Assimil Russian Without Toil 1951

[naqvisson]

I was wondering if anyone here in the group has used the Assimil Russian without Toil 1951 edition. I have been searching on HTLAL forums also. What I realized that majority of the learners speak so high of Assimil Russe 1971 edition but rarely mentioned 1951 (first generation) course with an exception of one post.

It seems tempting because it is in english. Any suggestions about using it or better sticking to latest watered down Assimil Russian course?

Thanks in advance.

[Purangi]

I have the 1956 edition by N. Tomiloff, from Centre Universitaire Méditerranéen, so I am not sure if it’s the same as the 1951 one?

Concerning the 1956 edition: Despite the expected limitations due to 70 years having passed since it was published, the book remains very interesting. I believe it covers much more vocab than the more modern Assimil books. It is mostly free of propaganda and the political terms and expressions introduced are useful ones, ones that any Russian speaker ought to know.

The only main issue I see is that it is highly focused on literature - both Soviet and pre Soviet - and much less on more practical conversations. From the middle of the course it feels much more like a graded reader than a conversational course.

[Ingaræð]

Sometimes people abbreviate Russian without Toil to RWT or RwT in their posts (myself included), so you might find some more opinions by searching the forums with those terms as well. (The same goes for the other without Toil books.)

I have the 1951 edition in English, the 1971 in French and German, the 2011 in English and also Perfectionnement Russe. The earlier lessons of the 1971 are broadly the same as the 1951: sometimes a different word may be used, or the word order changed. Lesson content diverges as you get further along in the books. I use the 1951 edition rather than the 1971: it's in my native language (my French and German are definitely not strong enough to use as base languages), and I prefer the voices and musical performances.

I tried the current edition, but I just don't enjoy using it. I wrote a little bit comparing it to the 1951 in my log:

My impression is that RwT focuses on acquiring grammar and vocabulary by pointing out patterns for your brain to assimilate, whereas Russian provides (comparatively) lengthy descriptions of grammar rules/case endings and (as someone else described) the authors forgot the adage 'repetitio est studium'. My brain definitely prefers the RwT approach. Also, I question whether the book is really so 'outdated': the words that I can pick out from Putin's recent addresses are those I've learned from RWT, eg. достаточно.

The cultural notes in the current edition are interesting, and I've used the audio from both that and Perfectionnement for 'blind listening'. There's something about the content that I just don't enjoy though, which makes it hard for me to learn from. I like the 'old school' stuff. Edit: I do plan on going back to the current edition in the future, just to make sure I fill in any gaps etc.

I think one of the reasons people speak highly of the 1971 edition is because Prof. Arguelles did, and it just gets repeated. From memory, one of his 'pros' was that there was more content crammed onto a page, and a publisher trying to save on printing costs by using less paper is not a factor for me personally.

I'd go with whichever suits you best. I've read a lot of books and watched a lot of films from the '50s and earlier, and the only thing that significantly changes in English is slang, which isn't that important as a beginner anyway. Bonus: you can not only get down with the kids, but with the oldies too.

[David1917]

I agree with all of the above. RwT is extremely similar to the 1970s Russian course, and focuses a lot on literary extracts. It's awesome - definitely go for it.