Confusion about Comprehensible Input

[tangleweeds]

Comprehensible vs Compelling:

Unfortunately, I find the topics in texts aiming to cover CEFR A1-A1 entirely non-compelling.

[Cainntear]

Comprehensible vs Compelling:

Unfortunately, I find the topics in texts aiming to cover CEFR A1-A1 entirely non-compelling.

Indeed.
Saying something should be comprehensible and compelling is all well and good, but if you can't describe how to find these rare unicorns of content, you've hardly described how to write a course.

Had Krashen himself found such material for even one language, it would be a best-selling product and he would be an obscenely rich man today.

[Saim]

Here is our friend Vladimir, not to be taken quite seriously since Krashen also wants compelling input.

Comprehensible Input or Compelling Content

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odCcpR0_GJg&t=384s

Input being compelling or interest makes it more likely for you to put in the hours; i.e. actually go through the process of exposing yourself to the language. However, if you have discipline or some other form of external motivation, you can learn a lot from input that isn’t particularly compelling. This is more about strategies (“find input that’s compelling to you”; or if you’re a teacher, “produce materials that are compelling to your students”) than about the way acquisition happens.

Vladimir also seems to insist a lot on misusing words for no reason other than to disagree with people. Is a reality TV show in your target language “information”? Is a novel “information”? “Input” is actually more clear once you understand the theory.

Comprehensible vs Compelling:

Unfortunately, I find the topics in texts aiming to cover CEFR A1-A1 entirely non-compelling.

Indeed.
Saying something should be comprehensible and compelling is all well and good, but if you can't describe how to find these rare unicorns of content, you've hardly described how to write a course.

Had Krashen himself found such material for even one language, it would be a best-selling product and he would be an obscenely rich man today.

His claim now seems to be that the only good way of learning a language as a beginner is through those “storytelling” and cross-talk classes.

When Olly asks him how to start as a beginner when no input is comprehensible his response is to “find a teacher” (that uses this specific method that only exists in a handful of schools in the US and Thailand). I have an idea: how about spending no money and just doing — shock horror! —explicit vocabulary study? It definitely works.

[Cainntear]

When Olly asks him how to start as a beginner when no input is comprehensible his response is to “find a teacher” (that uses this specific method that only exists in a handful of schools in the US and Thailand). I have an idea: how about spending no money and just doing — shock horror! —explicit vocabulary study? It definitely works.

No it doesn't! We've tried it and it doesn't work! Krashen told me so! He didn't give any evidence, but he told me so!

[tangleweeds]

Comprehensible vs Compelling:

Unfortunately, I find the topics in texts aiming to cover CEFR A1-A1 entirely non-compelling.

Excuse the self-quote, but it expands into this thought:

Studying Irish, I very much noticed the contrast between older courses like Buntús Cainte and Learning Irish, vs newer ones following CEFR guidelines. The newer ones always start out with introducing yourself, where you're from, how to find tourist necessities, all of which is admittedly very useful when you're planning to visit soon, but once you've found yourself having learned that same material in a few different languages, it really starts to feel like Groundhog Day.

OTOH, the older courses, particularly Buntús Cainte, were much better at enabling me to have my idle daily thoughts in the target language, which for me is the most effective way to truly internalize a language. I mean, I could possibly imagine going around introducing myself to every lamp post, telling it where I'm from, and asking it how to find the train station, but it comes more naturally to learn via thinking (admittedly trivial) things like: "That's a very big tree." "See the fat cat?" "I like that blue car. I want one!"

So for me, I guess, the optimized beginner course would be the one that enables me to have the most of my idle daily thoughts in the target language. We can sneak some tourist necessities in there, but I now hit a psychological wall each time I have to start by learning to introduce myself and all the ways to say "Hello, good day!"

I do also agree, btw, that there is a very important student/learner skill in being able to muster interest that isn't intrinsic (e.g. for Latin declensions) and sitting down to study what's needed in spite of however one might feel about it. But I personally find the former more important than the latter, as it makes the latter far more likely to happen.

So I guess I need to learn to imagine introducing myself to passers-by, asking them how to get to the train station, and (since I know exactly where that is) imagining how they might reply. But since that's actually a bit complicated to explain, my inner skeptic points out that in real life, the native speaker goes off into some overcomplicated reply which to me, the A1 learner, is utterly incomprehensible input, making Google Maps by far the better option.

[dampingwire]

Saying something should be comprehensible and compelling is all well and good, but if you can't describe how to find these rare unicorns of content, you've hardly described how to write a course.

Actually, at least when watching a series, I find compelling to be a hinderance. I get caught up in the story, I want to know what's going to happen next etc. OTOH when I come across Gogglebox in Japanese I'm happy to run through an episode without subtitles, then with subtitles, then once more listening and re-listening without subtitles, only turning them on once I've given up on some part of a scene. For me, caring about the story just gets in the way!

Reading is different though.

[Iversen]

I prefer the word 'enticing' to 'compelling'. Nobody compels me to read about the evolution of turtles, but I do it for fun. And if I can do so in a target language then it has an additional purpose and the risk that I get bored is minimized.

So much for extensive activities. With intensive activities the content is in principle less important because you only deal with relatively short passages and you spend much of the time worrying about details that could have occurred in any kind of source - but I still prefer reading about the long and winding history of turtles and tortoises to reading about the private life of rather uninteresting VIPs. Did you know that they first got flattened ribs, then a stomach shield below - and only much later a shield on the back which fused with the ribs? Well, rather that than the Kardashians...

[jmar257]

Comprehensible vs Compelling:

Unfortunately, I find the topics in texts aiming to cover CEFR A1-A1 entirely non-compelling.

Excuse the self-quote, but it expands into this thought:

Studying Irish, I very much noticed the contrast between older courses like Buntús Cainte and Learning Irish, vs newer ones following CEFR guidelines. The newer ones always start out with introducing yourself, where you're from, how to find tourist necessities, all of which is admittedly very useful when you're planning to visit soon, but once you've found yourself having learned that same material in a few different languages, it really starts to feel like Groundhog Day.

OTOH, the older courses, particularly Buntús Cainte, were much better at enabling me to have my idle daily thoughts in the target language, which for me is the most effective way to truly internalize a language. I mean, I could possibly imagine going around introducing myself to every lamp post, telling it where I'm from, and asking it how to find the train station, but it comes more naturally to learn via thinking (admittedly trivial) things like: "That's a very big tree." "See the fat cat?" "I like that blue car. I want one!"

Could not agree more, and this is one of my favorite things about Assimil vs. a regular coursebook. That and you get to guess at some things (like solving a puzzle, before you read the notes vs. having something explained then seeing examples) and you get snippets of "real" language. I lean towards the compelling side as well, especially given the proliferation of apps that enable a middle ground between extensive and intensive reading (i.e., being able to look up words on the fly). My route with Spanish and French, and what I'll be doing in the future, is basically reading a bunch of articles and whatnot and eventually making the jump to adult books before I should; if I tried children's books I'd never get anywhere because I'd not want to study as they bore me. That said, when I get away from FIGS and if I ever get into non-IE languages, we'll have to see how that goes, but for now it's fine for me.

[Cainntear]

I prefer the word 'enticing' to 'compelling'. Nobody compels me to read about the evolution of turtles, but I do it for fun.

No, nobody compels you, but that's the point: the content itself is compelling -- i.e. the material is intrinsically motivating. When we describe a book as being "compelling", we're not talking about one that you are forced to read, but rather one that is so good that it itself forces you to keep reading. To me, "enticing" sounds like it tempts you to start reading, but doesn't say anything about whether it keeps you reading or not.

Compelling content is a key part of Krashen's philosophy because he believes as long as the content keeps your attention, you will "acquire" language easily.

Actually, at least when watching a series, I find compelling to be a hinderance. I get caught up in the story, I want to know what's going to happen next etc.

I use soaps a fair bit. I'm not massively interested in them, but they are still compelling in the sense that they're constantly setting up little traps to capture your attention -- you're waiting for something to be resolved. But I generally don't care if I don't get every detail, because they're lightweight trash. It also lets my brain wander a bit if I hear an interesting turn of phrase.

[Montmorency2020]

That interlinear text idea is an interesting one. Half of me thinks "what a great idea" and the other half thinks "would that end up like watching an L2 film with L1 subtitles - i.e. you just end up reading the L1 subtitles".

I think that is a danger. But actually it's more of a danger with parallel texts (in my experience). Although I still like the idea of parallel texts in principle.