Dear Beaverswings and philipdavis, Thanks for watching the video. I'd like to clarify something regarding words that have a similar form in two languages. The examples you mention are examples of 'false cognates' ('false friends'), i.e. words with a similar form, but different meaning. I referred to cognates/loan words - words that have a similar form AND similar meaning in two languages. Usually, these outnumber the 'false friends'. A knowledgeable teacher who is familiar with srydents' L1 (mother tongue) will distinguish betwen the two and warn them against the false friends.
I have gone through all of the interviews on the channel by academics to help me, I am currently studying for my second MA in Language Teaching and currently teaching English and Spanish online, and I have to say that yours was the interview I got the most out of, thank you so much, Batia! Happy holidays y prospero año nuevo (:
The main problem in this debate is what people actually mean by 'input'. Many people seem to have reduced the idea to a caricature of what was orginally meant, or even is still meant by many who say they use such methods. It was preceded with the word 'comprehensible', and that doesn't just mean it was already comprehensible, that it's just 'letting it sink in', but that that input is at the right kind of level, not too hard, not too easy, where the engagement of the learner with what they hear or read means they work at and transform the language they encounter into meaning via those mental tools that are built for that, plus sharpen those tools in the process, as well as the fact that that 'input' is engaging, carrying meaning that the user is motivated to understand, and on which that learner focuses in itself, making the language the carrier of it. There is work, and analysis, and pattern recognition, and transformation, etc., etc., going on all the time, but it's fused with meaning and the conveyance of it, receptively at first, but then naturally also productively, all the time. At 17:28 Dr. Bauer actually explains herself doing the same thing, and how she would do it on her own in that context, but that's what was meant by 'comprehensible input': you have ways of making sense of it, and you engage with it cognitively in order to transform it into meaning, and to associate the lexis and structures with meaning. You have some 'leverage', some 'purchase' to get to the meaning, and you work at it to comprehend, and that work is 'comprehensive input'. It's not just unfocused letting listening wash over you or something, or just passively absorbing. It's nothing like that.
Yes, when I teach say students one on one, I try to make the input as close to their level as possible, but I do change things up and give them stuff somewhat above their level, but I try to review new vocabulary, phrases periodically, so they can retain it.
Input is key, the only difference is that for children it's their first language and for adults, alot of translation goes on especially early on, other then that.......I mean I'm js!
Step zero is the sound system. Some early practice with a teacher just on repetition can be useful even if you then go whole-bore input. For example, if you want to use "story learning" to get started in Dutch, it's nice to have some idea of what the words you are reading really sound like. Quite generally, I think work on the sound system is underestimated.
Another thoughtful, insightful video. A theme I'm picking up from across the interviews I've watched from this channel is: there is no theme ("There is no spoon!"). There is no "one simple trick that foreign language teachers hate". That's not to say that each guest doesn't have an evidence based method they think works better than others, they do. Whatever your 2nd language learning method is, you probably need to supplement it with some sprinkles from a different school of thought.
Memorising meaningful texts and then making up your own sentences with the words from this text, memorising dialogues and making your own, with learning vocab and grammar, thorough learning and, of course, kistening and reading and simulating teal life conversations - hard work but it works🎉
I started Spanish by myself for fun and loved it..I developed a bit and graduated to a group of different teachers for reading and comprehension and culture and I told her what I think I needed ,again it worked well. My mother died.. and I stopped for a while and only studied vocabulary for a year or so and when I got a teacher after that time, I was amazed how much the vocabulary integrated what I had learned previously, and my teachers felt that I was a good level considering being self taught for along time just because no goal. I now really want to be more fluent but I find my other interest and work keep me busy but I still love the journey
What an insightful interview! I appreciate Dr. Batia Laufer’s perspective that there isn’t a singular truth regarding complex language acquisition issues. She shared her personal experiences with language learning, particularly highlighting her immersion in Hebrew during her school years. Notably, she described a six-month silent period in which she focused solely on listening without speaking due to a lack of confidence. Remarkably, by the end of this period, she was able to speak fluently and use grammatical structures naturally. Dr. Laufer also advocates for learning a foreign language with a non-native teacher, emphasizing the importance of studying loanword lists and mastering grammar structures first. (I believe she suggests that a non-native teacher should possess a near-native proficiency or a strong grasp of grammar in the target language, which would align with her approach to language learning.) Which i personally don’t agree with - from a language teachers perspective but also from a language learners perspective. Furthermore, she references Professor Paul Nation, who champions the value of input but underscores the necessity of a balanced approach. Nation’s "25% method" highlights the importance of language focus, meaning focus, and the interplay of input and output. In my view, her statement “a healthy mix of everything” is THE key takeaway from the discussion. I’ve observed that many individuals often seek a single definitive answer to complex questions. However, the best outcomes in language learning are achieved through a comprehensive understanding of the material presented. The concept of comprehensible input (I+1) is vital, particularly at the outset of language learning. This should be followed by an emphasis on understanding the language's structure, grammar, and producing language (output) when the learner feels ready. There are numerous effective language teaching methods available. The essential task is to explore these methods, understand what works best for you as a learner, and seek out supportive teachers who align with those methods. As educators, we must remain open-minded, continuously learn about language acquisition research, and continually refine our teaching practices to better meet the needs of our students.
FUN FACT : "input" doesn't even work with children... Or more exactly, it doesn't work without social inreaction. In this experiment, Patricia Kuhl and her team exposed American English-speaking infants to a foreign language, Mandarin, to study how social interaction influences the learning of non-native language sounds. Experiment Setup: The researchers divided the infants (around 9 months old) into three groups: In-Person Interaction Group: These infants had in-person sessions with a native Mandarin speaker. During these sessions, the speaker interacted naturally with the infants by talking and playing with them in a social setting. Video Group: These infants watched videos of the same Mandarin speakers, but without direct interaction, passively watching a screen. Audio-Only Group: The infants only listened to audio recordings of the Mandarin speakers, without any visual component or social interaction. Results: In-Person Interaction Group: These infants showed an ability to discriminate Mandarin sounds, achieving results comparable to infants raised in a Mandarin-speaking environment. Video and Audio-Only Groups: In contrast to the first group, the infants in these two groups showed no significant improvement in their ability to distinguish Mandarin sounds. They could not discriminate between the sounds even after multiple sessions of exposure. Conclusion: The study highlighted that social interaction plays a crucial role in infants' learning of foreign language sounds. Passive exposure alone, whether through a screen or only audio, is insufficient for developing the ability to discriminate non-native phonemes. This experiment reinforced the idea that a social context is essential in early language learning.
That is with infants though. Adults can learn by relating things back to their native language and picking up on common social cues. Infants are still acquiring their first language and learning things for the first time. Social interaction and feedback are extremely important for infants no matter what they're learning. It would be ideal for adults too, but adults would have better developed faculties in terms of being able to imagine themselves in the shoes of the people in the videos and such. Children don't fully develop their ability to put themselves in another person's shoes until 7 or a bit later even. I wouldn't expect anyone to learn much from listening to something they don't understand, an infant needs to be shown what things mean, an adult already has a vocabulary and can use translation to help build comprehensible input and learn new words, while also studying grammar instructions as needed to aid the process. (In terms of picking up the native sounds/phonetics of another language, I find that input is rarely enough for adults either, they have to have the differences between sounds demonstrated to them before they can get an ear for them and produce them. And then they have to keep using them or they can lose them again, but I guess that's the same with anything language related, it's not like riding a bike, if you don't use it you will start to lose it over time.)
Bunch of gobbledygook. Any language for an infant isn't FOREIGN because they don't have a native language yet. And obviously, infants don't yet respond to audio video stimuli. Their survival depends on adult humans, not on video entertainment. Desire for entertainment develops later.
@@cigh7445 Agree, though I'd say it is certainly possible to fluently understand a language even if only given visual and audio input, in principle. I say this because I learned to understand German fluently through watching German foreign elevision from the age of 3, to the point that I could easily understand and speak German before I started formally studying it in school at the age of 12.
One of the problems about starting with loan words in a language like Korean or Japanese is that many of them only have a slight relationship to the English word. "Service", for example, is used in Japanese (サービス) and Korean (서비스) to mean "on the house" or "free of charge." In homes in Korea, they use "옵션" (option) or "풀옵션" (full option) for fixed features--for things that are included, and not optional at all.
Absolutely - this is one reason why French to English (and vice versa) learners often misuse the shared words. It’s very hard to break away from the notion that ‘magnifique = magnificent’ if you embed that in your brain.
@@philipdavis7521 Thanks for watching the video. I'd like to clarify something regarding words that have a similar form in two languages. The examples you mention are examples of 'false cognates' ('false friends'), i.e. words with a similar form, but different meaning. I referred to cognates/loan words - words that have a similar form AND similar meaning in two languages. Usually, these outnumber the 'false friends'. A knowledgeable teacher who is familiar with srydents' L1 (mother tongue) will distinguish betwen the two and warn them against the false friends
Thanks for watching the video. I'd like to clarify something regarding words that have a similar form in two languages. The examples you mention are examples of 'false cognates' ('false friends'), i.e. words with a similar form, but different meaning. I referred to cognates/loan words - words that have a similar form AND similar meaning in two languages. Usually, these outnumber the 'false friends'. A knowledgeable teacher who is familiar with srydents' L1 (mother tongue) will distinguish betwen the two and warn them against the false friends
If a language is learned with a bridging language, the brain's recall process is different from that of vocabualry acquired through acquisition alone. For an adult, acquisition is fine to start but at some near point, even what has been learned by acquisition rather than from "learning" has to be sorted and have formal rules applied to it either through a bridging language or from the acquired vocabulary if it's expansive enough..
I focus on building as solid of a foundation as I can for the students. I feel they learn faster if they review, see the concepts in so many different concepts.
If you don't emphasize input, how will you learn all those phrases and connotations that are not in textbooks, how will you fill the language system with life and keep it interesting? However, a balance between explicit and implicit learning is still important. Without explicit learning, you won't be able to notice a lot of things as an adult. The kids that say they don't need explicit learning don't know what they doing.
Children who try learning a Foreign language explicitly (Grammar/Translation) FAIL miserably. They are wasting valuable opportunity, because children can learn L2 implicitly to a native level.
I focus on "Grammar" for use rather than on all "Grammar". So, 20% of grammar learning gives 80% of what is required in daily life. Also, this is generally the 20% that is the most interesting to learn and the most useful.
Wow Loïs, you’re amazing. You keep inviting people I read in textbooks and articles when I was studying at a graduate school. Très bien ! J’adore votre contenu !
I kind of missed the part where the researcher explained exactly why and based on what evidence do adults not learn languages the way children do. Based on what research? Cause I find this example with immigrant parents vs children incomplete. I think everyone who's pushing this idea that adults in fact DO learn languages based on similar mechanics to those that children do DO NOT argue that you can use exactly the same methods, I think they just mean that grammar is learned more instinctively than we believe, hence most often the grammar instruction is quite useless, given the amount of time people spend on this, it's just a terrible yield from the time spent onit. They that before you say and catch the patterns instinctively yourself, you won't truly internalize it and therefore start using those patterns correctly. Children and parents immigrant have completely different motivations. Motivation of children is innate need of self expression, the deepest psychological need a human can posess. Parents already express themselves well enough, just in a different languages. Hence they don't need it on such deep level. This would explain the pace of aquisition differences.
I can see that some of you are discussing the differences in how children and adults learn foreign languages. You are right that children often learn through necessity and social integration. They have more time dedicated to language learning through school and social interactions. They have fewer inhibitions about experimenting with language sounds and structures, and they are less self-conscious about making mistakes. • BUT the main difference between adult and child foreign language learning is believed to be neurological that has to do with brain plasticity. Our brains become lateralized around puberty and lose quite a lot of neuroplasticity which enabled us as children to acquire languages with ease from input. Even though exceptions exist and some adults can 'pick up' languages easily, most adults tend to learn more explicitly, using structured methods, grammar rules, and conscious memorization techniques. Comprehensible input alone, even a lot of it, is usually insufficient. We (adults) may have lost a lot of neuroplasticity, but we are compensating for it with analytical thinking and learning strategies. This is why we can benefit from good teaching and good learning materials.
@@BatiaLaufer Thank you kindly for sharing the insights. These are good, valid points. My fundamental disagreement with tranditional instruction methods stems from my native Poland and the mandatory English programmes that run for for 12 years of the full mandatory education cycle and yield very poor results for students, mainly in speaking and communication skills. Those same students can perform very well on tests that follow the principles of formal instruction. Specifically, gap filling of specific, arbitrarily selected grammar points. As a bilingual English-Polish speaker I'd be able to find at least 2-3 options for any of the exercises that only have 1 accepted answers in the key. I personally find immersion methods more valuable, hence I'm more inclined to input and immersion based materials which is what would call incidental learning. I like to tell students that trying to speak English without input is like trying to be a writer without reading books. I also find some of the experimental methods tried in Canada and the results that were achieved there somewhat of a proof of my idea. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_immersion
@BartoszJokerS Perhaps you will find this experiment interesting. Can a young adult in one year learn English to a near native C1 if the starting level was A1 ? Yes, most can do it if the conditions are right. And it's well documented. Here is the complete story. I had spent 7 years learning English the conventional way (grammar, translation), some in school, and some as an individual hobby. And even though I did well in school, realistically, my final level was barely a beginner. (A1-A2, as was confirmed by the lowest TOEFL score possible) This was before the Internet, so my choices for CI were non-existent. At that time, I understood very basic English grammar (explicitly) as a set of rules in my native language (Slavic). Then, as a 19 year old I was a part of this experiment. I was placed in a US MILITARY academy with very strict guidelines. Foreign students were only allowed to use English. Native language (Slavic) WAS NOT ALLOWED, it was an absolute 100% immersion environment 24/7. (Kinda similar to Middlebury Language school or French Foreign Legion approach) And even though I was already an adult, I learned a second language to a near native level within a year. I could physically feel the development of a second language. After 3 months, I was thinking in L2 full time, I had near native listening comprehension in 6 months. And obviously i wasn't studying a second language exclusively, I was learning science, engineering, humanities, doing sports. I was having a rich learning experience while acquiring a second language at a rate that seemed magical. There are very important conditions that allow adults to learn on par with immigrant kids. One condition, really. Temporarily abstain from native language and dedicate all the remaining time to a second language. Regarding the deliberate study of GRAMMAR. Nobody was teaching me any of that. Well, I had a tutor for a few sessions, but then a school decided to forgo tutoring because our progress was too fast to keep track of. Yes, our progress, because there were 5 of us. And we all exhibited remarkable rates of improvement. We were separated to different battalions (dorms), and we weren't allowed to communicate. As far as EXPLICIT knowledge of L2 grammar, I FORGOT everything I knew as a beginner. I ACQUIRED grammar the same way native speakers do, and I was reasonably grammatically correct. A grammatically correct sentence SOUNDS right, incorrect sounds funny. I don't know much of the textbook grammar explanations. That being said, studying English (L2) grammar ENTIRELY in English when a student is progressing beyond A1-A2 could be a USEFUL tool, though not entirely necessary. In many countries, children learn Native (L1) Grammar in school. I studied my L1 Grammar and forgot absolutely everything soon after graduation. Studying L1 Grammar never changed the way I spoke L1. It was a totally useless academic endeavor. So, I have a conflicted opinion on this. Studying L2 grammar (or vocabulary) using native language is extremely INEFFICIENT. Conclusion: The goal for any beginner should be to reach a level where they can progress in L2 monolingually, i.e., without using L1 in the process of learning.
@@Alec72HD Your experiences are consistent with mines both as a student and a teacher! Thank you so much for an insightful comment and sharing them here!
Thank you for this interesting interview. I use self talk to practice what I learned and it quickly shows where I am lacking. What words or grammar structures do I need to be able to express what I want to say? I try to regularly write it down or record it so I can research or ask friends or my teacher later.
Grammar is also a big deal in japanese. It's really not just the 100 patterns to know. Think more like a thousand. It's less than the number of words you need to know, but mastering 1000 patterns of grammar takes a lot of time.
I’m surprised there isn’t more thought given to thinking in the language you’re targeting for acquisition. It’s always been part of my model that being able to think even simple sentences in Japanese would improve my Japanese overall, if only by acting as prompts to recall vocabulary and grammar structures. Repeatedly seeing trees and thinking 木 or 森 is always going to reinforce that connection from concept to word so I can’t see why more thought isn’t given to this area in academia tbh
I think you mean formulating foreign words or sentences in your mind (It's hard to distinguish between formulation of words/messages and unconscious 'thinking'). I agree with you that this is helpful. Actually I mentioned in my talk that this kind of formulation is 'auto-input', which is useful. So keep on 'formulating', or 'thinking' in a foreign language if it reinforces your knowledge.
@ that’s what made me mention it, I think you’re the first person I’ve heard say that it’s even happening, let alone that it’s a useful part of language acquisition
@@BatiaLaufer I would call it “covert verbal behavior” (which is what the behaviorists would call it) or, if “covert” sounds too espionage-y, “inner verbal behavior.” I think it's clearer than “formulating thoughts in your mind” because it's identical to verbal behavior that's observable only it isn't and verbal behavior of any sort is typically distinguishable from unconscious behavior. It _is_ auto-input because the person is his own listener but it's also (obviously) output because the person _is_ producing verbal behavior. It's just behavior that only he can observe.
@@jeff__w Covert verbal behaviour or inner verbal behavior - these terms sound fine to me. How about inner speech? The important elements of this phenomenon, whatever we call it, for language acquisition are producing language that can also serve as input.
I think we can't compare how children learn by aquasition and adults. What she didnt mention is that children communication differs. They dont use any sophisticated lang, they learn by playing, spend all days sorounded by lang with they peers. No preasure, etc. I do believe in comprehensive input, and I see it works.
13 year olds move to a different country and become indistinguishable from native speakers. 2 TH-camrs Lex Fridmam and Konstantin Kisin are now native English speakers, but they spoke only Russian until the age of 13.
Children's brains are different. That is one thing, but they also don't have full-time jobs, children, and they don't have to make their own food. They have a ton more time. Obviously, if adults have a lot of time, they could learn a ton, but most adults don't want to put in the time.
@QUINTUSMAXIMUS Time is irrelevant. Adult immigrants (to US) often fail to learn English, but not because they don't have time. Immigrants from former Soviet Union and Hispanics are notorious for not understanding English after decades of life in the US. The reason is more psychological. You have to suppress your native language, at least temporarily, to acquire a second language. Children easily suppress L1 because it's not yet fully dominant in their psychee. Adult's consciousness is DOMINATED by their native language.
I can see that some of you are discussing the differences in how children and adults learn foreign languages. You are right that children often learn through necessity and social integration. They have more time dedicated to language learning through school and social interactions. They have fewer inhibitions about experimenting with language sounds and structures, and they are less self-conscious about making mistakes. • BUT the main difference between adult and child foreign language learning is believed to be neurological that has to do with brain plasticity. Our brains become lateralized around puberty and lose quite a lot of neuroplasticity which enabled us as children to acquire languages with ease from input. Even though exceptions exist and some adults can 'pick up' languages easily, most adults tend to learn more explicitly, using structured methods, grammar rules, and conscious memorization techniques. Comprehensible input alone, even a lot of it, is usually insufficient. We (adults) may have lost a lot of neuroplasticity, but we are compensating for it with analytical thinking and learning strategies. This is why we can benefit from good teaching and good learning materials.
@BatiaLaufer I can elaborate further, but in short, there is a simpler explanation. IMO, the difference between children and adults' learning ability is mostly due to psychological factors. And we CAN create conditions where adults learn L2 through Input ON PAR with children. (Although children remain far superior at achieving perfect pronunciation.) It's not that adults lose some inherent ability but rather that their NATIVE language becomes fully dominant (in their psychee) at adulthood. In other words: In adults, dominant L1 literally resists the creation of a competing second language. Younger immigrant children don't necessarily perceive their L1 as Native, it's just first chronologically. What can adults do to remove the resistance from L1 ? Don't use L1 for a period of time. Middlebury Language School uses this approach with TREMENDOUS success. For 8 weeks, students live in a camp and never use their native language the entire time. ANY use of L1 may result in immediate dismissal from the program and without refund BTW. For many, it's psychologically arduous at first. Kinda like quitting drugs, suppressing dominant native language. But it gets easier, and results seem like MAGIC. I speak from experience.
There is nobody out there saying it's just input. Waiting to speak is not the same as not speaking at all. Why do people engage in strawman arguments like this? Very tiresome.
Everybody nowadays says it's just an input, what are you talking about. People are looking for some easy way to learn a language neglecting the grammar cause they're lazy. The best way to learn a language for an adult is the old and proven way - grammar, input, output and a lot of practice like test quizzes etc
@@father_saturnat least on the JP learning side, that's what they all say on the face of it, but they all use anki and other tools like it for study. If other language learning communities are similar, you fell for the click bait.
I think her approach doesn't work for learning Japanese at least for me it is really depends on about words recycling sounds really good for me that's important to see vocabulary in a different context and absolutely if you are talking with yourself in your head in a target language it is kind of thinking on the language and it is count for sure
I think comprehensive input is key and amazing just look at luca lamparielo he speaks in native accent english italian spanis Russian. He started as adult. Of course grammar is important and memorizing some basics but if i was left in an island with mandarin chinese girls for sure after some year i would speak 🗣️ mandarin chinese that gow all la guages were thaught
At last, someone who actually knows what she is talking about. However, the interview format means that she did not put proper emphasis on certain elements, sufficiently develop others, or differentiate your meaning shown in your question from what she was trying to say. It would be good for her to present her ideas concisely in a pinned post. That would improve viewer comprehension and avoid misunderstandings.
First, your takeaways are behind a subscription paywall (free, but then I have more junk mail I don't read and I need to unsubscribe or send to the junk mail box). Second, they are your takeaways and not what she was trying to say. I want to see her compilation. For example, how you understand 'input' and how she understands it can differ.
I sometimes wonder if all the cognates English has with French has made my higher level learning of French harder because so much of the vocabulary and its various uses just get mixed up in my head. Like, does French use this cognate in this same esoteric way that English does, or is that just my imagination? Is esoteric a word in French BTW?? Probably. I'm sure I've come across it, but since English and French share so much vocabulary I just can't keep them separate sometimes. It's frustrating. lol
I understand your frustration. There are researchers who claim that similarities between languages can be just as difficult as differences. However, more research suggests that similarities have a facilitating effect on the whole even though in some areas they may confuse. Russian and Polish have many false cognates. They don't just have a different meaning, but the opposite meaning. Imagine how frustrating it is when you say the opposite what what you intend to say....
Thanks for watching. Hope you finished the video... 🙂 You'd be surprised how many language teachers and scholars claimed L1 (first language) was irrelevant to L2 learning and teaching... Some still believe it. However, there is a lot of research evidence that not only L1, but also other languages you know influence the learning of any new language.
That is an interesting interview. It makes a nice change to hear someone who refers to a range of research, rather than yet more of Steven Krashen’s theory, which is unscientific nonsense. I have struggled with German, learning the words was a real problem until I stopped using the Krashen methodology. I now break words apart, and examine the components, that helps a lot. Once you know a lot of words, you can start to understand how the language works and sounds using real speech. As she says, you can learn words theough explicit study, and then through use they become implicit i.e. you can use them without thinking. I found French much easier than German as it shares so many words with English. People underestimate the incredible difficulty of learning a foreign language. Learn French in 30 days is nonsense, but there’s a lot of people out there who are making money from such outrageous claims. Doubtless most customers buy the course, and give up after 30 days having learnt very little.
Thank you for sharing this perspective. Some of her points are interesting, but overall, I have to say that I find limited value in what she offers, much of her advice feels outdated. For various reasons, I also find it hard to connect with her perspective.
I tried to learn English at school for 10 years then on my own…the results were just mediocre as I couldn’t have a basic conversation. Learning by heart vocabulary will NEVER make you fluent. Ask yourself why you don’t have to learn words in your native language?
@derekofbaltimore Growing up, you learn new words (in L1) effortlessly. Most of the time you encounter a new word, learn what it means and remember that word for the rest of your life.
@@Alec72HD I dont know about it being effortless... but what i'm trying to understand is what is different about "learning" a word in a class vs learning it the way you described - encounter a new word, learn what it means, and remember it. Both seem to include the word learn and both require outside help...?
@derekofbaltimore The difference is that we learn our first language monolingually. We may encounter a new L1 word in a class, let's say it's a science class. But when we are learning L2 through translation to L1, it doesn't register in our brains as a new language.
It seems to me that children learn a language because they never give up trying to learn because their very survival depends on being able to communicate.
• I can see that some of you are discussing the differences in how children and adults learn foreign languages. You are right that children often learn through necessity and social integration. They have more time dedicated to language learning through school and social interactions. They have fewer inhibitions about experimenting with language sounds and structures, and they are less self-conscious about making mistakes. • BUT the main difference between adult and child foreign language learning is believed to be neurological that has to do with brain plasticity. Our brains become lateralized around puberty and lose quite a lot of neuroplasticity which enabled us as children to acquire languages with ease from input. Even though exceptions exist and some adults can 'pick up' languages easily, most adults tend to learn more explicitly, using structured methods, grammar rules, and conscious memorization techniques. Comprehensible input alone, even a lot of it, is usually insufficient. We (adults) may have lost a lot of neuroplasticity, but we are compensating for it with analytical thinking and learning strategies. This is why we can benefit from good teaching and good learning materials.
@BatiaLaufer Thanks. I have been learning German for years and although I got good passes in exams in German at university, I said, I didn't really feel comfortable in the language then. Then I started listening to (rather than watching) tons of "learn German" videos on TH-cam at different levels of difficultiy and after about six months I could understand almost everything that was being said, no matter how fast the video creator spoke. Now I have an online German tutor and slowing I am managing to say more of what I want to say with a lot less effort. I can read and write German well because of all the German courses I've attended. I think the prior learning allowed me to "suddenly" understand almost everything I heard in German. This ability just emerged from nowhere. It's getting close to that level with my ability to say almost anything I want to say with not too many errors. I'd say a person could learn to learn a language with only comprehensible input, but not in an reasonable amount of time as an adult. The thing is, kids don't understand a lot about the world or using structured techniques or even read well for that matter, so they can't use these tools to acquire or learn a language faster. An adult can and if he or she it willing to make a ton of mistakes on route to mastering a new language, then he or she can master a language with a blend of comprehensible input and formal learning faster than either approach alone.
An adult may to be able get new languages before 26 unlike an adult after that age. Life forced me to explore situation with languages finding the ability understand English after 34 without knowing that I had got the language in my youth. But breakthrough through the wall of language doesn't mean high level which is the problem in my age. I haven't seen a video on youtube where is telling the truth about languages.
The professor should know better about words like “cat”. She speaks Slavic languages and Polish has many ways to say “cat”! But I enjoyed the interview. I agree with her on many points.
She isn't telling the truth. I observed thousands of adult immigrants in the US. Most of them avoid immersion in English. They go out of their way to read and watch entertainment in their Native Language. Very few actually seek 24/7 immersion.
I’m French and I did when I moved to the USA. But you are right I met some Spanish speaking women who have been living in the USA for 10 years and couldn’t speak in English at all because they worked and spoke only with people speaking Spanish. I think it has to see as well with your level of education and your openness.
@@chrystele-fr If an adult wants to learn L2 on par with immigrant children they need to temporarily suppress dominant (native) language. Children don't have such overwhelming dominance of their First Language like adults. So, immigrant children can efficiently learn L2 while still using L1.
I think your first sentence ''She isn't telling the truth.'' is too extreme. This is not my perspctive. Adults learn to the level that that can function and survive. This doesn't mean they achieve fluency or anything approaching near native ability. Its not a surprise that immigrants to another country still continue to speak in their first lanaguage.
@krncrty Her entire theory is based on the observation that a majority of adult immigrants don't acquire a second language, but children do. That doesn't mean adults are unable to learn L2 the same way as children. They really don't want to do what it takes. And what it takes is substantial replacement of their use of L1 with L2. Adult immigrants also fail learning L2 through Grammar/Translation. I have never met one who learned English (to a fairly advanced level) that way.
@@krncrty I think you are generalizing as well. I was an adult learner when I came to the US, and there years later, I was accepted in college with such hight grammar scores that the woman who checked my test was shocked. She told me that even native speakers rarely score that high. I went on majoring in Journalism. So, when you say " Adults learn to the level that that can function and survive. This doesn't mean they achieve fluency or anything approaching near native ability," you are generalizing. I agree that many adult immigrants don't have the time or desire to learn more, but many do. We are different people with different backgrounds, and should be put under the common denominator of "immigrants."
Emm, there is a difference. Modern teachers talk not just about input itself but about COMPREHENSIBLE input. This is the difference: using comprehensible input is a very effective way to learn a language, whereas just input is not. This video got lost in this misconception. That teacher belongs to the old generation with outdated methods
Unfortunately you are repeating the propaganda of the Krashen theory adherents. His theory is not based on science, in fact it is contradicted by research, as the guest indicated. Krashen is a showman and not a scientist. Thus the propaganda describes it as the ‘natural’ way to learn a language, unlike the earlier supposedly old fashioned methods. In truth using lots of input is nothing new, people were doing so long before Krashen. As for the teacher, she is a highly experienced language learner and researcher, with a lot to teach us.
@@StillAliveAndKicking_ Krashen is a scientist who graduated from MIT with a degree in English Linguistics, specializing in English grammar. His speciality after that became Language Acquisition and he has made great contributions to the field in a time when people thought language learning was mainly about doing lots of grammar exercises. His theory is that we learn by massive amounts of comprehensible input. That hasn't been disproven, in fact it's impossible to learn a language without it. What ignorant adherents of his suggest (and he himself in interviews) is that it is the *only* way we learn. However, studies since the 1990s have shown that output is also important and that input alone (listening and reading) won't allow us to use the language perfectly. Honestly, that's pretty logical too. How can you get good at speaking without actually practicing it?
Not true, teaching grammar the way it is used IS a form of comprehensible input. A basic, commonly used passive sentence as mentioned around 9:40 could be accompanied by an image to become an even more comphrensible form of input. Nothing outdated about that. The point where this researcher does not agree with Krashen is that for adults its important to point this out - and that is grammar instruction is. Languages do have some patterns, and pointing them out allows you to notice them more, and that makes them more meaningful and memorable. Actually, any teaching method based on the naturalist approach (Stephan Krashen's theory belongs to this field) will try to point things out to make them noticeable. In this sense the two aren't different, just that Krashen says it doesn't need to be explicit, whereas Dr. Laufer says some explicit instruction is needed.
@@gargantuan2810 Comprehensible Input is a term coined by Steven Krashen, hence it has a specific meaning. According to Krashen, a language cannot be learnt explicitly, all learning must be implicit. That simply is not true. Thus Krashen says that grammar should not be taught and words should not be memorised. In fact most grammar is best learnt explicitly. His theory is incredibly simplistic and not supported by science. It is outdated, and discredited. This lady is worth listening to, she also has far more experience of language learning than Krashen. Her ideas also match my own more limited experience of learning languages, in my experience CI is a very inefficient and poor learning method.
@@gargantuan2810 It is not true that when Krashen published his theory, people thought that language learning was mainly about doing lots of grammar exercises. There were many schools of thought. As early as the nineteenth century people were describing methods based on a more naturalistic way of learning using large amounts of input. The Grammar Translation Method was a rather rigid method based on, you guessed it, grammar translation, that fell out of favour decades before Krashen. Krashen made numerous hypotheses in his theory, they are all either disproven or lacking evidence. You are probably misinterpreting his theory, as many people do. We do need large amounts of input, but probably not in the early stages of learning, and that is not the same as saying we can learn from comprehensible input. I’m learning German with mostly incomprehensible input. For a while with French I listened to barely comprehensible input. That had the benefit of gradually training my brain to retrieve words rapidly, and reinforcing the meaning within an appropriate context. I also listen to audio while reading the transcript, to train my brain to recognise speech. Krashen’s theory is oversimplistic misleading nonsense.
If you land on a plane on an island with someone who speaks another language and spend 2 or 3 years listening to them, you will leave that island speaking a new language.
@@Luminous000 That's not what OP said. You need to be immersed in L2 24/7 and completely abstain from using your Native language. This way I learned a Second Language to a near native level in one year. I was 20 years old.
@xsavidou Mostly listening at first, but some speaking also helps. It definitely works just like that, even faster. One year is enough for very advanced L2 skills. Yes, I mean for Adults also. But Adults need to be completely separated from their native language. Then it works like the OP stated.
Dear Beaverswings and philipdavis,
Thanks for watching the video. I'd like to clarify something regarding words that have a similar form in two languages. The examples you mention are examples of 'false cognates' ('false friends'), i.e. words with a similar form, but different meaning. I referred to cognates/loan words - words that have a similar form AND similar meaning in two languages. Usually, these outnumber the 'false friends'. A knowledgeable teacher who is familiar with srydents' L1 (mother tongue) will distinguish betwen the two and warn them against the false friends.
I have gone through all of the interviews on the channel by academics to help me, I am currently studying for my second MA in Language Teaching and currently teaching English and Spanish online, and I have to say that yours was the interview I got the most out of, thank you so much, Batia! Happy holidays y prospero año nuevo (:
The main problem in this debate is what people actually mean by 'input'. Many people seem to have reduced the idea to a caricature of what was orginally meant, or even is still meant by many who say they use such methods. It was preceded with the word 'comprehensible', and that doesn't just mean it was already comprehensible, that it's just 'letting it sink in', but that that input is at the right kind of level, not too hard, not too easy, where the engagement of the learner with what they hear or read means they work at and transform the language they encounter into meaning via those mental tools that are built for that, plus sharpen those tools in the process, as well as the fact that that 'input' is engaging, carrying meaning that the user is motivated to understand, and on which that learner focuses in itself, making the language the carrier of it. There is work, and analysis, and pattern recognition, and transformation, etc., etc., going on all the time, but it's fused with meaning and the conveyance of it, receptively at first, but then naturally also productively, all the time. At 17:28 Dr. Bauer actually explains herself doing the same thing, and how she would do it on her own in that context, but that's what was meant by 'comprehensible input': you have ways of making sense of it, and you engage with it cognitively in order to transform it into meaning, and to associate the lexis and structures with meaning. You have some 'leverage', some 'purchase' to get to the meaning, and you work at it to comprehend, and that work is 'comprehensive input'. It's not just unfocused letting listening wash over you or something, or just passively absorbing. It's nothing like that.
Yes, when I teach say students one on one, I try to make the input as close to their level as possible, but I do change things up and give them stuff somewhat above their level, but I try to review new vocabulary, phrases periodically, so they can retain it.
Input is key, the only difference is that for children it's their first language and for adults, alot of translation goes on especially early on, other then that.......I mean I'm js!
Step zero is the sound system. Some early practice with a teacher just on repetition can be useful even if you then go whole-bore input. For example, if you want to use "story learning" to get started in Dutch, it's nice to have some idea of what the words you are reading really sound like. Quite generally, I think work on the sound system is underestimated.
Another thoughtful, insightful video. A theme I'm picking up from across the interviews I've watched from this channel is: there is no theme ("There is no spoon!"). There is no "one simple trick that foreign language teachers hate". That's not to say that each guest doesn't have an evidence based method they think works better than others, they do. Whatever your 2nd language learning method is, you probably need to supplement it with some sprinkles from a different school of thought.
Memorising meaningful texts and then making up your own sentences with the words from this text, memorising dialogues and making your own, with learning vocab and grammar, thorough learning and, of course, kistening and reading and simulating teal life conversations - hard work but it works🎉
I started Spanish by myself for fun and loved it..I developed a bit and graduated to a group of different teachers for reading and comprehension and culture and I told her what I think I needed ,again it worked well.
My mother died.. and I stopped for a while and only studied vocabulary for a year or so and when I got a teacher after that time, I was amazed how much the vocabulary integrated what I had learned previously, and my teachers felt that I was a good level considering being self taught for along time just because no goal. I now really want to be more fluent but I find my other interest and work keep me busy but I still love the journey
It take a special kind of person to learn a language on his or her own.
What an insightful interview!
I appreciate Dr. Batia Laufer’s perspective that there isn’t a singular truth regarding complex language acquisition issues. She shared her personal experiences with language learning, particularly highlighting her immersion in Hebrew during her school years. Notably, she described a six-month silent period in which she focused solely on listening without speaking due to a lack of confidence. Remarkably, by the end of this period, she was able to speak fluently and use grammatical structures naturally.
Dr. Laufer also advocates for learning a foreign language with a non-native teacher, emphasizing the importance of studying loanword lists and mastering grammar structures first. (I believe she suggests that a non-native teacher should possess a near-native proficiency or a strong grasp of grammar in the target language, which would align with her approach to language learning.) Which i personally don’t agree with - from a language teachers perspective but also from a language learners perspective.
Furthermore, she references Professor Paul Nation, who champions the value of input but underscores the necessity of a balanced approach. Nation’s "25% method" highlights the importance of language focus, meaning focus, and the interplay of input and output.
In my view, her statement “a healthy mix of everything” is THE key takeaway from the discussion.
I’ve observed that many individuals often seek a single definitive answer to complex questions. However, the best outcomes in language learning are achieved through a comprehensive understanding of the material presented.
The concept of comprehensible input (I+1) is vital, particularly at the outset of language learning. This should be followed by an emphasis on understanding the language's structure, grammar, and producing language (output) when the learner feels ready.
There are numerous effective language teaching methods available. The essential task is to explore these methods, understand what works best for you as a learner, and seek out supportive teachers who align with those methods. As educators, we must remain open-minded, continuously learn about language acquisition research, and continually refine our teaching practices to better meet the needs of our students.
Thanks for sharing!
FUN FACT : "input" doesn't even work with children...
Or more exactly, it doesn't work without social inreaction.
In this experiment, Patricia Kuhl and her team exposed American English-speaking infants to a foreign language, Mandarin, to study how social interaction influences the learning of non-native language sounds.
Experiment Setup:
The researchers divided the infants (around 9 months old) into three groups:
In-Person Interaction Group: These infants had in-person sessions with a native Mandarin speaker. During these sessions, the speaker interacted naturally with the infants by talking and playing with them in a social setting.
Video Group: These infants watched videos of the same Mandarin speakers, but without direct interaction, passively watching a screen.
Audio-Only Group: The infants only listened to audio recordings of the Mandarin speakers, without any visual component or social interaction.
Results:
In-Person Interaction Group: These infants showed an ability to discriminate Mandarin sounds, achieving results comparable to infants raised in a Mandarin-speaking environment.
Video and Audio-Only Groups: In contrast to the first group, the infants in these two groups showed no significant improvement in their ability to distinguish Mandarin sounds. They could not discriminate between the sounds even after multiple sessions of exposure.
Conclusion:
The study highlighted that social interaction plays a crucial role in infants' learning of foreign language sounds. Passive exposure alone, whether through a screen or only audio, is insufficient for developing the ability to discriminate non-native phonemes. This experiment reinforced the idea that a social context is essential in early language learning.
That is with infants though. Adults can learn by relating things back to their native language and picking up on common social cues. Infants are still acquiring their first language and learning things for the first time.
Social interaction and feedback are extremely important for infants no matter what they're learning. It would be ideal for adults too, but adults would have better developed faculties in terms of being able to imagine themselves in the shoes of the people in the videos and such.
Children don't fully develop their ability to put themselves in another person's shoes until 7 or a bit later even.
I wouldn't expect anyone to learn much from listening to something they don't understand, an infant needs to be shown what things mean, an adult already has a vocabulary and can use translation to help build comprehensible input and learn new words, while also studying grammar instructions as needed to aid the process.
(In terms of picking up the native sounds/phonetics of another language, I find that input is rarely enough for adults either, they have to have the differences between sounds demonstrated to them before they can get an ear for them and produce them. And then they have to keep using them or they can lose them again, but I guess that's the same with anything language related, it's not like riding a bike, if you don't use it you will start to lose it over time.)
Bunch of gobbledygook.
Any language for an infant isn't FOREIGN because they don't have a native language yet.
And obviously, infants don't yet respond to audio video stimuli.
Their survival depends on adult humans, not on video entertainment.
Desire for entertainment develops later.
@@cigh7445 Agree, though I'd say it is certainly possible to fluently understand a language even if only given visual and audio input, in principle. I say this because I learned to understand German fluently through watching German foreign elevision from the age of 3, to the point that I could easily understand and speak German before I started formally studying it in school at the age of 12.
One of the problems about starting with loan words in a language like Korean or Japanese is that many of them only have a slight relationship to the English word. "Service", for example, is used in Japanese (サービス) and Korean (서비스) to mean "on the house" or "free of charge." In homes in Korea, they use "옵션" (option) or "풀옵션" (full option) for fixed features--for things that are included, and not optional at all.
Absolutely - this is one reason why French to English (and vice versa) learners often misuse the shared words. It’s very hard to break away from the notion that ‘magnifique = magnificent’ if you embed that in your brain.
@@philipdavis7521
Thanks for watching the video. I'd like to clarify something regarding words that have a similar form in two languages. The examples you mention are examples of 'false cognates' ('false friends'), i.e. words with a similar form, but different meaning. I referred to cognates/loan words - words that have a similar form AND similar meaning in two languages. Usually, these outnumber the 'false friends'. A knowledgeable teacher who is familiar with srydents' L1 (mother tongue) will distinguish betwen the two and warn them against the false friends
Thanks for watching the video. I'd like to clarify something regarding words that have a similar form in two languages. The examples you mention are examples of 'false cognates' ('false friends'), i.e. words with a similar form, but different meaning. I referred to cognates/loan words - words that have a similar form AND similar meaning in two languages. Usually, these outnumber the 'false friends'. A knowledgeable teacher who is familiar with srydents' L1 (mother tongue) will distinguish betwen the two and warn them against the false friends
@@BatiaLaufer Thanks for the clarification.
If a language is learned with a bridging language, the brain's recall process is different from that of vocabualry acquired through acquisition alone. For an adult, acquisition is fine to start but at some near point, even what has been learned by acquisition rather than from "learning" has to be sorted and have formal rules applied to it either through a bridging language or from the acquired vocabulary if it's expansive enough..
In my experience you need basic functional foundation vocabulary of daily living and tons of input, your vocabulary will subsequently increase.
I focus on building as solid of a foundation as I can for the students. I feel they learn faster if they review, see the concepts in so many different concepts.
If you don't emphasize input, how will you learn all those phrases and connotations that are not in textbooks, how will you fill the language system with life and keep it interesting? However, a balance between explicit and implicit learning is still important. Without explicit learning, you won't be able to notice a lot of things as an adult. The kids that say they don't need explicit learning don't know what they doing.
Children who try learning a Foreign language explicitly (Grammar/Translation) FAIL miserably.
They are wasting valuable opportunity, because children can learn L2 implicitly to a native level.
I focus on "Grammar" for use rather than on all "Grammar".
So, 20% of grammar learning gives 80% of what is required in daily life.
Also, this is generally the 20% that is the most interesting to learn and the most useful.
Wow Loïs, you’re amazing. You keep inviting people I read in textbooks and articles when I was studying at a graduate school. Très bien ! J’adore votre contenu !
I'm glad you enjoy the content!
Learning -> Input -> Consolidation - > Learning -> Input. Rinse and repeat.
In my experience, 2 years of intensive learning 500 instruction hours is quite good time to feel fine in most languages
Cool. Were you learning an L2 (or L3) similar to your L1? What mix of learning tools did you use?
I kind of missed the part where the researcher explained exactly why and based on what evidence do adults not learn languages the way children do. Based on what research? Cause I find this example with immigrant parents vs children incomplete. I think everyone who's pushing this idea that adults in fact DO learn languages based on similar mechanics to those that children do DO NOT argue that you can use exactly the same methods, I think they just mean that grammar is learned more instinctively than we believe, hence most often the grammar instruction is quite useless, given the amount of time people spend on this, it's just a terrible yield from the time spent onit. They that before you say and catch the patterns instinctively yourself, you won't truly internalize it and therefore start using those patterns correctly. Children and parents immigrant have completely different motivations. Motivation of children is innate need of self expression, the deepest psychological need a human can posess. Parents already express themselves well enough, just in a different languages. Hence they don't need it on such deep level. This would explain the pace of aquisition differences.
I can see that some of you are discussing the differences in how children and adults learn foreign languages. You are right that children often learn through necessity and social integration. They have more time dedicated to language learning through school and social interactions. They have fewer inhibitions about experimenting with language sounds and structures, and they are less self-conscious about making mistakes.
• BUT the main difference between adult and child foreign language learning is believed to be neurological that has to do with brain plasticity. Our brains become lateralized around puberty and lose quite a lot of neuroplasticity which enabled us as children to acquire languages with ease from input. Even though exceptions exist and some adults can 'pick up' languages easily, most adults tend to learn more explicitly, using structured methods, grammar rules, and conscious memorization techniques. Comprehensible input alone, even a lot of it, is usually insufficient. We (adults) may have lost a lot of neuroplasticity, but we are compensating for it with analytical thinking and learning strategies. This is why we can benefit from good teaching and good learning materials.
@@BatiaLaufer Thank you kindly for sharing the insights. These are good, valid points. My fundamental disagreement with tranditional instruction methods stems from my native Poland and the mandatory English programmes that run for for 12 years of the full mandatory education cycle and yield very poor results for students, mainly in speaking and communication skills. Those same students can perform very well on tests that follow the principles of formal instruction. Specifically, gap filling of specific, arbitrarily selected grammar points. As a bilingual English-Polish speaker I'd be able to find at least 2-3 options for any of the exercises that only have 1 accepted answers in the key. I personally find immersion methods more valuable, hence I'm more inclined to input and immersion based materials which is what would call incidental learning. I like to tell students that trying to speak English without input is like trying to be a writer without reading books. I also find some of the experimental methods tried in Canada and the results that were achieved there somewhat of a proof of my idea. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_immersion
@BartoszJokerS
Perhaps you will find this experiment interesting.
Can a young adult in one year learn English to a near native C1 if the starting level was A1 ?
Yes, most can do it if the conditions are right.
And it's well documented.
Here is the complete story.
I had spent 7 years learning English the conventional way (grammar, translation), some in school, and some as an individual hobby.
And even though I did well in school, realistically, my final level was barely a beginner. (A1-A2, as was confirmed by the lowest TOEFL score possible)
This was before the Internet, so my choices for CI were non-existent.
At that time, I understood very basic English grammar (explicitly) as a set of rules in my native language (Slavic).
Then, as a 19 year old I was a part of this experiment.
I was placed in a US MILITARY academy with very strict guidelines.
Foreign students were only allowed to use English.
Native language (Slavic) WAS NOT ALLOWED, it was an absolute 100% immersion environment 24/7.
(Kinda similar to Middlebury Language school or French Foreign Legion approach)
And even though I was already an adult, I learned a second language to a near native level within a year.
I could physically feel the development of a second language.
After 3 months, I was thinking in L2 full time, I had near native listening comprehension in 6 months.
And obviously i wasn't studying a second language exclusively, I was learning science, engineering, humanities, doing sports. I was having a rich learning experience while acquiring a second language at a rate that seemed magical.
There are very important conditions that allow adults to learn on par with immigrant kids.
One condition, really.
Temporarily abstain from native language and dedicate all the remaining time to a second language.
Regarding the deliberate study of GRAMMAR.
Nobody was teaching me any of that.
Well, I had a tutor for a few sessions, but then a school decided to forgo tutoring because our progress was too fast to keep track of.
Yes, our progress, because there were 5 of us. And we all exhibited remarkable rates of improvement.
We were separated to different battalions (dorms), and we weren't allowed to communicate.
As far as EXPLICIT knowledge of L2 grammar, I FORGOT everything I knew as a beginner.
I ACQUIRED grammar the same way native speakers do, and I was reasonably grammatically correct.
A grammatically correct sentence SOUNDS right, incorrect sounds funny.
I don't know much of the textbook grammar explanations.
That being said, studying English (L2) grammar ENTIRELY in English when a student is progressing beyond A1-A2 could be a USEFUL tool, though not entirely necessary.
In many countries, children learn Native (L1) Grammar in school.
I studied my L1 Grammar and forgot absolutely everything soon after graduation.
Studying L1 Grammar never changed the way I spoke L1. It was a totally useless academic endeavor.
So, I have a conflicted opinion on this.
Studying L2 grammar (or vocabulary) using native language is extremely INEFFICIENT.
Conclusion:
The goal for any beginner should be to reach a level where they can progress in L2 monolingually, i.e., without using L1 in the process of learning.
@@Alec72HD Your experiences are consistent with mines both as a student and a teacher! Thank you so much for an insightful comment and sharing them here!
Thank you for this interesting interview. I use self talk to practice what I learned and it quickly shows where I am lacking. What words or grammar structures do I need to be able to express what I want to say? I try to regularly write it down or record it so I can research or ask friends or my teacher later.
Which language are you learning though
Grammar is also a big deal in japanese. It's really not just the 100 patterns to know. Think more like a thousand. It's less than the number of words you need to know, but mastering 1000 patterns of grammar takes a lot of time.
I’m surprised there isn’t more thought given to thinking in the language you’re targeting for acquisition. It’s always been part of my model that being able to think even simple sentences in Japanese would improve my Japanese overall, if only by acting as prompts to recall vocabulary and grammar structures. Repeatedly seeing trees and thinking 木 or 森 is always going to reinforce that connection from concept to word so I can’t see why more thought isn’t given to this area in academia tbh
I think you mean formulating foreign words or sentences in your mind (It's hard to distinguish between formulation of words/messages and unconscious 'thinking'). I agree with you that this is helpful. Actually I mentioned in my talk that this kind of formulation is 'auto-input', which is useful. So keep on 'formulating', or 'thinking' in a foreign language if it reinforces your knowledge.
@ that’s what made me mention it, I think you’re the first person I’ve heard say that it’s even happening, let alone that it’s a useful part of language acquisition
@@BatiaLaufer I would call it “covert verbal behavior” (which is what the behaviorists would call it) or, if “covert” sounds too espionage-y, “inner verbal behavior.” I think it's clearer than “formulating thoughts in your mind” because it's identical to verbal behavior that's observable only it isn't and verbal behavior of any sort is typically distinguishable from unconscious behavior. It _is_ auto-input because the person is his own listener but it's also (obviously) output because the person _is_ producing verbal behavior. It's just behavior that only he can observe.
@@jeff__w Covert verbal behaviour or inner verbal behavior - these terms sound fine to me. How about inner speech? The important elements of this phenomenon, whatever we call it, for language acquisition are producing language that can also serve as input.
@@BatiaLaufer Inner speech is good, too! 👍
I think we can't compare how children learn by aquasition and adults. What she didnt mention is that children communication differs. They dont use any sophisticated lang, they learn by playing, spend all days sorounded by lang with they peers. No preasure, etc. I do believe in comprehensive input, and I see it works.
13 year olds move to a different country and become indistinguishable from native speakers.
2 TH-camrs Lex Fridmam and Konstantin Kisin are now native English speakers, but they spoke only Russian until the age of 13.
Children's brains are different. That is one thing, but they also don't have full-time jobs, children, and they don't have to make their own food. They have a ton more time. Obviously, if adults have a lot of time, they could learn a ton, but most adults don't want to put in the time.
@QUINTUSMAXIMUS
Time is irrelevant.
Adult immigrants (to US) often fail to learn English, but not because they don't have time.
Immigrants from former Soviet Union and Hispanics are notorious for not understanding English after decades of life in the US.
The reason is more psychological.
You have to suppress your native language, at least temporarily, to acquire a second language.
Children easily suppress L1 because it's not yet fully dominant in their psychee.
Adult's consciousness is DOMINATED by their native language.
I can see that some of you are discussing the differences in how children and adults learn foreign languages. You are right that children often learn through necessity and social integration. They have more time dedicated to language learning through school and social interactions. They have fewer inhibitions about experimenting with language sounds and structures, and they are less self-conscious about making mistakes.
• BUT the main difference between adult and child foreign language learning is believed to be neurological that has to do with brain plasticity. Our brains become lateralized around puberty and lose quite a lot of neuroplasticity which enabled us as children to acquire languages with ease from input. Even though exceptions exist and some adults can 'pick up' languages easily, most adults tend to learn more explicitly, using structured methods, grammar rules, and conscious memorization techniques. Comprehensible input alone, even a lot of it, is usually insufficient. We (adults) may have lost a lot of neuroplasticity, but we are compensating for it with analytical thinking and learning strategies. This is why we can benefit from good teaching and good learning materials.
@BatiaLaufer
I can elaborate further, but in short, there is a simpler explanation.
IMO, the difference between children and adults' learning ability is mostly due to psychological factors.
And we CAN create conditions where adults learn L2 through Input ON PAR with children.
(Although children remain far superior at achieving perfect pronunciation.)
It's not that adults lose some inherent ability but rather that their NATIVE language becomes fully dominant (in their psychee) at adulthood.
In other words:
In adults, dominant L1 literally resists the creation of a competing second language.
Younger immigrant children don't necessarily perceive their L1 as Native, it's just first chronologically.
What can adults do to remove the resistance from L1 ?
Don't use L1 for a period of time.
Middlebury Language School uses this approach with TREMENDOUS success.
For 8 weeks, students live in a camp and never use their native language the entire time.
ANY use of L1 may result in immediate dismissal from the program and without refund BTW.
For many, it's psychologically arduous at first.
Kinda like quitting drugs, suppressing dominant native language.
But it gets easier, and results seem like MAGIC.
I speak from experience.
There is nobody out there saying it's just input. Waiting to speak is not the same as not speaking at all. Why do people engage in strawman arguments like this? Very tiresome.
Because a lot of people are saying that only input is needed. It is a core tenet of Steven Krashen’s theory, and propagated by many people.
Everybody nowadays says it's just an input, what are you talking about.
People are looking for some easy way to learn a language neglecting the grammar cause they're lazy. The best way to learn a language for an adult is the old and proven way - grammar, input, output and a lot of practice like test quizzes etc
@@father_saturnAgreed.
@batsoup7031 my thought too.
@@father_saturnat least on the JP learning side, that's what they all say on the face of it, but they all use anki and other tools like it for study. If other language learning communities are similar, you fell for the click bait.
She's bang on. I feel vindicated :-)
I think her approach doesn't work for learning Japanese at least for me
it is really depends on
about words recycling sounds really good for me that's important to see vocabulary in a different context
and absolutely if you are talking with yourself in your head in a target language it is kind of thinking on the language and it is count for sure
I think comprehensive input is key and amazing just look at luca lamparielo he speaks in native accent english italian spanis Russian. He started as adult. Of course grammar is important and memorizing some basics but if i was left in an island with mandarin chinese girls for sure after some year i would speak 🗣️ mandarin chinese that gow all la guages were thaught
left in that island with mandarin chinese guys would be probably more effective lol
At last, someone who actually knows what she is talking about. However, the interview format means that she did not put proper emphasis on certain elements, sufficiently develop others, or differentiate your meaning shown in your question from what she was trying to say. It would be good for her to present her ideas concisely in a pinned post. That would improve viewer comprehension and avoid misunderstandings.
First, your takeaways are behind a subscription paywall (free, but then I have more junk mail I don't read and I need to unsubscribe or send to the junk mail box).
Second, they are your takeaways and not what she was trying to say. I want to see her compilation. For example, how you understand 'input' and how she understands it can differ.
I sometimes wonder if all the cognates English has with French has made my higher level learning of French harder because so much of the vocabulary and its various uses just get mixed up in my head. Like, does French use this cognate in this same esoteric way that English does, or is that just my imagination? Is esoteric a word in French BTW?? Probably. I'm sure I've come across it, but since English and French share so much vocabulary I just can't keep them separate sometimes. It's frustrating. lol
I understand your frustration. There are researchers who claim that similarities between languages can be just as difficult as differences. However, more research suggests that similarities have a facilitating effect on the whole even though in some areas they may confuse. Russian and Polish have many false cognates. They don't just have a different meaning, but the opposite meaning. Imagine how frustrating it is when you say the opposite what what you intend to say....
Thanks for sharing!
18:10 who said your first language has no influence?
I have honestly never heard that.
Haven't finished the episode yet, interesting guest !
Thanks for watching. Hope you finished the video... 🙂 You'd be surprised how many language teachers and scholars claimed L1 (first language) was irrelevant to L2 learning and teaching... Some still believe it. However, there is a lot of research evidence that not only L1, but also other languages you know influence the learning of any new language.
@@BatiaLaufer seems so obvious
That is an interesting interview. It makes a nice change to hear someone who refers to a range of research, rather than yet more of Steven Krashen’s theory, which is unscientific nonsense. I have struggled with German, learning the words was a real problem until I stopped using the Krashen methodology. I now break words apart, and examine the components, that helps a lot. Once you know a lot of words, you can start to understand how the language works and sounds using real speech. As she says, you can learn words theough explicit study, and then through use they become implicit i.e. you can use them without thinking. I found French much easier than German as it shares so many words with English. People underestimate the incredible difficulty of learning a foreign language. Learn French in 30 days is nonsense, but there’s a lot of people out there who are making money from such outrageous claims. Doubtless most customers buy the course, and give up after 30 days having learnt very little.
how do I find a "good teacher" for Arabic who speaks Hebrew as well as Arabic who's not a Muslim? - Zach
You've got plenty of bilingual Arab Christians
Minute 13:32 listening to cassettes? What year is she living in? 1998?😂😂😂
Thank you for sharing this perspective. Some of her points are interesting, but overall, I have to say that I find limited value in what she offers, much of her advice feels outdated. For various reasons, I also find it hard to connect with her perspective.
I tried to learn English at school for 10 years then on my own…the results were just mediocre as I couldn’t have a basic conversation. Learning by heart vocabulary will NEVER make you fluent. Ask yourself why you don’t have to learn words in your native language?
you don't learn words in your native language? I do. Someone says a new words and you say, whats that? Then they explain it
@derekofbaltimore
Growing up, you learn new words (in L1) effortlessly.
Most of the time you encounter a new word, learn what it means and remember that word for the rest of your life.
@@Alec72HD I dont know about it being effortless...
but what i'm trying to understand is what is different about "learning" a word in a class vs learning it the way you described - encounter a new word, learn what it means, and remember it.
Both seem to include the word learn and both require outside help...?
@derekofbaltimore
The difference is that we learn our first language monolingually.
We may encounter a new L1 word in a class, let's say it's a science class.
But when we are learning L2 through translation to L1, it doesn't register in our brains as a new language.
@@Alec72HD ok, so what you are actually talking about is the use of translation.. understood
It seems to me that children learn a language because they never give up trying to learn because their very survival depends on being able to communicate.
• I can see that some of you are discussing the differences in how children and adults learn foreign languages. You are right that children often learn through necessity and social integration. They have more time dedicated to language learning through school and social interactions. They have fewer inhibitions about experimenting with language sounds and structures, and they are less self-conscious about making mistakes.
• BUT the main difference between adult and child foreign language learning is believed to be neurological that has to do with brain plasticity. Our brains become lateralized around puberty and lose quite a lot of neuroplasticity which enabled us as children to acquire languages with ease from input. Even though exceptions exist and some adults can 'pick up' languages easily, most adults tend to learn more explicitly, using structured methods, grammar rules, and conscious memorization techniques. Comprehensible input alone, even a lot of it, is usually insufficient. We (adults) may have lost a lot of neuroplasticity, but we are compensating for it with analytical thinking and learning strategies. This is why we can benefit from good teaching and good learning materials.
@BatiaLaufer
Thanks.
I have been learning German for years and although I got good passes in exams in German at university, I said, I didn't really feel comfortable in the language then.
Then I started listening to (rather than watching) tons of "learn German" videos on TH-cam at different levels of difficultiy and after about six months I could understand almost everything that was being said, no matter how fast the video creator spoke.
Now I have an online German tutor and slowing I am managing to say more of what I want to say with a lot less effort.
I can read and write German well because of all the German courses I've attended.
I think the prior learning allowed me to "suddenly" understand almost everything I heard in German. This ability just emerged from nowhere. It's getting close to that level with my ability to say almost anything I want to say with not too many errors.
I'd say a person could learn to learn a language with only comprehensible input, but not in an reasonable amount of time as an adult.
The thing is, kids don't understand a lot about the world or using structured techniques or even read well for that matter, so they can't use these tools to acquire or learn a language faster. An adult can and if he or she it willing to make a ton of mistakes on route to mastering a new language, then he or she can master a language with a blend of comprehensible input and formal learning faster than either approach alone.
An adult may to be able get new languages before 26 unlike an adult after that age.
Life forced me to explore situation with languages finding the ability understand English after 34 without knowing that I had got the language in my youth.
But breakthrough through the wall of language doesn't mean high level which is the problem in my age.
I haven't seen a video on youtube where is telling the truth about languages.
The professor should know better about words like “cat”. She speaks Slavic languages and Polish has many ways to say “cat”! But I enjoyed the interview. I agree with her on many points.
She isn't telling the truth.
I observed thousands of adult immigrants in the US.
Most of them avoid immersion in English.
They go out of their way to read and watch entertainment in their Native Language.
Very few actually seek 24/7 immersion.
I’m French and I did when I moved to the USA. But you are right I met some Spanish speaking women who have been living in the USA for 10 years and couldn’t speak in English at all because they worked and spoke only with people speaking Spanish. I think it has to see as well with your level of education and your openness.
@@chrystele-fr
If an adult wants to learn L2 on par with immigrant children they need to temporarily suppress dominant (native) language.
Children don't have such overwhelming dominance of their First Language like adults.
So, immigrant children can efficiently learn L2 while still using L1.
I think your first sentence ''She isn't telling the truth.'' is too extreme. This is not my perspctive. Adults learn to the level that that can function and survive. This doesn't mean they achieve fluency or anything approaching near native ability. Its not a surprise that immigrants to another country still continue to speak in their first lanaguage.
@krncrty
Her entire theory is based on the observation that a majority of adult immigrants don't acquire a second language, but children do.
That doesn't mean adults are unable to learn L2 the same way as children.
They really don't want to do what it takes. And what it takes is substantial replacement of their use of L1 with L2.
Adult immigrants also fail learning L2 through Grammar/Translation.
I have never met one who learned English (to a fairly advanced level) that way.
@@krncrty I think you are generalizing as well. I was an adult learner when I came to the US, and there years later, I was accepted in college with such hight grammar scores that the woman who checked my test was shocked. She told me that even native speakers rarely score that high. I went on majoring in Journalism. So, when you say " Adults learn to the level that that can function and survive. This doesn't mean they achieve fluency or anything approaching near native ability," you are generalizing. I agree that many adult immigrants don't have the time or desire to learn more, but many do. We are different people with different backgrounds, and should be put under the common denominator of "immigrants."
It was very good to practice my listening skills, but i don't agree with her. Thanks Lois! You're amazing!
I'm glad you enjoyed the video!
What does mean word "Input and output" in this podcast? Thanks.
I'm also curious.
Output is speech generation. Input refers to language consumed by listening or reading
Output is speaking and writing. Input is listening and reading.
@@Harry-io8pd thanks. So it’s clear for me
My French pronunciation is rubbish anyway.
How is input going to fix that?
Emm, there is a difference. Modern teachers talk not just about input itself but about COMPREHENSIBLE input. This is the difference: using comprehensible input is a very effective way to learn a language, whereas just input is not. This video got lost in this misconception. That teacher belongs to the old generation with outdated methods
Unfortunately you are repeating the propaganda of the Krashen theory adherents. His theory is not based on science, in fact it is contradicted by research, as the guest indicated. Krashen is a showman and not a scientist. Thus the propaganda describes it as the ‘natural’ way to learn a language, unlike the earlier supposedly old fashioned methods. In truth using lots of input is nothing new, people were doing so long before Krashen. As for the teacher, she is a highly experienced language learner and researcher, with a lot to teach us.
@@StillAliveAndKicking_ Krashen is a scientist who graduated from MIT with a degree in English Linguistics, specializing in English grammar. His speciality after that became Language Acquisition and he has made great contributions to the field in a time when people thought language learning was mainly about doing lots of grammar exercises.
His theory is that we learn by massive amounts of comprehensible input. That hasn't been disproven, in fact it's impossible to learn a language without it.
What ignorant adherents of his suggest (and he himself in interviews) is that it is the *only* way we learn.
However, studies since the 1990s have shown that output is also important and that input alone (listening and reading) won't allow us to use the language perfectly. Honestly, that's pretty logical too. How can you get good at speaking without actually practicing it?
Not true, teaching grammar the way it is used IS a form of comprehensible input. A basic, commonly used passive sentence as mentioned around 9:40 could be accompanied by an image to become an even more comphrensible form of input. Nothing outdated about that. The point where this researcher does not agree with Krashen is that for adults its important to point this out - and that is grammar instruction is.
Languages do have some patterns, and pointing them out allows you to notice them more, and that makes them more meaningful and memorable. Actually, any teaching method based on the naturalist approach (Stephan Krashen's theory belongs to this field) will try to point things out to make them noticeable. In this sense the two aren't different, just that Krashen says it doesn't need to be explicit, whereas Dr. Laufer says some explicit instruction is needed.
@@gargantuan2810 Comprehensible Input is a term coined by Steven Krashen, hence it has a specific meaning. According to Krashen, a language cannot be learnt explicitly, all learning must be implicit. That simply is not true. Thus Krashen says that grammar should not be taught and words should not be memorised. In fact most grammar is best learnt explicitly. His theory is incredibly simplistic and not supported by science. It is outdated, and discredited. This lady is worth listening to, she also has far more experience of language learning than Krashen. Her ideas also match my own more limited experience of learning languages, in my experience CI is a very inefficient and poor learning method.
@@gargantuan2810 It is not true that when Krashen published his theory, people thought that language learning was mainly about doing lots of grammar exercises. There were many schools of thought. As early as the nineteenth century people were describing methods based on a more naturalistic way of learning using large amounts of input. The Grammar Translation Method was a rather rigid method based on, you guessed it, grammar translation, that fell out of favour decades before Krashen. Krashen made numerous hypotheses in his theory, they are all either disproven or lacking evidence. You are probably misinterpreting his theory, as many people do. We do need large amounts of input, but probably not in the early stages of learning, and that is not the same as saying we can learn from comprehensible input. I’m learning German with mostly incomprehensible input. For a while with French I listened to barely comprehensible input. That had the benefit of gradually training my brain to retrieve words rapidly, and reinforcing the meaning within an appropriate context. I also listen to audio while reading the transcript, to train my brain to recognise speech. Krashen’s theory is oversimplistic misleading nonsense.
the endless mojntain of words baahahahahahaha.... so true
Sounds like robots
If you land on a plane on an island with someone who speaks another language and spend 2 or 3 years listening to them, you will leave that island speaking a new language.
I don´t think so, I spent 5 year working with a chinesse guy I din´t learn a thing.
@@Luminous000
That's not what OP said.
You need to be immersed in L2 24/7 and completely abstain from using your Native language.
This way I learned a Second Language to a near native level in one year. I was 20 years old.
😂@@Luminous000
Just from listening to them?🤔 I don't think so.
Maybe you mean speaking to them, too?
@xsavidou
Mostly listening at first, but some speaking also helps.
It definitely works just like that, even faster. One year is enough for very advanced L2 skills.
Yes, I mean for Adults also.
But Adults need to be completely separated from their native language.
Then it works like the OP stated.
I already thought the video was boring and when I heard where she's from, I immediately stopped watching.
Because she's from Israel ? How intelligent of you.
You really feel the need to announce your racism on the internet?
She's from Lithuania. Maybe you thought Israel.
I don't trust her physiognomy.
It's not a very wise comment bro.
@@rsloma71 it's just an observation
Completely independently from he fact that she is an Israeli Jew of course... (Irony)
@@PaleoalexPicturesLtd Google Roald Dhal physiognomy. Some things are universal
@@wyverntheterrible I observe a racist in our midst.