Prompted by a discussion on the Italian Language Forum concerning the DILIT Language School, I thought I'd initiate another one, perhaps more general, regarding different language learning methods people have encountered. I'd like to describe the methods, discuss basic impressions, and evaluate the effectiveness of these different methods. I'm going to link this to all of the language forums and also paste in Discovering Umbria's post about DILIT.
To start off, long ago , when I was an undergrad, I studied Italian with a teacher who taught via a method of which I never got the name. She used "regoli" - little colored wooden sticks. All of the conversational exercises were generated from the way we spoke about the regoli. For example, she started the very first class by picking up a blue stick and saying "un regolo blu." We all repeated and it went on from there. Has anyone ever heard of this method? Did it die out? There was no textbook for the course - we just spoke (and eventually wrote a bit) about regoli.
Frankly, since I had had a good bit of Spanish at that point as well as one year of accelerated high school French, the class bored me. The others in the class seemed quite slow and I really didn't learn much. But if someone told me that they pursued Italian study with this method and continued further than my 2 semesters with it and really learned the language, I'd be interested.
Ok, that's one of my language learning stories. Anyone else?
I have not heard of the regoli method, but … From studying the teaching of secondary languages as part of my linguistics studies, I remember learning how NOT to depend on the written word for one's first impression of a word. The first impression that enters one's mind should ideally be an audio impression - a sound impression. In order to have a better accent and a faster immersion, it is best to relate an object immediately with the sounds of a word, which has more impact - and a sound impact at that - in our brain than a list of printed words like pen -> stylo; book -> livre, etc.
(However, people have a psychological dependency on the written word and are immediately thrown off their comfort zone if you tell them to close the book and not see the word.)
One example of how NOT to teach a foreign language would be the older generation of English-teaching in France. Often one meets the best overachiever professionals in this country who still mysteriously cling to Franglasi pronunciations like "go-VERNNNNN-ment" (accent on the 2nd syllable, with the N prominently pronounced) and "MUNG-tane". De Villiers says goVERNNNNNment. Chirac says goVERNNNNNment. Have not heard and am sure Carla's hubbo poo says it too. I began to suspect that the grandes écoles like ENA and HEC have a language teacher-dictionary conspiracy going on for decades, sabotaging certain pronunciations and spreading the wrong ways far and wide ! What's that about.
I am very happy that you posted this post as it could help (we hope!!) the languages learners to make the right choice concerning “where to study” and, above all, “how to study”.
This post makes me very excited as I’ve been a teacher of Italian as a second language for almost 7 ys and I think that being aware of the fact that a language can be learnt and taught in different ways, it’s a very important information to tell to the learners.
Now I am expressing the point of view of a teacher, then in other posts I would probably say the point of view of a student (as I am Italian and if I am able to take part to this forum this is because I studied somewhere and for some (long) time English.... )
When my basic profession was teaching Italian, I saw several times students that weren’t happy of the language course they have chosen, because the teaching methodology was different from the way they were used to learn.
In this first post, I don’t want to begin to bore anyone on the different methodologies (maybe on a next one ..), but I’d like starting with the fact that most of the times, students’ “unsatisfaction” about our course was due to the fact that we didn’t translate what we were saying in English. I saw several students wrote bad feedbacks about the school and us, because we didn’t teach in this way.
So, our school was considered a bad school because we used ITALIAN in class of ITALIAN language!
but I’d like starting with the fact that most of the times, students’ “unsatisfaction” about our course was due to the fact that we didn’t translate what we were saying in English.
Hm.... I thought that was the whole premise of "immersion" - to stay with the language being studied and NOT to refer to your mother tongue as much as possible! Perhaps, in the case of the dissatisfied students, it was a matter of not understanding the methods of the school before they enrolled?
quote:
From studying the teaching of secondary languages as part of my linguistics studies, I remember learning how NOT to depend on the written word for one's first impression of a word. The first impression that enters one's mind should ideally be an audio impression - a sound impression. In order to have a better accent and a faster immersion, it is best to relate an object immediately with the sounds of a word, which has more impact - and a sound impact at that - in our brain than a list of printed words like pen -> stylo; book -> livre, etc.
This is very interesting, AinP. So I guess that in the "regoli" method, in which different regoli stood for various objects (e.g. the teacher would hold up a regolo and tell us that it was (or represented) a pen or a stick or something), that concept was being kind of abstracted. To my mind, the reasoning you describe makes a lot of sense.
Hm.... I thought that was the whole premise of "immersion" - to stay with the language being studied and NOT to refer to your mother tongue as much as possible! Perhaps, in the case of the dissatisfied students, it was a matter of not understanding the methods of the school before they enrolled?
Basically, I think it depends first on the generic fact that even if we are in the 21st century and we have at least already more than 40 ys of studies on language learning,learning processes and so on, there are still places (and believe me, not so few!) where a language is taught as 60 ys ago...
Secondly, yes. Concerning the school where I worked, in the brochures as well as on the website, it was CLEARLY written that the language used in the class was only Italian (this is because the "immersion" mode you mentioned). So..my opinion is : if there were some students that were upset because we didn't use the translation methodology (that it was a methodology widely used ..but in the 50s)this is was probably because 1.) they haven't read this fundamental part; 2.)they didn't paied attention to this part.
In general people who are not professionals (like teachers, students of languages and so on)pay attention to the location of the school, the activities that the school offer, the price/hours of lessons and so on, not on asking questions on "how do you teach Italian, there?"
When I worked in this school, I was also in charge of the management of the courses, so that I was available (by email, phone etc..) to answer to students questions on the so-called "metodology".
But, if the secretariat received hundreds of questions on the matters above, I think that in 7 ys I received not more than 5 emails asking more info on the matters of the lesson itself...
I think that it's normal for a non-professional, so I think that this thread is really very helpful for people are deciding learning/improving a language.
Discovering Umbria, Sorry that you have had bad responses for your school, i beleive that full emersion is the best way to learn a language. A language is not just words repeted as a parrot they are lived with all the history, culture, etc implied everytime they are spoken...
I am very interested in what people have to say here because I am teaching my daughter english and Italian while French will probably be her first language. She is 16 months old so is absorbing alot right now. I have gotten some flack about teaching her early reading. I would consider it more pictograph regonition because she is not rationally constructing the words.
From what I am reading a baby's brain needs to hear sounds clearly and at a higher pitch and to understand the pictograph of the word needs to see it written in large typeset. As a visual person and dislexic I think that seeing the word written and hearing the pronunciation at the same time is extremely important. I think for an adult it would be the same especially as a person learning their first second language later in life.
At 16 months she is saying "qu'est-ce qu-il y a?" Can you write anything more complicatedly? I have made flash cards of the words/phrases that she is picking up this is one of them. I think as watching her learn that many adults would benefit from hearing-seeing certain phrases-words. Personally I need to see a word written to understand the nuance of the pronunciation.
Another striking thing is how the constant repition of nursury rhymes is helping her speak by learning the sounds. "La beffana vien di notte" - "Bateau sur l'eau". It is amazing how easily the nursury rhymes come back to mind from over 30 years ago. Nursury rymes in English come to my mind with ease but not Italian because I learned Italian as a second language.
I remember learning how NOT to depend on the written word for one's first impression of a word. The first impression that enters one's mind should ideally be an audio impression - a sound impression.
I would make a distinction between immersion in the language (i.e., trying to learn without translating into another language) and learning only by auditory input. Especially with a language like French, where one sound can be spelled so many different ways, I like to be able to see the French word in context to get the spelling. This is maybe less important in Italian, where everything is so phonetic.
I suppose the total auditory immersion idea is based on the way children learn to speak before they can read. But I think that's very hard for an adult learning a new language, who already has developed a lot of visual learning habits. I think, for example, an English speaker might visualize French words as spelled in a completely different way if they didn't see them written while learning them. Then they would have to unlearn all the spelling they had visualized in order to read them.
On the other hand, I can see that looking at the French word while you are learning to say it, you might let your English pronunciation habits get it the way of making the French sounds. So maybe you do need to start with sounds, but I'm not sure what is the most effective way of learning to read and speak at the same time.
I also think that different people have different learning styles, and maybe there isn't "one style fits all" when it comes to learning a language even under the general idea of immersion learning.
I’ve been taking Italian at the Istituto Italiano di Cultura here in Toronto, and I like the balance of reading, speaking and listening. I am a very visual person and I think I would find it difficult to try and learn a language, especially at this stage in my life, without relying somewhat on the written word.
I did have an instructor in ‘Beginners II’ who focused almost entirely on speaking and listening, and I was left in the dust. Part of what made it difficult was that she would say something and if you looked blank, instead of repeating herself slowly, word for word, she would try to explain her point using different words. That just led to more blank looks.
I am now happily repeating Beginners II with a different instructor who suits my learning style.
Posts: 777 | Location: Toronto | Registered: 18 February 2006
All very interesting comments, particularly when addressing the subject of how different people learn - possibly differently at different ages. Both Roz and tuscanartist seem to say that having the visual reference of the language (either at the same time or soon after) is very helpful.
This reminds me of a theory I have read about (if someone knows more about it, please chime in) which classifies people in 3 different groups - those who are primarily visually oriented, those who are primarily aurally oriented, and those who are primarily kinesthetically oriented. For learning a foreign language, assuming that there's something to this theory, I wonder if those who are primarily aurally oriented learn better with fewer visual aids?
One of the major frustrations about language-learning concerns how fast we forget a new word.
In my experience of learning a few languages (all badly ) , I learned some tricks about how to help retain vocabulary. -- Accent on the "help"...
- Learning by phrases is better than learning by words because (1) one remembers better; (2) one is sooner "speaking.
- Contextualing the word or phrase also helps remembering. This means remembering the word with, say, the object, or with an environment, or with another word. Examples: (1) In many European languages, learners are forever forgetting the correct article with the noun. It is better to learn the article along with the word: La matière, le cimetière. But la and le don't sound different enough, or impactful enough. So it is even better to learn by repeating not La matière, le cimetière, but "de la matière", "DU cimetière". (2) When learning adjectives, instead of remember one word after another, pair them in opposites: noir-blanc, joli-laid, grand-petit, loin-près.
Sigh. Sooner or later one has to accept the brute labor of language-learning. The French say the way to learn a word is to have forgotten it 10 times…
Learning by phrases is better than learning by words because (1) one remembers better; (2) one is sooner "speaking.
Couldn't agree more.
My first attempt at learning Italian was through the Board of Ed evening classes, and our teached asked us to memorize the preposizione articolate!
My current instructor approached this 'disastro' (his word) by having us use them in context. We are also building a chart of the various meanings of the prepositions, with examples of use. I finally feel as though I'm beginning to make sense of it.
Posts: 777 | Location: Toronto | Registered: 18 February 2006
The French say the way to learn a word is to have forgotten it 10 times…
That kind of describes my experience - looking up a word, then immediately forgetting it, looking it up again, thinking about it later and not quite remembering so I look it up again, etc.
quote:
- Learning by phrases is better than learning by words because (1) one remembers better; (2) one is sooner "speaking.
- Contextualing the word or phrase also helps remembering. This means remembering the word with, say, the object, or with an environment, or with another word.
I like both of those ideas - thanks. I wonder if any particular teaching method distinctly makes use of them?
The contextualizing technique could extend beyond just an object or another word. As you say, AinP, with an environment - memorizing the word in a phrase or attached to a specific action.
Hello everybody. I see that this thread is having a good success and I am very happy!
Following David's comment I see that every person has his/her own preferred and personalized way to learn a language and this is absolutely true.
But the learning process of a language, the "paths" that the brain uses are the same for all mankind as we belong to the same species which is called "homo sapiens"
The natural learning process of a second language is the same that we used to learn our mother language, which means by a long process of "attempts, mistakes, attemps, mistakes, attempts, mistakes...." and so on, to the final "correct" form.
The basic problems that adults have learning a language is that we have forgotten how long it took learning our mother language and we have forgotten that we learnt it by an infinite number of "attempts".
So the students I wrote before (i.e. people who like the translation method) were basically people that have forgotten the process and like the translation because it was considered a (totally) false way to jump ahead...
Then the traslation method is a sort of (false) placebo as it seem to reduce the level of stress in an adult. The stress infact is the most terrible enemy in the language learning for an adult.... For this reason some people dislike the "immersion" mode.
The natural learning process of a second language is the same that we used to learn our mother language,
There is some doubt about this: MRI images of the brain during language learning for adults seems to show different processes than for young learners.
quote:
The basic problems that adults have learning a language is that we have forgotten how long it took learning our mother language
Here is one of a few counter-examples that I know of: my friend was born, raised and educated up to the age of 19 in Le Marche. He was the best student in his class, and especially excelled in Latin and Italian. He then went to the US where he has lived for the next 55 years of his life. He furthered his education in the US with a BS and an MS. He later learned French, and can be considered fluent. He married an American woman, spoke only English in the home. He is fluent in English, with no distinguishable accent. At this point he has lived in the US for 55 years.
Yet he revealed to me several classes of problems he has never been able to overcome in the English language - problems that in general do not affect people raised in English speaking countries.
I would guess that 5 or 10 years (ok, maybe 15) is long for a normal person to be fluent in the English language when it is their mother tongue. However, my friend is an example of someone I would consider above normal in intelligence and education (he recently achieved his Master Level rating in contract bridge), with a mind eager for learning, who still has problems with English after 55 years. He appears totally fluent in English because he knows his problem areas and is able to avoid them in conversation.
I consider my friend to be one of several people I know that have learned languages as an adult with similar results. However, others I know (far fewer though) have much more success: a neighbor went to Florence for 6 months and came back fluent in Italian!
I wish I could to that, but I'm afraid of what would need to be removed from my brain in order to make space for me to do it...
Posts: 401 | Location: Northern VA | Registered: 13 October 2004
Originally posted by Remensin: [There is some doubt about this: MRI images of the brain during language learning for adults seems to show different processes than for young learners. ...
Hi Ramemsin. I agree with your consideration above. Sure!The areas of the brain involved are different and this is because the brain and, above all, the background of an adult it's totally different from a child's one.
What I'd like to point out in my previous post was that if we -adults- face the learning process only with the logic, trying to find a logic in everything, I think it's rather difficult going on on the process. For sure we -adults- cannot face the learning process as a child as it's (unfortunately) impossible. For sure we always need something where we can hang on, such as a grammar rule, a translation, writing the word, and so on. I'd like to insist on the fact that human beings with a normal intelligence are programmed by our DNA to develop the language ability, so that there's really no biological reason for not doing it. Learning a language and learning maths is not the same. Learning a language is similar to learning to drive (i.e an ability vs. theory) even if our grand grand parents in the caves didn't have cars
Otherwise how we can explain that an immigrant with a very basic or even without an education after some months in our countries can be able to communicate and your friend with a high education have still some problems in his second language?
I think (and also in my 7ys experience of teaching Italian as a second language to adults) that if an adult have problems in learning a second language, this is because there are some psycological facts that make this process very difficult. One of the worst (that I saw many times..) was the fear of loosing face, the fear of making mistakes..but without making mistakes it's really impossible learning a language as well as learing to drive a car
One of the worst (that I saw many times..) was the fear of losing face, the fear of making mistakes..
I agree. The fear of seeming silly is one of the biggest obstacles to learning a language.
As for the difference between an immigrant learning a language and a well-educated person learning a language, first of all, their expectation may be very different. If I were learning a language in order to start a life from zero and survive, I would not mind stringing sentences like "me tarzan you Jane". If I were learning French because I was tired to dealing with translations and wanted to read Proust dans le texte and be able to discuss it with other Proust fans, "moi Tarzan toi Proust" would not do. And there is also the famous learning "curve". As a beginner, most of us progress rather fast. After a while (6 months to few years, depending on the person) we reach a plateau, and our progress slows. It seems to us we make the same mistakes and retain nothing, and we seem to remain in that state for years. We have enough language for survival, but not enough to, say, understand a joke and reply with another joke spontaneously. Many learners/immigrants stay in this slow-progress time machine for years, maybe decades. They may never wield the language like a native speaker. And they may still feel frustrated and dissatisfied, even though in a way the "worst" is over...
As for the difference between an immigrant learning a language and a well-educated person learning a language, first of all, their expectation may be very different. If I were learning a language in order to start a life from zero and survive, I would not mind stringing sentences like "me tarzan you Jane". If I were learning French because I was tired to dealing with translations and wanted to read Proust dans le texte and be able to discuss it with other Proust fans, "moi Tarzan toi Proust" would not do. And there is also the famous learning "curve". As a beginner, most of us progress rather fast. After a while (6 months to few years, depending on the person) we reach a plateau, and our progress slows. It seems to us we make the same mistakes and retain nothing, and we seem to remain in that state for years. We have enough language for survival, but not enough to, say, understand a joke and reply with another joke spontaneously. Many learners/immigrants stay in this slow-progress time machine for years, maybe decades. They may never wield the language like a native speaker. And they may still feel frustrated and dissatisfied, even though in a way the "worst" is over...
Hi AiP, I agree with your comments above. For sure there's a difference concerning the level of fluently that an immigrant and a well-educated person could reach, but in my experience this is not authomatic nor can be generalized. I mean that I experienced several students with a high level of education, but not everybody reached a high level of abilities in Italian.
Personally I strongly believe that the psycological fact is one of the most important aspect to consider.
there's really no biological reason for not doing it
Hi Alessandra,
Sorry it wasn't clear, but on re-reading my post I can see that left out a point: The imaging studies show sturctural (biological) differences between the brain of an adult and the brain of a child.
This may mean that the pathways for storing (learning) and the pathways for retrieving a language may be quite different. That may mean that the most efficient ways to learn a language may different between adults and children.
As with all biological properties, these differences may be greater in some individuals and lessor (or non-existent) in others. But they seem to be present in most people.
Posts: 401 | Location: Northern VA | Registered: 13 October 2004
One of the worst (that I saw many times..) was the fear of loosing face, the fear of making mistakes..
Yeah, so true!
What an interesting thread. I don't have much formal knowledge about language learning but I sure have a lot of opinions on what works for me! And like Alessandra pointed out, it is interesting that people will ask all sorts of questions about the excursion and housing but not about the methodology. Personally I am think total immersion is great - except for at the very beginner level. There, I think a little translation now and then is helpful, especially if somebody is taking a class for just two or three weeks, to not feel too discouraged.
I have been lucky when it comes to languages because of several reasons: I started early, as most northern Europeans. I really, really like languages. But the most important is probably that I am not shy, I am not afraid to make mistakes, and I am a bit of a show-off. I am that annoying person who really enjoys role playing about a trip to the store, which to many people, especially adult learners, is total torture.
Being a language teachers must be really difficult, because you are always catering to people on different levels, with different backgrounds, ages, previous foreign language learning, different learning styles, etc. Personally I often find it difficult to pick a level, because it seems that most people are better at writing/reading/grammar, while I can be pretty bad at those but still good at speaking and understanding. (Of course, this is all anecdotal evidence!)
I am trying to decide on a language class right now - I have taken American Sign Language for a while and now I want to take it on the college level. However, I really don't like that there is no refund after the first class, because I don't know anything about the teaching styles, the level, etc. I prefer relaxed, conversation type classes but I have no idea what these classes will be like. So it is a 500 dollar bet!
I am curious about the sign language because I believe that written music and played/sung is as much as language as any other. I learned basic music early.
I would like to know what blocks people from learning a language? Is it that they make it too complicatd?
I think that finding th blocked point is probably an important factor. IMO Learning should be fun not work or over acheivement are we too hard on ourselves?
Originally posted by tuscanartist: I am curious about the sign language because I believe that written music and played/sung is as much as language as any other. I learned basic music early.
Yeah, sign language is really interesting! I think sign language really shows very clearly that language is culture, as many Deaf people consider themselves a linguistic minority, not persons with disabilities. In the developing world, where deaf children often do not get exposure to sign language or education, and often end up with no language at all, it is painfully evident how important language is to us.
Sorry if this was off topic, I just find it fascinating!
As for the blocks to learning language, I really don't know, but it seems clear to me that some people have a facility for languages and others less so, just as we have with math, etc. On the other hand, I think if we start early enough the window of learning is much bigger. We see this a lot in countries where bi- or trilingualism is the norm; there, everybody knows the two or three common languages, not depending on whether they have an ear for languages or not.
Perhaps, with a language, it's not always clear (or it's feared/perceived) that someone who isn't fluent may be seen as stupid/backward, rather than just as a beginner, as they might be in another subject. With a language, almost everyone one meets in the country of the language is seen as an expert (in the language, but not as a teacher who might be assumed to be patient), and one's tested in everyday life, rather than in a context focussed on the subject as a discrete subject, with many learners/beginners to few experts.
Originally posted by Chiocciola: As for the blocks to learning language, I really don't know, but it seems clear to me that some people have a facility for languages and others less so, just as we have with math, etc. On the other hand, I think if we start early enough the window of learning is much bigger. We see this a lot in countries where bi- or trilingualism is the norm; there, everybody knows the two or three common languages, not depending on whether they have an ear for languages or not.
Hi! yes it is rather difficult to understand what blocks people for learning a language... I agree also with Chiocchiola's comment above, about the "language exposure factor".
However in my experience I noticed that the blocks are not strictly connected with age among adults. I mean that I sometimes experienced 20 ys old students more "blocked" than a 65 ys old one...
In general what I often found in "blocked" students was the fact of being afraid of making mistakes and the fact to find a logic explanation in every single grammar rule (and you know that there are more exceptions than rules!! ).
I spent a lot of time during the lesson with this kinds of students to try to "remove" these ideas and to try to encourage them to make mistakes (as it's a necessary step to go on on the language process)! I noticed than when students trusted in me and in my suggestions, the learning process improved.
What an interesting thread. For what it's worth here are my observations as a hoplessly inept language learner (I have degrees in Physics and Math, including a PHD. I have also had a successful career as a scientist, engineer and manager. So I'm not stupid).
What I particularly have problems doing is restricting my brain to the vocabulary/grammar of the language I am speaking. English is my mother tongue, but I have the same problem with it when trying to describe some of my thought processes (oral exams were hell for me). I can write clearly, but for me the processes of thinking and speaking in language are quite separate. I almost never "think" by "talking" about something. I have noticed that not everyone seems to have this difficulty.
---Marlene
Posts: 643 | Location: Boston, MA | Registered: 11 May 2004
ith a language, it's not always clear (or it's feared/perceived) that someone who isn't fluent may be seen as stupid/backward
--- I have experienced all my life, anyone that has travelled has, to be treated like a idoit because we cannot express ourselves like adults. It is a good reason to learn languages for travelling but no matter where you go (example if you're a woman buying something in a car parts store) you will be treated as an idiot.
Marlene, I am a visual person and sometimes cannot speak at all because my brain works more in pictures with a great visual memory. That is also why I like to see the images of the written word, helps me understand the sound.
It is really interesting at the moment watch my daughter start to recognize shapes and realize that those shapes have names and sounds. She could be learning cryllic or arabic writing and recognizing those shapes as the sounds she is hearing.
Originally posted by David: This reminds me of a theory I have read about (if someone knows more about it, please chime in) which classifies people in 3 different groups - those who are primarily visually oriented, those who are primarily aurally oriented, and those who are primarily kinesthetically oriented.
David, Olivia Mitchell recently wrote several essays on her blog on this topic. Olivia is a coach who works with people to improve their presentation and public speaking skills. (I follow her on http://www.twitter.com/oliviamitchell )
Interesting. Thanks for that, Colleen. It's particularly interesting in terms of tuscanartist's comments regarding the visual cues of written language being a very helpful tool for her because she is visually-oriented - that's kind of different than Olivia Mitchell's assertion.
I first encountered this theory with regard to teaching acting to singers, which is one of the things I do. I'm still interested in working with it - not necessarily to prove anyone wrong or right, but in terms of just exploring teaching methods.
I first encountered this theory with regard to teaching acting to singers
In 1st grade our music teacher taught us solfege by making us do different dance movement to different notes. It was a fun thing to do, and we all got quite good pitch later. Dunno whether it was because this method was esp efficient or that we were especially brilliant kids musically speaking (tend to think the latter… NOT).
My husbandd has also thought that I read faster than he because I had learned Chinese as a kid, and I learned the concept of reading not by letters running along, but by visual chunks.
I have also heard from a special needs teacher that a group of western children plagued with dyslexia were "unblocked" when they were introduced to … the Chinese written language. For the same reasons that gave them difficulty in western spelling-based languages, they suddenly found that their different mind finds a facility in "getting" Chinese. In a western alphabet-based language, in the perception of a dyslexic, the words run into each other, and the syllables do not have distinctive meaning. But they can take two Chinese characters and right away see much more difference; no way can they be the same and run into each other. Eureka, they "get" reading !
The explanation is a little similar to the visual-mind theory; I was told that some people have a linear thinking - thinking in terms of one thing after another - and others have a spatial thinking - thinking in terms of how several things relate to each other simultaneously.
(Off topic: I always wondered if the famous no-sense-of-direction people have to do with this "disturbance" too.)
Seen this way, one thinking is not superior to another, but in western society and its ways of teaching in the schools, it seems that linear thinkers are favored.
AiP Thanks for talking about that because I am dyslexic, not as bad as some people but I am a spatial thinker. I've never read anything about this theory because of never encountering big learning problems in school. There was a period that I was studying japanese and had great fun learning the written language because it came easily. The left to right reading in western reading maybe one of the problems about learning to read for people like me. Is my visual memory is good my spelling is terrible even if all the letters are there the sequence is often wrong. I can tell you that remembering left and right is somes a problem when thinking about following someones directions and if I have to write the small letter d or b I have to think about which is which even writing a word. I've heard that alot of artists are dyslexic. It is funny that dislexia is considered a "disturbance." Who invented that theory?
It is funny that dislexia is considered a "disturbance." Who invented that theory?
Oops, the choice of word is mine. By disturbance I mean people who are born with some physiological feature that the society is not built for, like left-handedness, or spatial-mind when most western learning methods favor linear-mind.
My husband is a musician and a leftie (I mean hand-wise here). He forever gets his directions wrong but wrong in a reliable way. I have noticed that when he guessed at a direction, he would get it 180° wrong. That's when I started suspecting that when it comes to right-left, his mind is turned around because all his life society has fought his left-right instinct. Well, at least this theory of mine gave us lots and lots of laughs.
Another "disturbance" that you may suffer from, which I share, is a special dyslexia: number dyslexia. I too get numbers reversed all the time. When given a phone number, most of the time I copy it wrong. All the numbers are there, but in disorder! Then other bi- or multilingual friends tell me they have the same problem. Now I think it is a multilingual person's "disturbance". In our head, most of the time we don't mix the languages. The words and phrases are too contextual. But when it comes to numbers, they are just numbers, nothing contextual. In a way, all numbers are last-minute translations. Boy, am I disturbed or what.
(And in my head I can only do multiplication in my mother tongue - in Chinse, not English or French. I suspect that for all of us the multiplication table sank in as music, or a musical patter. Musical in the sense of having different tones, pitches.)
Re Chinese vs Western languages: I read somewhere once about the theory that Chinese is a right-brain language and alphabet-based languages are left brain. The author said that Chinese speakers who had suffered left-brain damage could still read and write. But the opposite was true for Western people -- left-brain injury rendered them unable to read and write.
Funny about the numbers. I can only count and do math in english. I also get numbers miked up and mix up some numbers with letters, 4 and F are a problem.
My companion is also a lefty. I realized after over a year why living in his apartment was so strange for me that everything seemed backwards. It is his order of things. He had problems in school with written french. But now he is the teacher of doctorate and post-docs at Institute Pasteur.
We disturbed dislexians can cope pretty well once we get out of the limited schools systems.
.... just a little Seriously, I think that the digression does relate to the discussion.
So, in terms of language learning techniques, it sounds like immersion and less use of standard texts seems to be more of right-brain method. If the consensus is that right-brain-oriented methods are more effective, hm.... what are the educational implications? Outside of private language schools, what's being done in public school language teaching? Is the conversational/less textbook approach being used more than it had, say, 30 years ago?
The method I use in my classroom with young beginning second language learners is called Total Physical Response, or TPR. It follows the strategies young children use as they acquire their first language--a long period of exposure to the receptive (heard) language before there is the expectation that the child produce expressive (oral) language on his own; language is bonded through physical activity and sensory experiences (tactile, vestibular, music, etc), language is always connected to routines and repeated every day in different formats, in carefully structured increments as the children first understand and then begin to verbally use the language.
Atmosphere is crucial in this approach--a positive emotional climate and strong interpersonal connections; language is expected to be produced by the child spontaneously only he is ready; language is modeled instead of corrected; lots of humor, silliness, and wholehearted fun to eliminate stress; novelty to broaden use of language and refocus.
I do know that TPR is used with adults, particularly those beginning language instruction. A friend who is a ESL teacher uses it in her adult classes, and I've seen research about its use with adults. I found this article on TPR with adults, with the effectiveness and limitations.
Hello everybody! I was out for a week and I'm updating on your interesting comments!
For sure there are a many different methods,but I am convinced that the "perfect" method does not exist. For sure we should take into consideration the updated studies on language acquisition (and avoiding the "parrot-like" methods), but I think that it's up to the teacher (but a good one!) to find the right way for each student. However this is possible only when the lesson is individual. When the lesson is a group one, it's rather impossible for the teacher to "tailor made" the lesson... For this reason, for people who have (or better..feel to have) "problems" in learning a language, in my experience, I think that it's better that they enroll for a one-to-one lesson with a (good) teacher.
From reading all your posts, esp Amy's, and checking with my own experience, I come to the concluision that the best method is to make the learner LIKE to speak. Then everything is facilitated. Several times I heard French friends say they had not like the English language, or any foreign language at all. After my persistent questioning, it turned out they all once had a teacher, or a school system, that turned them off language-learning. Then they went to the UK or the States for a holiday and had a positive experience, or they fell in love with Bob Dylan or Leonard Cohen, and started to love the language and love speaking it, so they "relearned" it. The late director François Truffaut fell in love with… the Watergate hearing process! He happened to be in the States during those months and watched the hearing every night and learned his English from the hearing. Afterwards all his life he liked to say in English, "… at zees point in time…".
I was told that some people have a linear thinking - thinking in terms of one thing after another - and others have a spatial thinking - thinking in terms of how several things relate to each other simultaneously.
(Off topic: I always wondered if the famous no-sense-of-direction people have to do with this "disturbance" too.)
Yes, there is research that supports this. There are three types of people: those that find their way by "signposts" (clues) along the route (my daughter does this); those that proceed linearly from point to point; and those that think of a route in two dimensions like on a map. Only the last can find short cuts. I don't know whether pilots think in three dimensions. ---Marlene
Posts: 643 | Location: Boston, MA | Registered: 11 May 2004
Gosh, I came across this thread after months away from this forum. Just thought I'd relate my own experience with you...
I started studyign Italian through a correspondence course - mostly written with the occasional cassette tape to listen to. Of course, that was just to start off with, and after a few weeks I also enrolled myself in an evening class which was taught completely in Italian. This happened in Sydney Australia.
I must say that it was extremely difficult to settle in the first few weeks, but it was ultimately good because the extra effort put in helped the learning process.
I managed to attend a second evening course before moving to Florence, where I had enrolled for both private lessons as well as a small group course at a private school. That was one and a half months in all, and when I finally transfered to Venice for attend university, I continued with more classes for another 6 months.
As an adult, I would definitely say that I needed a "textbook" approach to things throughout the learning process, while the full immersion method would have been ineffective if that had started too early. The reason for this is that, unlike children, I had (and still have) the need to understand the grammatical logic and structure of the language to gain confidence of use, even if it does not help with fluency.
Progress during the first stage in Australia was obviously slow, as there was little opportunity to practice. I remember having a panic attack on my first morning in Florence while on the bus on the way to school. There were some housewives on board who were chatting with each other and I realised I couldn't understand a word they were saying despite my months of preparation... (well, now I know it wasn't just a question of speed but one of dialect!)
While I felt that progress was much faster once I was living in Italy, I cannot really say that I became fluent in the language after having attended all the courses I did (a total of some 8 months of classes). In fact, I would say I only became fluent perhaps after 3 years living there, when I finally stop translating everything I wanted to say from English and simply thought and communicated directly in Italian. This still was not the end of my progress.
What did notice during the several years was that the learning process took place with sudden stages of improvement rather that a steady progress. Sort of like waking up one day and some things suddenly fall into place in your mind. I'm not sure how to explain this, but I'm sure some of you know what I mean.
I think my last "jump to the next level" happened by my 7th or 8th year, when I found I could use linguistic humour in my communication with other Italians. It's great when you can make them laugh!
I am amazed with people who can be fluent in another language after just 6 months!
Yes, a lot of learning comes in fits and starts, with "plateau" periods, at least for me. It's true of more physical skills, like sports or playing a musical instrument, I think.
There really are "Eureka" or "lightbulb" moments - and one needs them for confidence. Fluency doesn't always mean - and doesn't have to - 100% accuracy or a perfect accent: it's the absence of all that stopping and starting and umming and erring, even if the result is a bit "Je vous avoir savoir que je ne suis pas quelqu'un à trifler avec".
Quite right. And I also realise that fluency means different things to different people, from just "getting by" all the way to simultaneous translation.
, when I was an undergrad, I studied Italian with a teacher who taught via a method of which I never got the name. She used "regoli" - little colored wooden sticks. All of the conversational exercises were generated from the way we spoke about the regoli. For example, she started the very first class by picking up a blue stick and saying "un regolo blu." We all repeated and it went on from there. Has anyone ever heard of this method? Did it die out? There was no textbook for the course - we just spoke (and eventually wrote a bit) about regoli. 
)
..), but I’d like starting with the fact that most of the times, students’ “unsatisfaction” about our course was due to the fact that we didn’t translate what we were saying in English. 
) , I learned some tricks about how to help retain vocabulary. -- Accent on the "help"...
I am that annoying person who really enjoys role playing about a trip to the store, which to many people, especially adult learners, is total torture. 
Seriously, I think that the digression does relate to the discussion.
