up to 50% extra time to learn vocab this way. Anecdotally, I remember doing the original SaySomethingInWelsh, and open, close, door and window were introduced and practised together. I was forever talking about shutting doors when I was supposed to be opening windows etc. What was frustrating about this was that all the words were pretty obvious to someone with my background on a conscious level (ffenest, fenêtre; drws is only a short step from door;...


Activation is different from deliberate translation, though. A L2 word will activate L1,, L3, L4..... Having said that, my favorite dictionaries (when I use them) are bilingual ones.

Regarding related vocabulary etc.:

Conti:

"1) teach the target words as contextualized in as wide as possible a range of written or aural comprehensible input which models the target vocabulary (e.g. narrow reading and listening). This can be done even with beginners, provided that the texts used are short and accessible. This is the most important part of teaching vocabulary as it models how words relate to and combine with each other in the target language;"

https://gianfrancoconti.wordpress.com/2 ... struction/

See also:
How many new words should you teach per lesson?

"Why the title question is the wrong question to ask yourself

In deciding how many words to teach per lesson one has to take into account a number of contextual factors which play a decisive role in vocabulary acquisition and, more importantly, the depth and range of one’s learning intentions.

Knowing a word entails knowing many things about the word: its literal meaning, its various connotations, its spelling, its derivations, collocations (knowing the words that usually co-occur with the target word), frequency, pronunciation, the syntactic constructions it is used in, the morphological options it offers and a rich variety of semantic associates such as synonyms, antonyms, homonyms (Nagy and Scott, 2000). How deep one intends to go will entail spending more time hence teaching fewer words.

Receptive vs Productive knowledge – as Nation (1990) notes vocabulary items in the learners’ receptive vocabulary might not be readily available for productive purposes, since vocabulary reception does not guarantee production.

"Deep processing includes activities such as: establishing association within new and old words, categorizing them; finding opposites and synonyms; writing the definition; inferencing their meanings from context; creating mnemonics to enhance future recall); odd one out; etc. Shallow processing involves little cognitive effort (e.g. learning by repeating aloud;"

"...words are never used in isolation and not simply in two or three sentences learned by rote. Moreover, acquiring a vocabulary item takes weeks and in certain cases even months of practice in context."

https://gianfrancoconti.wordpress.com/c ... -teaching/

Nation:

"Is it good to learn related words together?
Although it seems like a good idea to learn related words at the same time, whether it is helpful or not depends on the relationship between them. Words like near synonyms (embarrass-humiliate, prevent-protect), opposites (hot-cold, long-short), and members of a lexical set (days of the week, colours, the names of fruit, articles of clothing, parts of the body) are best not learned together. The effect of learning them together is so strong that it can make learning 50% to 100% more difficult. Being 100% more difficult means that it would take twice as many repetitions to learn these words compared to learning unrelated words. It has been suggested that where the related words are nouns, objects which are nearer to each other in shape, apple-orange, are more likely to interfere than objects which are different in shape, banana-orange.

The relationship that helps learning is where the words are related as if in a story (frog, pond, green, slimy, hop, croak). So, it is a good idea to note words from your reading onto word cards as these words are unlikely to be members of the same lexical set.


When learning items that are similar to each other there is not only the difficulty of learning the items but also the difficulty of not mixing them up with each other. If the words also have some formal similarities this can make interference even more likely. We are more likely to confuse Tuesday and Thursday than Tuesday and Sunday because Tuesday and Thursday begin with the same letter and both contain s and day. The way to reduce the effects of interference is to learn possibly interfering items at different times, not together."

Paul Nation
What you need to know to learn a foreign language
http://www.victoria.ac.nz/lals/about/st ... e_1125.pdf
Last edited by reineke on Tue Mar 07, 2017 9:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
1 x

User avatar
reineke
Black Belt - 3rd Dan
Posts: 3570
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 7:34 pm
Languages: Fox (C4)
Language Log: https://forum.language-learners.org/vie ... =15&t=6979
x 6554

Re: Memorization and You

Postby reineke » Mon Mar 06, 2017 2:09 pm

Continued...

"The more morphological (e.g. prefix, suffixes) and syntactic patterns (rather than grammar rules) you teach your students the greater the chances for them to learn new words by ‘hooking’ them to those patterns. This process, known as ‘chunking’ happens in the brain at incredibly high speed in L1 acquisition and plays a crucial role in L2 vocabulary acquisition; hence, the more automatized the ability to recognize those patterns in aural and written input will be in your students, the more likely they will be to learn more words in your lessons.

Word awareness refers to a learner’s ability to ‘unpack’ the way words work both in relation to other words (synonyms, antonyms, collocations, etc.), their word class (adjectives, nouns, etc.) and how they are formed (prefixes, suffixes, etymology, similarities with mother tongue words, etc.). Word awareness promotes chunking, hence, acquisition.

Not all students have the same ability to learn vocabulary. Students who are low in any of the crucial components of language aptitude, especially Working Memory span and Phonemic sensitivity will be particularly disadvantaged ..

Motivation is obviously another crucial factor. I am not going to discuss it as it is beyond the scope of this post. It will suffice to say that motivation enhances cognitive and affective arousal which in turns increases Working Memory span and the chances to memorize words. Hence, the more fun and relevant to your students’ lives and interests your vocabulary teaching is, the more words you will be able to teach effectively."

https://gianfrancoconti.wordpress.com/c ... -teaching/

But what about self-directed learners?

"Personalizing one’s learning experience pays enormous dividends as it involves more cognitive and affective involvement on the part of the learner. But when the learner draws entirely on her cognitive and emotional resources without the help of specialised websites, her effort and investment are likely to be even greater as she is being totally self-directed in her language learning management, without following a pre-determined instructional path dictated by others."

12 tips for self-directed vocabulary learning

Word activation in context
If you do not process receptively or use a word/phrase within the first week of learning it is likely to be lost for ever. Hence, try and use it as often as you can. The best way would be with native speakers in face-to-face or phone conversations or online chat. What I used to do when no native speaker was available, was to make up meaningful sentences using the new words – as many as possible – then get a native speaker or one of my teachers to give me some feedback.

To keep the memory trace of the new words alive and kicking over the weeks and months to come until it is fully acquired, you will need to practise over and over again at spaced intervals. Read the next point.

Be mindful or memory decay

As you can see from the curve of forgetting rate below, the time where most of the forgetting occurs is within the first 24 hours from first processing it. Hence, this is when most of the memorization work has to be done; use as many of the above strategies as you can! During the remainder of the first week you should go over the target words over and over again, a few minutes for word-set. Better a few minutes per day than one hour once a week."

Get the pronunciation of the word as close to right as possible from the beginning

Words are activated in the brain by their sound, even when we are processing them silently, as we read. This entails that we must try and get their pronunciation right from day one or you may confuse them in the future with other words that sound similar with harmful consequence for your processing ability even for reading comprehension!"

Follow the link to learn more:

https://gianfrancoconti.wordpress.com/2 ... -learning/
1 x

Cainntear
Black Belt - 3rd Dan
Posts: 3469
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2015 11:04 am
Location: Scotland
Languages: English(N)
Advanced: French,Spanish, Scottish Gaelic
Intermediate: Italian, Catalan, Corsican
Basic: Welsh
Dabbling: Polish, Russian etc
x 8662
Contact:

Re: Memorization and You

Postby Cainntear » Mon Mar 06, 2017 10:16 pm

reineke wrote:Nation:
The relationship that helps learning is where the words are related as if in a story (frog, pond, green, slimy, hop, croak). So, it is a good idea to note words from your reading onto word cards as these words are unlikely to be members of the same lexical set.


When learning items that are similar to each other there is not only the difficulty of learning the items but also the difficulty of not mixing them up with each other. If the words also have some formal similarities this can make interference even more likely. We are more likely to confuse Tuesday and Thursday than Tuesday and Sunday because Tuesday and Thursday begin with the same letter and both contain s and day. The way to reduce the effects of interference is to learn possibly interfering items at different times, not together."

Exactly -- and that's a far cry from Conti's words quoted earlier:
In any given lesson we ought to teach words that are as closely related as possible at semantic and grammatical level. This is often done by textbooks.

When we look at words telling a story, they sit across the full spread of grammatical categories, and while they have certain shared semantics and connotations, they're certainly not "as closely related as possible".

Notice that the best Assimil books have always done what Nation advises.
0 x

yong321
Orange Belt
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 12:42 am
Location: Texas
Languages: English, Chinese. Spanish, French, Italian, German, reading comprehension only.
Language Log: http://yong321.freeshell.org/misc.html#lang
x 140
Contact:

Re: Memorization and You

Postby yong321 » Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:40 am

Whether remembering two similar words strengthens memory or causes confusion is an issue I've been thinking of for a long time. I think we need to distinguish two types of study habits here. If repeated drills are the primary method, there will be more benefit in separating the learning of similar words in order to avoid confusion. If on the other hand slow learning and word analysis are practiced, it often helps to learn similar words together and pay great attention to the small differences between the words. The latter method is incompatible with fluency, in the sense that after years of study, the similarity of the words should be subconsciously dissolved and which word is preferred in what context comes to mind naturally with no or very little word analysis.
0 x

William Camden
Green Belt
Posts: 384
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2015 2:47 am
Location: Greenwich Mean Time zone
Languages: English (N), German (fluent), Turkish (fluent), Russian (fluent), French (semi-fluent), Spanish (semi-fluent), am studying Polish, have some knowledge of it, also studying modern Greek, basic knowledge of Arabic (mostly MSA, some exposure to colloquial dialects), basic knowledge of Latin and Italian, beginner in Scottish Gaelic.
x 476

Re: Memorization and You

Postby William Camden » Tue Mar 07, 2017 8:42 am

William Camden wrote:
reineke wrote:We don't date or otherwise see each other. She's unfaithful and dumb.

"Einstein’s memory was notoriously poor. He was unable to remember dates and could not remember his own phone number. As a student, one of his teachers claimed that he had a memory like a sieve. Once when he was traveling on a train, the conductor approached to collect his ticket. Einstein began searching his pockets, but the conductor recognized him and said he could ride for free. Einstein responded, “Thank you, but if I don’t find my ticket I won’t know where to get off the train.”

"A reporter interviewed Albert Einstein. At the end of the interview, the reporter asked if he could have Einstein's phone number so he could call if he had further questions.

“Certainly” replied Einstein. He picked up the phone directory and looked up his phone number, then wrote it on a slip of paper and handed it to the reporter.

Dumbfounded, the reporter said, "You are considered to be the smartest man in the world and you can't remember your own phone number?”

Einstein replied, “Why should I memorize something when I know where to find it?”

I am glad we share at least some traits.

Einstein learned English in his fifties and he also spoke French in addition to his native German. Apparently he could also lecture in Italian. I am getting some conflicting information about his French as some online sources are referring to his low grade in school French. No, he did not fail math.

There's a book called "Einstein Never Used Flashcards: How Our Children Really Learn--and Why They Need to Play More and Memorize Less".

I'm curious if anyone has read this book.


I can't be bothered trying to link to it, but there is a famous photo of Einstein in his office towards the end of his life. The photographer was trying to get a picture of the great man in the process of thought, and he finally succeeded when Einstein was trying for a moment to remember where he had put something - a book or journal.
2 x
: 4321 / 4321Greek Memrise

User avatar
reineke
Black Belt - 3rd Dan
Posts: 3570
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 7:34 pm
Languages: Fox (C4)
Language Log: https://forum.language-learners.org/vie ... =15&t=6979
x 6554

Re: Memorization and You

Postby reineke » Tue Mar 07, 2017 6:50 pm

Cainntear wrote:
Iversen wrote:But there is a basic flaw in this argument, namely that it doesn't matter where the picture comes from or whether the learner can relate to it - so in principle any picture of a dog should help visual learners to remember the word "canis" in Latin. But in my experience the imagery that really supports memorizing has to be either chosen by the learner him/herself or at least occur in some natural setting - such as in a shop, where you learn the name of a fish while looking at it (or a restaurant where you eat it). If the picture is just forced upon you it will become 'a thing more to remember'.

I think you're talking about something different from the study, though. The study wanted to look at the use of the visual channel. Once the learner starts engaging in creating their own imagery, there's a far more complex and involved process going on than just "using the visual channel", so you wouldn't prove anything about a visual learning style that way.


"In recent years, foreign language education has been focussing on learning styles. However, despite the quantity of articles and practice books, websites on the topic, and investment in teacher training, there is no empirical evidence for the existence of learning styles. Furthermore, if one agrees that it is the brain that learns, there should be indicators in the brain for the existence of learning styles, anatomically, and/or functionally. This is not the case. In this paper, the validity and reliability of tests assessing learning styles are questioned. Thereafter, following on basics of cognitive neuroscience and experimental evidence it is argued that the natural way for the brain to learn words is by collecting multiple sensory and sensorimotor experiences. In fact, evidence-based literature in the domain of vocabulary acquisition demonstrates that the inclusion of multiple modalities leads to best results. Impoverished linguistic input by allowing only one modality, for example only acoustic or visual input—the so called learning style (Pashler et al., 2008) of the student—reduces the chances of acquiring words. Also, the article briefly outlines brain related factors that lead to high performance in vocabulary learning.

A closer look at the literature on learning styles shows a multitude of models that classify learners in different types. Despite differences (for reviews see Pashler et al., 2008; Romanelli et al., 2009; Kaminska, 2014), learning style models have a common base: they sustain that not all individuals learn the same way. One of them, the VARK model (Fleming, 2001), categorizes learners as aural, visual, kinaesthetic, haptic, and learners who prefer to read and write. In second language instruction, this view implicates that a person classified as aural should learn vocabulary items by means of acoustic training, whereas a visual learner would optimize the learning outcome by reading and/or using flash cards that illustrate the word's semantics. However, despite being very popular, this position is not evidence-based. It is simply taken for granted with the intention to promote the learners' capacities. Also, it is not proven that assessments administered to determine the learning style to which a person belongs are valid and reliable. Nobody has proven that they measure what they claim. One major issue connected to these tests is that they are based on self-report. It has been suggested that in self-reports, subjects might lack introspection and that yes or no answers on personal experiences may not mirror reality (Paulhus and Vazire, 2007; Vazire and Solomon, 2015). Furthermore, there is an additional aspect to consider: tests on learning styles—supposed they were valid and reliable—might tell how a learner likes to acquire information on a conscious level. However, this does not automatically imply that preference leads to best learning outcome. In Western countries, L2 instructions make large use of listening activities, reading and writing exercises for vocabulary learning. These procedures are well-known to learners. When asked, learners may indicate them as preferences due to familiarity. Also, learners might not be informed about other possibilities of acquiring vocabulary and/or have not tested them. For example, learners might not know that performing gestures while learning words enhances retention compared with audio-visual learning (Macedonia, 2014). Hence, in order to define whether learners might acquire L2 words with one or another modality better, a large population should be tested in all modalities at different points in time. Testing should occur with vocabulary items that are controlled for familiarity, length, and associative features. If the population proves to repeatedly learn vocabulary items with visual input better than with aural or kinaesthetic and haptic input, then this population might have a learning style and the test would be valid. But such studies have yet to be conducted. Reviews on learning styles often come to the insight that best practice employs a variety of learning styles (Romanelli et al., 2009). However, despite the arguments above and the lack of a scientific basis, practitioners take learning styles seriously. In L2 lessons, teachers endeavor to offer “individualized” learning tools with the intention to augment learning outcomes in vocabulary acquisition.

Considering that it is the brain that learns, it is worth asking what happens at this level during word learning in L2. On average, if learners display no congenital or acquired neurological impairments, they should possess similar learning potentials. Billions of neurons process and store the incoming information in large networks. They include areas of the brain that deal with language (Friederici, 2011), cognitive control (Abutalebi, 2008), semantic processing (Binder et al., 2009; Binder and Desai, 2011) and multisensory integration (Seghier, 2012), memory (McClelland et al., 1995), and with stimulus specific regions as illustrated in Figure 1.

At the processing level, if learners hear the German word Himbeer Engl. raspberry and read it, their auditory cortices will analyse and store the sounds (Dubois et al., 2013). Their left fusiform gyrus will process the letter sequence and memorize it (McCandliss et al., 2003). If the learners are additionally presented a real fruit, a multitude of stimuli will reach their brains. Smelling will engage the piriform cortex (González et al., 2006) and tasting, the anterior insula (Barros-Loscertales et al., 2012)—a gustatory area. Manipulating the raspberry and its pulp will create patterns of the texture in somatosensory regions (Sathian et al., 2011) and the motor cortex will store movement patterns necessary to grasp and hold the fruit (Hauk et al., 2004). Writing the word Himbeere and/or drawing the fruit will activate visual and motor regions (Yuan and Brown, 2015). Hence, the concept of the raspberry, and its German label Himbeere will be represented in the brain with large experience dependent sensorimotor networks (Pulvermüller and Fadiga, 2010).

Most interesting for educators is the fact that the more complex brain networks are, the better they retain words (McClelland, 1985; Klimesch, 1994). A word network consisting of many components, i.e., visual, aural, kinetic, olfactory, etc. (Figure 1) stores and retrieves information more efficiently than a small network. If a component decays, for instance the sound sequence of the word, other components partially containing the lost information will restore it (Macedonia and Klimesch, 2014). This is due to the fact that all components of a network share and exchange information. Interestingly, behavioral memory research has been asserting for decades that word retention in L1 is impacted by the richness of stimuli accompanying the word (Craik and Tulving, 1975; Engelkamp and Zimmer, 1994). However, these findings have not reached L2 education and could not have an impact on procedures and methods..

In a recent study, Mayer et al. (2015) compared the memory performance for words in L2 that had been learned according to three conditions: by reading only, by reading and enriching them through pictures, and by reading and performing semantically related gestures. Words that had only been read scored worst, whereas words learned with gestures scored best particularly in the long term. Results are no surprise: observing and thereafter self-performing a gesture requires more complex processing than observing a static picture. Altogether, empirical research on word learning demonstrates that enrichment of verbal information is key to word retention in L2 (Takashima et al., 2014) and to learning altogether (Shimojo and Shams, 2001; Seitz et al., 2006; Shams and Seitz, 2008; Thelen and Murray, 2013). Moreover, if one observes children while acquiring words in their L1, one will agree that they do not learn only acoustically or only visually. Instead, children collect multiple sensorimotor experiences related to words. Hence, it stands to reason that in L2 lessons “learning style specific” input, i.e., only acoustic or only visual, can by no means facilitate learning. Instead, it is possible that learning according to one's presumed learning style hinders learning.

If it is not a matter of learning styles matching with the teaching style of the instructor, why does performance vary so much among learners? Evidence-based research has found that subjects differ in their performance due to reasons related to their brain anatomy and function. Most interestingly, brain anatomy is not finally given at birth. Instead it changes with the use of our brains. A factor shaping brain anatomy that we encounter in classrooms is bilingualism. If a child grows up learning a second language, this induces structural changes in their white matter tracts, that is, the bilingual child's brain is wired better than that of a monolingual child (Li et al., 2014). Bilingualism also enhances cortical thickness in the inferior frontal gyrus: the core language region (Klein et al., 2014). Also, the age of L2 acquisition plays a major role: the younger the person is when they start learning L2, the larger the volume in sensory integration areas (Wei et al., 2015). In other words, in L2 classes, we find bilinguals and monolinguals and this can at least partially explain differences in learning performance. Also, phonological working memory, that is, the skill to keep unfamiliar sequences of sounds in mind, is also related to differences in word learning (Kapantzoglou et al., 2015). This has been recently demonstrated in a meta-analysis of 79 samples with around 3700 participants (Linck et al., 2014). Furthermore, two more mechanisms determine proficiency: first, cognitive control, the capacity to switch between L1 and L2 and to suppress interference from L1, a well investigated forebrain mechanism (Branzi et al., 2015), and second, attentional capacities (Bialystok, 2015). These factors that, for obvious reasons of space, here can only be mentioned are by no means connected to anything one could define as a learning style.

Learning style theories have not been scientifically demonstrated (Rogowsky et al., 2015), but many L2 teachers believe in them. Similarly, a multitude of L2-educators also believe that learners are right-brained or left-brained and try to improve their teaching to selectively activate the right hemisphere (Lindell, 2006; Lindell and Kidd, 2011). In both cases, we have to do with pseudoscience: It is appealing because simple, but unfortunate because as such it impacts education in a misleading way. In our time, we do have knowledge on learning processes and this knowledge should flow into L2 practice. Therefore, a basic education in cognitive neuroscience would prevent L2 teachers from becoming a soft target for pseudoscientific theories."

http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/ ... 01800/full
Last edited by reineke on Sat May 06, 2017 5:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
3 x

User avatar
reineke
Black Belt - 3rd Dan
Posts: 3570
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 7:34 pm
Languages: Fox (C4)
Language Log: https://forum.language-learners.org/vie ... =15&t=6979
x 6554

Re: Memorization and You

Postby reineke » Tue Mar 07, 2017 9:36 pm

Cainntear wrote:
reineke wrote:
Gianfranco Conti wrote:In a fluent foreign language learner with a sizeable vocabulary repertoire, the way words are stored in their L2 mental lexicon will be pretty much the same, except that there is another very important association, the one between an L2 word and its L1 (and L3,L4, etc.) translation(s). So the word ‘dog’ in the brain of a speaker of Italian, French and German will be connected with the words ‘chien’ , ‘cane’, hund, etc.

Consequently, when spread of activation occurs in search for the word ‘dog’ in one language, say ‘French’, all the words in the other languages will be activated too (Parallel activation theory); all languages one speaks will be activated simultaneously with different levels of activation, with the language in use being the most activated, and the weaker language(s) being the least activated.

Which is why the phrase "no translation, not even mental translation" is so dangerous. If you activate the meaning, you cannot help but activate the L1 word. Anyone learning the word meaningfully can't prevent the translation, and anyone who orevents the translation is preventing themselves from learning the meaning.



Measuring the impact of translation on the accuracy and fluency of vocabulary acquisition of English


Highlights

We study how translation affects ESL vocabulary learning.

A reading tutor using language technologies measures each student's learning.

Use of translation increases the retrieval time of L2 lexical items.

Excessive use of translation decreases long-term retention of L2 lexical items.
Abstract
This article assesses the impact of translation on the acquisition of vocabulary for higher-intermediate level students of English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL). The use of translation is a relevant issue in the research of Second Language (L2) acquisition and different authors provide arguments on both sides of the issue. Language technologies serve this issue in both the usability of automatic translation and the automatic detection of lexical phenomena. This paper will explore translation as it affects the acquisition of new words in context when students are given real texts retrieved from the Internet in a web-based interface. The students can instantly obtain the dictionary definition of a word and its translation to their native language. This platform can accurately measure how much each student relies on translation and compare this to their accuracy and fluency on a lexical retrieval task using words seen in the texts. Results show that abundant use of translation may increase accuracy in the short term, but in the longer term, it negatively affects accuracy and possibly fluency. However, students who use translation in moderation seem to benefit the most in this lexical task. This paper provides a focused and precise way to measure the relevant variables for each individual student, and new findings that contribute to our understanding of the impact of the use of translation in language learning.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar ... 0814001223
0 x

Cainntear
Black Belt - 3rd Dan
Posts: 3469
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2015 11:04 am
Location: Scotland
Languages: English(N)
Advanced: French,Spanish, Scottish Gaelic
Intermediate: Italian, Catalan, Corsican
Basic: Welsh
Dabbling: Polish, Russian etc
x 8662
Contact:

Re: Memorization and You

Postby Cainntear » Tue Mar 07, 2017 9:42 pm

reineke wrote:

I never said I believed in learning styles -- I've been telling people they're nonsense for years, and if anyone tries to tell me they're real, I usually feel a powerful roll up a copy of this paper and hit them over the head with it.

My point was simply that if you're running an experiment to try to prove that this particular unicorn exists, then you have to be basing your experiment on the basic theory. Iversen criticised a study that was designed to try to determine whether there was a visual learning style like so:
Iversen wrote:But there is a basic flaw in this argument, namely that it doesn't matter where the picture comes from or whether the learner can relate to it

I assert that this is a different research question -- do learners learn better from teacher-selected imagery or self-selected imagery. If your two conditions are "no imagery" and "self-selected imagery", then you've got no proof whatsoever that there's any effect from using the visual channel.

And of course finding an effect from the visual channel still wouldn't prove the existence of a "visual learning style", but that's kind of the opposite complaint from Iversen's.
0 x


Return to “General Language Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: tastyonions and 2 guests