He says that he likes to do matching pairs because is quick.
2 Likes
I happens. It happens to me. However, that has always been true, and Krashen can’t take the credit for that concept. We do benefit from his popularizing it. And we all learn through every interaction with a language. I learn when I look words up, when I add words to a daily reminder, when my native speaker wife explains things to me, when I write in Russian in my journal, etc.
But certainly: lots of exposure to Russian has taught me a lot – sometimes even when it was nearly incomprehensible input.
When I lived in Germany I was bombarded with input – much of which for months was way over my head. Then one day, as if by magic, I was pretty much conversationally fluent. All the school work, all the conversations with friends, the interactions with Germans while shopping, etc. paid off. It was gradual and seemed to take forever and then it seemed all of a sudden.
1 Like
@LeifGoodwin Thank you for clarifying point 3. Yeah, this makes completely sense. Besides prepositions also verbs are a good example for that.
I am also not convinced that one can reach a sophisticated level in a language by exposure only, let alone perfection. The best evidence are native speakers. 
Scientific debates never get boring. 
1 Like
Discussing language learning never gets boring for sure.
1 Like
Same with me. I’m learning Finnish, and don’t do anything then listen to the lessons, look up unknown words, and listen to playlist when I go for a walk. No grammar study, no SRS and no sentence exercise. I found them be boring. Studying most be fun, no matter what the subject is.
3 Likes
I don’t think anyone doubts that huge amounts of +- comprehensible input is required for acquisition of language at a high level (B2, C1, C2). However, why do almost all adult learners of a second language speak with an obvious accent and make grammatical mistakes? Why are some barely intelligible? I know a Russian Lithuanian who, after 19 years in England, can barely communicate. I suspect Krashen’s theory is too simplistic.
It sounds like you speak to your wife in Russian, hence you benefit greatly from a sympathetic language coach.
Did you study German grammar at school? Did you study the language? Did you end up speaking with a native accent and grammar? As I said earlier, no-one doubts the benefit of huge amounts of comprehensible input in the target language. But I for one am starting to question the model put forward by Krashen.
Incidentally I lived in Montreal for two years, and simply being immersed in a language is insufficient, at least in my experience. Then again I didn’t have the confidence of people like Steve Kaufmann, I felt very uncomfortable talking to strangers in French.
1 Like
I took German two years in high school and three years in college before my year in Germany. By the end of my time there I was sometimes mistaken for native. My grammar was quite good. I never found a conflict between speaking correctly and speaking generally. So much of this is a matter of desire and attitude.
Speaking Russian is a desire but not a priority for me. First priority is comprehension when we are with my wife’s Russian speaking friends and when I listen to podcasts of interest. At this point I don’t spend enough time speaking to think I’m going to become proficient at it. That’s fine with me for now.
1 Like
I’m impressed by your achievements, and perhaps a little jealous (my German is approaching intermediate level) but from what you say you learnt by traditional methods plus huge amounts of comprehensible input and interaction, and no doubt lots of hard work.
In fact I’m starting to think that in the earlier stages, more traditional methods have their place.
As an aside, am I the only one who finds language learning hard work?
It’s one thing to understand a foreign language, quite different to learn to speak it good or fluent, if you don’t practise lot of talking with native speaking people.
But I think some have a talent for learning to speak without accent. Others understand the foreign language very well, but never learn to speak without a more or less thick accent.
1 Like
I’m sure he speaks to a lot of English speakers, but he doesn’t work on his English. Well known polyglots work hard.
As regards accent, when in Germany 15 years ago I asked how to say The bill please, which I think is Die Rechnung bitte. The Germans were surprised by my pronunciation, asking if I spoke any foreign languages. At that time I knew a little French. I am told by native Welsh speakers that my Welsh pronunciation is good, I don’t speak the language, just many phrases sich as Peint o gwrw os gwelwch yn dda. I don’t have a talent for accents, but acquiring an accent requires significant exposure to speakers and paying attention and practising. Most people can do regional accents in their own language.
But you did say learning to speak without accent and I’m sure you’re right, the difference between a slight accent and none is huge and the likes of Richard Simcott are few and far between.
For me traditional methods along with lots of input work. As a result of an eight week Russian intensive last summer at the University of Virginia, I have the equivalent of two years of college Russian. Big help in a compact amount of time.
1 Like
Learning to talk a new language without an accent of your native language is hard. It’s nice be able to do this, but it’s not a necessary for a good (enough) communication.
As my parents are from Finland and I have meet many finish people here in Sweden. I immediately hear they are from Finland, but there Swedish communication is good enough.
1 Like
You missed the comma, but otherwise it’s correct: Die Rechnung, bitte.
Me not 
(but I cannot speak Hochdeutsch neither, so maybe I should start there 
)
No, you are not. It is always hard work if one tries to really become good at something. In regards to language learning the impression that some don’t consider it easy peasy is risen by all those videos of self-claiming polyglots telling you “not to learn, but to acquire a language” (which is mutually the same imho), that they learned to speak fluently in a year and what else not. Even if you know it’s bullshit it is hard not to feel intimitated.
I for one am convinced that the traditional methods are indeed valuable. It might be noted that a lot of those methods incorporate active usage of the language from the beginning on. For example, the natural language learning approach included learning a language via dialog with the teacher. He asks a question and the pupil answer and vice versa. Grammar acquisition is done solely via corrections by the teacher and the whole course is solely in the target language. This approach developed in the 19th century and declined at the 1920’s/30’s. Lots of those principles persisted, but correct grammar teaching and text studies also became important. So basically what Krashen proposed later on (which is more or less identical to the natural method developed a century earlier) had become part of a much more complex study scheme in order to take other important aspects of language usage, like the ability to understand complex texts, into account. He basically tried to revive a method that, while surely not the worst approach, has proven insufficient on the broader scheme. Similar to how a grammar heavy approach, as done in studies of ancient languages (Latin, ancient Greek, et. al.) are insufficient if you want to teach someone to speak a language (which is unneccessary for Latin, for example).
From my very limited life experience I would assume that any approach that solely focuses on one aspect of a rather complex issue while declaring everything else irrelevant is likely to produce suboptimal results.
I would doubt that, to be honest (the talent thing). People always tend to claim that the reason others perform well is due to talent. But maybe those who perform better simply put some extra effort in trying to get rid of their accent.
It’s hard, indeed. It’s as if you try to get rid of a local dialect and you are right that it isn’t neccessary to become completely rid of it in order to be understandable. However, between no accent at all and unintelligeble there is a broad spectrum. It’s part of learning to speak a language that you get the pronounciation roughly right at some point. Even little kids get corrected by their parents if they pronounce a word wrong.
1 Like
We can discuss at length what the word talent means. Of course you can say everybody can learn something if they get enough time. But for some this required time, is more then a lifetime! And even if not so, you must have motivation to continue for a long time with your studies. Reaching this “good enough” level in a shorter time then many other motivated learners, is what I call talent. And also different people have different views on what “good enough” is.
2 Likes
If it feels like hard work, this might be an opportunity for some problem solving. Is it hard work because you need to find a different methodology, different study material, because you have some mental block? Or something else?
When I hit a wall in any pursuit, particularly language learning, I open my journal and do some thinking on paper.
Ultimately I will set at least one goal: “I allow myself to love learning .” It helps prime my brain to find ways to enjoy the process.
A problem will always present an opportunity. Take advantage of it.
Instead of discussing the meaning of the word talent I would stick to the definition of the Oxford Dictionary:
A special natural ability or aptitude, usually for something expressed or implied; a natural capacity for success in some department of mental or physical activity
I’d say this is what is usually meant by people when using this term.
So reaching a certain goal or state faster then others or with less effort is not what the term means, but the fact that the reason for this lies solely or at least mostly in something one is born with.
This is also the definition that would fit to your statement that “[…] some have a talent for learning to speak without accent. […]”. So before I even consider disussing the meaning of talent with you I would prefer you to decide on how you interpret this term. At first it was a mean to reach a goal in learning, than it was the state of reaching it. Well, it can’t be both.
But if we stick with the definition of the dictionary as it is also how you used this term at first, do you have any proof for your thesis?
Obviously there are differences among people. But the question is to which extent someone performs better in an area because of some attributes he is born with (talent) or some skills or a specific mindset acquired over time (like the ability to motivate oneself or a proper orchestration of the different aspects and methods in learning). Furthermore people who are not born in such a way that they can naturally perform good at a specifc matter might adapt over time when dealing with it, so that on the long run the difference might be neglectable. (iirc someone mentioned a study in the forum that illustrates exactly that).
Another crucial aspect is that our self-perception plays an important role. Do we focus on the progress made and reflect on how effective different methods work for us to further improve our workflow or do we focus on our failures and what everyone else does better, while only doing more of the same in order to speed up our progress. My personal experience with teaching others is that those who don’t perform well don’t do so because they are not “talented” or smart enough, but more often their workflow is suboptimal and they are caught in this belief in talent that they often think they don’t have, demotivating them for learning something they think they can never become good at anyway which than usually is the main source for their failure.
So even if people are born with a disposition towards the acquirance of certain skills, whether it is the main driving factor on the long run is imho highly doubtable, and the whole idea of talent a very hypothetical and unproven concept that has a mainly negative if not even toxic impact on young individuals learning (anything, not only languages). It also neglects the sheer amount of time and dedication those people we tend to call talented, like musicans and athlets for example, have put over years and decades into reaching their level. A level I assume we all can reach if we invest the same amount of time. The question is if we want to do this or not. And are we willing to admit that we simply may not be willing to do so or is it more comfortable to state that the other person is just “talented”.
1 Like
French is not hard work, it’s fun and highly beneficial because I listen to podcasts on history, science, technology and other subjects.
German is hard because I have to force myself to sit down and study.
Researchers compared two ways of studying. The first was to cram or blitz a subject, then go on to the next subject. The second was to alternate between many subjects, spending less time on each. Students far preferred the first approach, it was more enjoyable and easier. However, tests showed that the second approach was far better in terms of skills acquired. This applies to academic study and sports. In other words, sometimes you just have to do something that isn’t always enjoyable.
I’m more interested in progress than fun. In fact, I suspect I might have to do a bit more ‘dull’ study in German as I find it works better. I’m the kid who, during the marshmallow test, leaves the single marshmallow on the table in order to get two later on. (1)
In other words, I favour delayed gratification.
(1) Sibsequent studies have shown the marshmallow test to be highly flawed.
Strange. I’ve always prefered the latter. Still wasn’t overhelmingly good at school 
I would be interested on your thoughts on what might be the reason for your differing perception in learning French and German, though. I know German has some, well, grammatical hurdles. But from my friends at school who took French I remember them complaining about the very same thing in French. Or is it just that you are at a different level in French then you are in German?
1 Like
Most important: to pursue your personal interest. Set your goals or set no goals. Whatever works.
If hard work is your goal and your perception, do it. And hard work can still be fun. I ran ten miles yesterday. It was hard work at times, but still a lot of fun!
1 Like