Yes, I also looked at the grammar explanations for Russian, and all that I took away was that there are cases. The explanations of the cases, the endings themselves, all different depending on gender, these I just left. I occasionally revisited them but the information did not penetrate. Meanwhile I was happily concentrating on listening, reading and accumulating vocabulary. Now that I have enough words, I am focusing on the endings, and doing just fine. I would not have done it any other way.
Thank you, Steve for reminding me about my feeling and expierence during my English learning. When I started learning I hardly got used to constructions like "I have a..". Some teachers tried to help and translate it as "Я имею ..." which sounds awkward in russian.
It's very much a virtuous circle I think. The exposure to contextually relevant input provides the source from which we start to recognise patterns. As we start to learn we see only a few dots, as we progress, we're able to perceive more dots. As we reach a tipping point, based on size of vocabulary and simple grammar, we can start to join these dots to perceive meaning. The more information we have, the more readily we can recognise meaning and infer more subtle patterns. And so it goes...
I like what you say about chipping away at a mistake. It can't happen immediately. Sometimes I think people chose to notice or at least it feels like that. My wife might correct the same point in my Japanese until she gets annoyed. Its usually then when I sit up and notice.
And it's all related to this video and 'noticing'. When I get familiar with the endings in the beginning (just familiar not KNOW them perfectly) I can start to notice things much easier especially in those lanuages where they're generally SVO but because of the case system sometimes words can be jumbled in the sentence.that's just what I think about the Slavic languages and Hungarian and Finnish too, you need to dive into that grammar pretty soon so then you can start noticing better and faster
Lingq is great! But what about Swain's output theory? I know you are a partial Krachenite, the same as I am. I know you speak more than ten languages, I can speak five (to CEF C1). Input is phenomenal to help learn, but what about output, and surely in a controlled, relaxed environment, output is easier and more accurate and fluent (I am talking about a classroom)? Basically, my learners learn through input and output. We also use grammar translation where necessary but reading and listening as input, writing and speaking as output work in my experience.
+Andrew Macdonald Obviously we need to produce the language. It helps us activate our passive knowledge. speaking and writing are skills in and of themselves that we want to develop. Producing the language shows us our gaps. It also confirms for us what we think we have learned. All these good things. It is just a matter of the order of things, and the weight. Input over output, input before output. But once we have absorbed enough of the language, output, output and output. But let it be meaningful not artificial.
+Steve Kaufmann - lingosteve Absolutely, no artificial output! I totally agree, as I make my learners speak the whole language. Today we are not focusing on the present perfect or the third conditional, we a focusing on the English language as a whole. Also, please do a video on this. I am a British teacher and I have my own successful language school in Spain, and I recommend lingq to my students, along with anki and memrise as the more input they get, the better. I provide controlled output. As it is, I am studying my second Master's, this time in Applied Linguistics and ESL and the lingua franca of the course is Spanish.
+Steve Kaufmann - lingosteve Also as far as "showing us our gaps" goes, I am studying an MA in applied linguistics, I have the C1 in Spanish. I live and work in Spain, do I need the C2? No, I don't. My gaps are explaining educational theory to clients. That is where I need to work on my personal, professional fluency. Good job Mr. Kaufmann, and please keep it up!
its weird, i cant understand what is happening without an explanation of the grammar, nor can i understand the grammar really without having seen it before. i guess you just have to keep it all in balance.
I like your system and opinions but to me they seems like they'd work best for languages without satanic grammars like Russian (what you're studying) and Polish (what I'm studying). I think you can only do so much listening and reading only without really diving into a grammar book. It seems most of your listeners lean towards asian languages but really those Slavic languages are terrible as far as the grammar, I think you lengthen the time to learn without going into those grammars right away
Yes, I also looked at the grammar explanations for Russian, and all that I took away was that there are cases. The explanations of the cases, the endings themselves, all different depending on gender, these I just left. I occasionally revisited them but the information did not penetrate. Meanwhile I was happily concentrating on listening, reading and accumulating vocabulary. Now that I have enough words, I am focusing on the endings, and doing just fine. I would not have done it any other way.
These early videos of Steve where his head is barely in the frame of the camera LOL. My man has come a long way.
Thought I was the only one watching his old videos lol
Thank you, Steve for reminding me about my feeling and expierence during my English learning. When I started learning I hardly got used to constructions like "I have a..". Some teachers tried to help and translate it as "Я имею ..." which sounds awkward in russian.
It's very much a virtuous circle I think. The exposure to contextually relevant input provides the source from which we start to recognise patterns.
As we start to learn we see only a few dots, as we progress, we're able to perceive more dots. As we reach a tipping point, based on size of vocabulary and simple grammar, we can start to join these dots to perceive meaning.
The more information we have, the more readily we can recognise meaning and infer more subtle patterns. And so it goes...
I like what you say about chipping away at a mistake. It can't happen immediately. Sometimes I think people chose to notice or at least it feels like that. My wife might correct the same point in my Japanese until she gets annoyed. Its usually then when I sit up and notice.
Read out loud has been helped me a lot to notice the language.
And it's all related to this video and 'noticing'. When I get familiar with the endings in the beginning (just familiar not KNOW them perfectly) I can start to notice things much easier especially in those lanuages where they're generally SVO but because of the case system sometimes words can be jumbled in the sentence.that's just what I think about the Slavic languages and Hungarian and Finnish too, you need to dive into that grammar pretty soon so then you can start noticing better and faster
thanks so much for the input! ur description of a dark well is EXACTLY how i feel when immersing myself! : )
'endings can be all over the place'
I must agree with that statement in some language.
Noticing does not come easily but if u do daily listening then one day u notice clearly everything
Lingq is great! But what about Swain's output theory? I know you are a partial Krachenite, the same as I am. I know you speak more than ten languages, I can speak five (to CEF C1). Input is phenomenal to help learn, but what about output, and surely in a controlled, relaxed environment, output is easier and more accurate and fluent (I am talking about a classroom)? Basically, my learners learn through input and output. We also use grammar translation where necessary but reading and listening as input, writing and speaking as output work in my experience.
+Andrew Macdonald Obviously we need to produce the language. It helps us activate our passive knowledge. speaking and writing are skills in and of themselves that we want to develop. Producing the language shows us our gaps. It also confirms for us what we think we have learned. All these good things. It is just a matter of the order of things, and the weight. Input over output, input before output. But once we have absorbed enough of the language, output, output and output. But let it be meaningful not artificial.
+Steve Kaufmann - lingosteve In fact I will do a video on this subject.
+Steve Kaufmann - lingosteve Absolutely, no artificial output! I totally agree, as I make my learners speak the whole language. Today we are not focusing on the present perfect or the third conditional, we a focusing on the English language as a whole. Also, please do a video on this. I am a British teacher and I have my own successful language school in Spain, and I recommend lingq to my students, along with anki and memrise as the more input they get, the better. I provide controlled output. As it is, I am studying my second Master's, this time in Applied Linguistics and ESL and the lingua franca of the course is Spanish.
+Steve Kaufmann - lingosteve Also as far as "showing us our gaps" goes, I am studying an MA in applied linguistics, I have the C1 in Spanish. I live and work in Spain, do I need the C2? No, I don't. My gaps are explaining educational theory to clients. That is where I need to work on my personal, professional fluency. Good job Mr. Kaufmann, and please keep it up!
its weird, i cant understand what is happening without an explanation of the grammar, nor can i understand the grammar really without having seen it before. i guess you just have to keep it all in balance.
I like your system and opinions but to me they seems like they'd work best for languages without satanic grammars like Russian (what you're studying) and Polish (what I'm studying). I think you can only do so much listening and reading only without really diving into a grammar book. It seems most of your listeners lean towards asian languages but really those Slavic languages are terrible as far as the grammar, I think you lengthen the time to learn without going into those grammars right away