LingQing based on (1) Definition, (2) Spelling (3) Gender (4) Pronunciation

I am new to the forum and LingQ, so I apologize in advance if this question has been posed before as I have not yet read through all of the posts. . .

Before discovering LingQ I began (for French) learning the old fashioned way. Using an Excel spreadsheet, I would highlight in color a newly input learned vocabulary word as “known” ONLY if I was confident on all of the following: (1) its definition (2) its spelling (3) its gender (4) its pronunciation.

So I now find myself with the tendency in LingQ to LingQ a word if I do not know ALL of the 4 above for a specific word. Perhaps it is perfectionist tendencies, but realistically, I do not want to LingQ a word if, for example, I know its definition but I cannot spell it, pronounce it or cannot remember its gender. Of course, there are multiple variants of this.

Does this make sense to anyone else? What are others doing? It would be great if one could LingQ in 4 different ways based on the above (perhaps unrealistic for the programmers at LingQ but a good idea, no?).
Thank you.


I have learned many languages and have been using LingQ for Russian which also has gender, 3, as well as cases and other problems.

I LingQ a lot. I LingQ different forms of the same word. I LingQ words and then phrases containing these words. I LingQ even if I think I know the meaning but am not sure of the usage.

I do not worry about spelling or pronunciation or remembering the gender of individual words. I am not a perfectionist. I will move some words to known only to re LingQ them again later, no problem.

I see the new language as a great fog, that gradually lifts as the language gets clearer. I am mostly motivated to understand what i am reading and listening to.

Reviewing my words and phrases,and making mistakes when I write and speak, helps make more attentive to certain specifics as my brain gets used to the language. In time I get more accurate.

I have used this approach for all languages and am not quite accurate in French gender, Mandarin tones, less accurate but improving in German and Russian cases etc.

Good luck.

I meant to say " I am now quite accurate in French etc." samples of which are available at Youtube under lingosteve and I am also in some of the FrenchLingQ podcasts with Henry.

Thanks for the prompt reply and good perspective. I am sincerely looking forward to the future with LingQ. And I neglected to say before, the site is excellent. My hat is tipped . . .

Steve: Wow, those videos are VERY INSPIRING! It is amazing to see you handle so many languages so very well. I have been working towards mulitlingualism my whole life but never really believed it was possible before finding LingQ.

gmitchell - your way of grading your knowledge is similar to how I use Anki (another spaced repetition software). I only give full score (4) if I know how to write the character (I’m studying Chinese), 3 if I more or less know it (or know the reading and translation), 2 if I know the reading or translation, and finally 1 if I don’t know it. The program knows when it’s time for the word to show up again, according to how “well” I knew it the last time.

Here at LingQ, I’m treating the vocabulary as Steve does. I LingQ frequently, go through whatever words that are present in the current lessons, move status 4 words down to status 2 (maybe 3) when I encounter them in new texts but don’t remember the meaning.