I have serendipitously fallen into what might perhaps be seen as a skewed way of thinking about these activities. I am in no position to back any of this up with anything other than a hunch, some subjective personal accounts and some (I hope) common sense, but I guess that is why i’m posting this up so that the rest of you can give me your 2 cents on all this. My hypothesis (if you’d call it that) is this:
There are four (at least) fundamental tasks to language learning that we would engage in here on lingq, on our own, with our ipod, etc… and they are silent reading, following a transcript with audio, listening to the audio only and reading the transcript out aloud. Now, it is becoming apparent to me that although these four tasks appear to have seemingly trivial differences that accomplish the same thing - they are in fact remarkably different.
Now since this isn’t a dissertation and you are not a doctoral committe and since my hypothesis has probably been answered by many people beyond my limited hobbyist slash casual observer research into this subject, please allow me to indulge in an arbitrary recounting of my journey).
… and the story goes like this…
Basically, Steve posted up this youtube video
which I made a few comments. I stronly believed in certain points of view which didn’t seem to make sense at the time as to what Steve was actually saying, and it was quite funny how this all came about. You see, Steve stated that he found video a distraction when following a transcript. Initially my reaction was that the statement was a non sequitur, and i had my reasons of which if you’re interested they are in the youtube comments section - but the point is the whole conundrum got me thinking very very hard on what exactly does constitute a distraction or a non-distraction in the brain. What does the brain find distracting and how does that affect meaning?
By meaning, the overall comprehension level of the text. I find that it is this: The more brain power you dedicate to understand the meaning, the more you will understand. Now, in things like movies, a lot of the meaning IS derived from the visual, whereas in a narration you should be able to derive 100% of the meaning from the narration itself. In this case, a visual aid is superfluous and not necessary by a long shot.
When the brain is exposed to something that does not “add” to the sum of understanding in a text, it is perhaps processed as an additional process that detracts from the amount of brainpower used in actually deriving the meaning.
For instance, if you are trying to read a book and next door there are construction workers banging away with hammers and saws and power tools - you may find it insidiously difficult to read the book. Even though each time you read a word, your brain processes that word and you know that word in-side-out, the “overall meaning” of the text which may be an unfolding series of plot points, or the description of a diabolical character, or the demise of the protagonist - will largely elude you, yet you would reread the text over and over and over ad nauseum without being able to raise your level of comprehension above a certain point.
I believe that these four fundamental tasks have perhaps not necessarily an inherent level of “distraction” per se, but a certain level of effectiveness when it comes to comprehending a passage of text.
When we read something out aloud, we are, in effect, utilising a large portion of our brain to form the words with our vocal chords. In other words, our focus or point of concentration has shifted from comprehending to pronouncing the words. Much in the same manner as the book with the construction workers example, our brain now has a lower ceiling in which to formulate the total level of comprehension.
In much the same way as a visual feed would distract the narration of a package as Steve pointed out in his youtube video, so too would the audio of a transcript (I believe) have an effect at lowering, perhaps in varying degrees, the comprehensibility of a passage. Even though the input is the same as the text, simply the audible version, it still taking away from our brain’s “total” power being focused on understanding and comprehension. Now, instead of one input feed, we have 2. We are decoding text with our eyes and decoding speech with our ears. One would then expect, if we believe the hypothesis to be true, that dropping EITHER one or the other - that not looking at the transcript or muting the audio would result in better comprehension.
Will it? Are there any papers that back this up? I don’t know… it’s just a hunch at the moment.
So, here is a preliminary list of the various tasks and what I feel is the strong point. I’ve placed them in a certain order, of which I believe they are in order of difficulty from a language learning perspective.
-
Following a transcript - Core skill: Association of written vs verbal language
I think that when you follow a transcript with text and audio (previously I have thought of this to be the single most important activity to language leraning) it appears to be a primary driver that is the precursor to silent reading - or the ability to silently read with correct pronounciation with your silent voice. Perhaps in the beginning this must be utilised a lot. -
Silent reading - Core skill: Comprehension
Silent reading, that is, reading a piece of text without any audio or any video and not moving your lips or saying any of the words or trying to verbalise anything results in the highest level of comprehension… even in your native language. -
Reading out loud - Core skill: Pronounciation. As with silent reading, reading out loud would help focus on our language production, but if we are reading new transcripts (I have found this very apparent actually) and reading out loud from the start, the level of comprehension drops considerably. It greatly aides language production however.
-
Listening to audio - Core skill: Verbal understanding. No real need for elaboration here. Skype / phone conversations / radio. A very hard skill to master - may come nearer to the end. It is perhaps one of the final stages of mastering language development.
Perhaps 1 and 2 are interchangeable in various contexts, but in testing out this theory, I’ve done a fair bit of silent reading in the latest book I’m reading in my target language, and it has benefitted me immensely. In the last week, my pronounciation has skyrocketed and I can comprehend more. Now, I’m not going to pin this solely on this whimsical idea of silent reading / reading out loud does wonders etc, etc. but just the overal macro management of my overall approach to using my time studying has benefitted.
At this point in time, I find it beneficial to do this: When I get to a new text, I first silently read the whole thing (2). Then, I go back and read it along with the transcript / audio playing. I find that the slient reading greatly aides in my ability to follow the audio effectively. Then, I may do nothing - or if I like some of the transcript, I’ll pick out a passage (a paragraph or two) and practice pronouncing it several times (3). Then, perhaps later on, after reading it a few more times and following the transcript with audio, I’ll put it on my iPod and listen to the audio only (4). This last part is by far the hardest of the four, and the most rewarding when I can follow it all.
As for the whole theory, I know one thing: Never rely on yourself to support your own arguments 
so I’m putting this out there. Disseminate it if you wish. I hope it is found to be something useful. It may or may not already be a widely known phenomenon. I’m not an expert in the field but I thought I’d write it up in any case.
Cheers.
For me, reading while you are busy doing something else is only a waste of time. If you’re not paying attention, you’re not learning - it’s just background entertainment. I admire your skill at multitasking but I would rather focus on one task at a time or not bother at all. But feel free to differ!