From our discussion on the native material study, smallwhite smartly wrote:
smallwhite wrote:Iguanamon has always warned us to keep the number of languages simultaneously learned down to a minimum. There's a price to pay for ignoring advice from a wise man.
And this has been on my mind a bit. I think she struck a cord. She's right of course. And I have to look at my language learning method and consider that it may impact me negatively to hold onto too many languages at times. Of course, I know that when I do that I often end up dropping one for a while. And that's fine because often I am not 'serenading the lady to take her home' but just 'dancing a waltz to pass the evening together'.
So it was with Mandarin, Arabic or even Italian. We've met become slightly familiar but remain friendly enough that we might visit in the future but for now, not many a dance in the near future. That's fine.
Other languages, I really want to achieve something and the stacking of study is hampering depth. My German drive to C1 is basically not going places if I'm not spending the time and giving in to my three other active languages. I can get by with slow advances from everyday exposure, if I don't have a goal but I really do need to get that going.
But the cross-over that I am seeing is that it takes me a few minutes now to activate and be sure that I am in Tibetan or Hebrew mode. Something that wasn't there a few weeks back - one opaque language meant I was all in the pit instantly - now it's two pits and it takes a minute to see which one I'm in.
Speaking of pits - I am finding learning the Tibetan alphabet to be a completely different set of challenges than Hebrew and in interesting ways. In Tibetan the vowels are marked ས་སོ་སི་སེ་ is sa, so, si, se, and quite easy to identify as all you need to do is write "sa, so, si, se" with the Wylie converter on. Well, sa may become sé depending on the suffix, etc. but the vowels are relatively easier than Hebrew where ס סו סא סי סע have a series of rules that you need to experience to figure out the unmarked vowels and the sounds that may or may not be produced. On the other hand, the consonants tend to be a bit easier to hear in Hebrew and to produce - no need to worry about tone, aspiration and vowel length. Two writing systems that I'm attacking at the same time in one and no way am I going to approach Tibetan handwriting for a long time ...
As Tasha Mannox writes...
There are several different forms of the Umeh class of scripts, when learning Umeh there is a specific chronological order, from the more uniformed constructive forms called Tsugring ཚུགས་རིང། meaning long form and Tsugtung ཚུགས་ཐུང་། meaning short form, to the more cursive styles གཤར་མ། of which there is the every-day writing styles of Khyug dri འཁྱུག་བྲིས། meaning nimble writing and Kyug dri རྒྱུགས་བྲིས། meaning quick writing.
There are other intermediate script styles བར་བྲིས། such as Tsugmakhyug ཚུག་མ་འཁྱུག། a sub style between Tsugtung and Khyug yig. Petsug དཔེ་ཚུགས། often used for hand-written texts and books, of which is traditionally associated with different regions of Tibet, such as the Khamyig ཁམས་ཡིག། a script style referring to the Eastern Provence called Kham.
For the more artistic form of calligraphy Drutsa འབྲུ་ཚ། is used, this script style is particularly flamboyant and cursive in style, traditionally used for official documents and titles.
Enough complexity that I'll stick to Uchen even if Umeh is what what is used in handwriting more often. Gotta pick my battles.
Which brings be back - too little diversity and I get bored, too much and I'm sure to suffer from it. so in the end it is a question of awareness and focus. Actively knowing I could be more focused but willing to pay the price of a little (or a lot, in the eyes of some) of diversity versus the depth of focus.
Back to my studies! (And Hebrew, Portuguese and Tibetan are going nicely, only German is sort of standing still.)