How Would You Describe LingQ (In 1-2 sentences)

Open Forum
21

“centered on but not limited to” is more accurate

22

Hi Peter,

Thank you for replying.

  1. Incompleteness → I do not say it was your main point, but it follows that if the criticism is about the shortcomings of Duolingo to learn via listening or speaking (as it was mentioned in a previous post of yours), it is a matter of incompleteness of the tool, rather than its inadequacy.

  2. Anecdotal evidence → by this I meant that the critics you mentioned about Duolingo such as Bob Meese’s or von Ahn’s experience, mentioned on the Wikipedia. That is anecdotal.

So it all boils down to two points in my opinion:

(A) The adequacy of the grammar-translation approach. Is it a good method? Is it useful? Even if it were useful, would it be suboptimal to learn this way, given that there are other alternative methods?

(B) Supposing we decide to use the grammar-translation approach, is Duo a good tool to use?

**

Regarding (A): As you said, there is objective evidence that the grammar-translation approach is not the best. We both agree on this. We seem to agree as well that grammar-translation can however be a useful ingredient of the “mix” to approach a language.

Regarding (B): I do not see how writing full sentences could be matched by any other system. It forces you to practice everything at once. Other apps may have more grammar explanations (thus being more complete) or go up to higher levels (B / C) which are certainly improvements (and come with a price tag). But to the extent they overlap within the same scope, I cannot see how they are better.

So even though it has been objectively proven that the translation-grammar method may not be optimal, that is not tantamount to saying it is useless.

I also think sometimes the best is the enemy of the good enough, and it is better to have a suboptimal approach that fits real life constraints than an ideal method that is expensive or hard to apply. Certainly interaction with native speakers and full immersion will always beat any other system. But I always remember reading about some celebrity who was losing weight by eating expensive sashimi (I cannot recall who it was) just at the time I was trying to lose weight myself. Sure! Eating a lot of sashimi probably beats many other diets in an enjoyable manner. But we cannot all afford that.

Anyway, those months I lost some 15 kg (I was 25 back then, I cannot do that anymore unfortunately) by eating lots of cheap canned tuna and apples. If I had to rely on unaffordable sashimi I would probably have not achieved it. So my life lesson was not to underestimate the value of some cheap tuna if it gets the job done :wink:

Nice discussion, thanks for the feedback!

23

Good morning (as you seem to live in Spain), Jokojoko83!

Nice discussion, thanks for the feedback!
Yes, it’s always a pleasure to discuss language learning with people like you who share the same passion!
It doesn’t matter if we disagree on some (minor) points, because I still enjoy the discussion and learn a lot this way.

  1. Incompleteness
    I’d say we agree 100 per cent on this point.
    No exclusive approach, tool or language learning material (textbook, graded reader, whatever) can cover absolutely everything a language learner needs at a given level.
    Therefore, a language learner must always find a “personal mix” that works for him or her at a particular level. And (s)he must repeat this trial-and error process at a higher level.

  2. Anecdotal evidence reg. von Ahn / Meese
    Yes, you’re right!

  3. grammar-translation can however be a useful ingredient of the “mix” to approach a language.
    Yes, definitely!
    However, I wouldn’t recommend the G-T method at the absolute beginner stage (anymore), as a “soft” approach à la

  1. Supposing we decide to use the grammar-translation approach, is Duo a good tool to use?
    Let me start by saying that I’m not a Duolingo hater. I like Duolingo’s mission, von Ahn, the workplace, the machine learning approach / the software side of things, the gamification, and especially the user interface.
    Also, as a long-time (non-dogmatic) vegetarian, I don’t eat animals.
    So the Duolingo owl is safe from being bitten by me :slight_smile:

I also think sometimes the best is the enemy of the good enough
I agree. “Satisficing” (Herbert Simon, see:
Satisficing - Wikipedia) is good enough in most areas of life to get us going.
Striving for perfection/optimality, on the other hand, hinders this process (that is: of going forward) too much. But, I like the idea of striving for a kind of “evolutionary (i.e. test-driven, incremental, etc.) excellence” à la Lean Startup for dealing with complex (not simply “complicated”) situations…

However, the key question is: Should learners invest their valuable time in Duolingo?
“II do not see how writing full sentences could be matched by any other system. It forces you to practice everything at once.”
Duolingo’s G-T drill approach is definitely superior to word equation decks (table = Tisch = mesa, etc.) in many flashcard systems. But, this is a problem of the mindset of the makers of such flashcards, it isn’t a problem of the Spaced Repetition systems themselves!

From my point of view both as a language learner and as a teacher, I’d say that a deliberate writing (or: speaking) practice that

  • has enough context (everyday conversation topics, etc.)
  • is more free style than drill-based
  • revolves around small texts, especially stories, that are relevant and interesting to the learner so that they have a positive effect on the memory function and motivation of the learner
  • is geared towards oral / written communication situations
  • includes (immediate) feedback from native speakers
    is superior to simple word- and / or sentence-based drills (G-T oriented or not). And this is exactly where an app like Busuu “shines”.

Or, to put it more concisely:

  • Duolingo makes you good at language drills, but it’s of limited use for oral/written communication.
  • Busuu focuses more on communication purposes (mainly vocabulary and grammar relevant to everyday situations), so it helps learners improve their communication skills.
    So for a language learner, it boils down to these two questions:
  • Do you want to do well on drills because you want to succeed at a test/an exam?
  • Or do you want to improve your communication skills?
    My audience-specific answer would be:
  • For drill-based tests, Duolingo is better than Busuu’s G-T style.
  • For communication purposes, Busuu is better than Duolingo’s G-T drills.

Have a great day
Peter

.