you can be conversationally fluent and be illiterate at the same time.
Or the other way around: You can be literate, but a “fluency disaster”.
Been there, done that - never again.
It´s not “either - or”, but “both - and”.
I don’t know why I can’t reply to your comment below, (ville761)
Unfortunately, this is a restriction of the forum software.
Watching those tv shows could still be useful. I prefer audiobooks, which have also helped.
I agree, both resources are useful.
It´s probably a matter of personal taste to find the right “mix”.
@Stewart
Thanks for the info and the links.
Very interesting!
extensive reading much much sooner but also add doing much much more intensive TV listening exercises.
I agree. That´s an excellent combo that corresponds to my “both-and” logic.
But, 3000 h of Japanese. WOW!
If it’s a shorter video (10 minutes or less) I’m usually fine reading subtitles first. If it’s long form, especially for movies, I load up LingQ on one side of the screen and video on the other side and enable the Language Learning with Netflix/Youtube plugin so I have a finer tuned control of the situation. But this process is so time consuming, I haven’t had the energy to do this very often. Or I just don’t even LingQ it, I just watch with the LLN and don’t worry so much about it.
My experiment with using short books/with audiobooks this week has been quite interesting. I noticed the books (aimed at kids with a total word count between 2k to 6k) have so much more unique words per lesson than a standard tv show I’ve been watching (about 2x as much for the same amount of words). The audiobooks are also so much more comfortable for passive listening, I don’t have to strain at all to figure out what’s being said with all the sound effects removed and no cross talk. So I’ve found it to be much better for building up my vocabulary and reviewing this week and will continue prioritizing more on these than TV series for the mean time.
Peter: “O crush perfeito” is very entertaining. I agree with your fluency test, since I live in Brazil currently I target content that’s more true to life for my listening skill so I was thrilled to find that show along with “The Circle”. As boring as Big Brother is in general I wish I could find a transcript for that show as it’s just endless amounts of content of people sitting around chatting, chatting chatting, but I haven’t found a source yet. But ya, for passive listening it’ll take a lot of grinding to be able to tune my ear to listen to shows like that passively and understand it to a high degree so for now I’ll use short audiobooks to be more productive for passive time.
By the way I highly recommend you watch one specific episode of the USA version of O crush perfeito, “Dating Around”. Go to season 2, episode 2 (Ben) and you’ll witness the most awkward dates… OF ALL TIME. Thank me later.
The exposure to individual words per minute heavily outranked when working with books w/ audio as opposed to movies with subs. A typical audiobook is read at a pace of about 2000 words every 15 minutes. So in 1.5 to 2 hrs of engaging with it, you may be exposed to 12,000 to 16,000 total words. A 1.5 to 2hr movie on the other hand could contain in the neighborhood of 4,000 - 4,500 subtitled words – at least the last one I checked. So that’s a factor 3.5X to 4X more of overall exposure to the language with time spent on books as opposed to movies.
This is one of the reasons why, as far as the active study time with LingQ, books are a way better choice.
To the argument that “you need both.” Yes of course you should watch movies – I watch a ton of TV in various languages. But you don’t “need” to import subs into LingQ if you’re already reading books on LingQ. You will learn the same words from books as you would from a movie – and you’ll learn them faster. A large percentage of a book is dialog, and it gets just as slangy and colloquial as a movie. It’s just not performed as fast. But if you learn it from a book, you’ll encounter it at movie speed when you’re watching TV for fun.
What about radio plays? I’d expect you get more vocabulary from those than from TV but you still get dialogue. Podcasts/radio programmes also include conversation, but are often easier than radio plays. It seems it’s not necessary to watch any TV at all.
For me, it depends on my level in the target language:
Beginner level (A1/A2):
- Either reading first without listening or reading and listening at the same time. This can be with or without LingQ.
- Listening (usually several times) without reading to see how much I understand.
- When I rely on LingQ, I use its SRS (later Anki) and listen again several times.
Intermediate or advanced level (B1 and upwards):
- Always listening without using any technical crutches because I want my brain/mind to get used to the pace of the native speaker(s), do some guessing, and get used to the ambiguity of the content
- Reading without listening
- Sometimes I use an SRS, sometimes not.
- Listening again one or more times without technical aids.
Many (longer) novels in print, e-book or audio format are definitely great for our mood-and-mind management. And some of them are even works of art. But I’d say (longer) novels in general aren’t that useful for language learning (at an A1-B1 level), esp. pre-1950 or demanding novels, e.g. “Nouveau Roman” texts.
For mastering everyday language the following text categories are, in my opinion, better suited:
- Non-fiction texts like Hararí s “Sapiens”
- Articles in newspapers and weekly / monthly magazines
- Blog posts
- Shorter stories like “Le Petit Prince” (I just love this text - in any language!)
- Wikipedia articles
- News scripts
- Scripts from certain podcasts
This doesn’t exclude novels once and for all. But I’d say that learners are “much” happier reading novels once they reach an advanced level in their TL, i.e. B2/C1 and above.
Why aren’t novels useful for language learning?
Vera Birkenbihl has recommended novels for language learning. She argued they get easier after 30 pages, as the authors usually then start repeating the same vocabulary. She recommended especially crime novels as translations. But even with crime novels it’s best to start from the easier ones.
quote:
Für mich ist Agatha CHRISITE (in der Übersetzung in meine derzeitige Zielsprache) immer der letzte Test, ehe ich zu Original-Büchern in dieser Sprache übergehe.
Birkenbihl, Vera F… Sprachenlernen leichtgemacht!: Die Birkenbihl-Methode Fremdsprachen zu lernen (German Edition) (Kindle Locations 1781-1782). mvg Verlag. Kindle Edition.
Yes, for improving our listening comprehension of everyday Brazilian Portuguese shows like “O crush perfeito” or “The Circle” are ideal.
A tip in this context: the Netflix - LingQ combo: You can find “O crush perfeito”, “The Circle”, “Dating Around Brasil”, etc. on Netflix. Then, if you use the LingQ extension (for Netflix), you can import the subtitles of the episodes of these shows into LingQ. This makes life “sooo” much easier for us language learners!
Go to season 2, episode 2 (Ben) and you’ll witness the most awkward dates… OF ALL TIME
Sounds like a high cringe factor beyond my current imagination 
@t_harangi
I agree, the word density of texts, independent of the format (print, e-book or audio), is second to none. In other words, they’re the finest tools we have for vocabulary building!
- But 1: Should we use “novels” on a beginner or intermediate level for language learning? Maybe not, because non-fictional texts could be a better choice for non-advanced language learners (see my comments to @Hagowingchun and @ville761 above).
- But 2: Watching TV series or listening to podcasts with a lot of dialogs related to everyday life, e.g. comedies, dating shows, etc., is less about enriching our vocabulary, esp. colloquialisms and slang expressions, as language learners. It’s more about training our listening comprehension, i.e. getting used to syntagmatic intonation patterns (beyond the sounds of single words), the fast pace of native speakers, the overall rhythm of the language, and so on. This also includes learning more about the nonverbal dimension (like hand gestures, etc.) in communication situations with native speakers of the TL. That is: Audio books and many movies are simply not the right media for this kind of training, However, audio dramas / radio plays can also be quite helpful in this context.!
As soon as you live in a foreign country for some time (let’s say for a few months) and try to interact with the locals, you’ll experience that having a large vocabulary without an adequate level of “oral fluency”, i.e. good listening comprehension and speaking / pronunciation skills, is simply not enough.
And this perspective corresponds to Boris Shekhtman’s “do-more-with-less” view on communication (see: https://www.amazon.com/Improve-Your-Foreign-Language-Immediately/dp/0967990750).
But of course, having a rich vocabulary is a great thing, because it can help you reach a high level of “oral fluency” much faster.
Why aren’t novels useful for language learning?
Let me first start by saying that I’m being in “experimentation mode” here, so I’m neither dogmatic on this subject nor a “novel hater” (in fact, I love all kind of novels).
-
Not all novels are created equal
Try to read some advanced novels like Robert Musil’s “The man without qualities” iin German, and you’ll see they don’t get easier after 30 pages -
A lot of words of older novels (esp. pre-1950) are just obsolete.
For example, a few months ago I re-read Gustave Flaubert’s “Madame Bovary” in French. I studied this text at university, I know the plot / movies, and I “love” Flaubert (he’s one of the all-time greats!).
Nevertheless, I kept wondering “how outdated” many expressions (manners, problems, and ways of life included) have become nowadays. I’m not sure how many words have fallen out of use, but my guess is it’s about 10-15 per cent.
Should you read Flaubert? Of course!
Is “Madame Bovary” a good read at an intermediate language level? No, it isn’t. -
It really depends on the learners’ language level
Language learners who are at an advanced level can try to read everything they want.
But, novels aren’t suitable for beginners because they’re much too difficult and long (exception: graded readers for beginners, see point 6). And long (young) adult novels are even for many intermediate language learners a tough nut to crack.
Concrete example: I’m at an intermediate level in Brazilian Portuguese right now, and I know stories like “The Hobbit” or “The Lord of the Rings” inside and out. I can read these texts in German, English, French, and Spanish. But, in Portuguese it’s extremely tedious for me - even with the help of LingQ!
In contrast, reading (and listening to) a non-fictional text like Harari’s “Sapiens” feels like a walk in the park compared to “The Hobbit / LoR”.
-
Short stories and non-fictional texts (articles, blog posts, etc.) are just easier to digest than novels.
Novels are the most complex non-specialized texts we know. Therefore, many language learners at a beginner / intermediate level who focus mainly on non-fiction texts and short stories will improve their language skills much faster than they do with long novels. (thesis 1. Note: This thesis isn’t about effectiveness, but about efficiency!).
And thesis 2 is: Language learners will be much “happier” when they try to tackle more or less long (young) adult novels on an advanced level. -
Crime novels, pulp fiction stuff, etc.
They’re great when they’re short and their vocabulary isn’t too outdated.
However, if someone wants to learn how people talk about everyday things nowadays, dialog-heavy YT videos, podcasts, and TV series are probably the way to go.
It doesn’t make much sense to me to learn dialog structures that our grandparents used in the 1920s, 1930s, etc., when I can study thousands of current dialogs on Netflix, for example -
Graded readers / abridged classics
As in point 5), they can be helpful if the texts are interesting and short.
But, when referring to short(er) stories, I include abridged Penguin classics à la “Treasure Island,” “Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde,” “Frankenstein,” “Dracula,” etc.
OK, I get your point, I think. Obviously some books are better suited than some others, depending on your level and preferences. Birkenbihl said translations are the best/easiest. Probably in the case of classic novels, one should try to find a recent translation, too.
I find it’s more enjoyable to read novels without LingQ where a long text can get a bit tedious. If I’m reading it on Kindle I can easily look up those words that seem essential to get the point in a paragraph (if necessary). But the key is to resist the temptation to look up too many words. so paper books probably work best.
Yes, I agree, depending on our language level, prior knowledge and interests / preferences, we need to find both the right medium and the right format for us.
By the way, I purchased some English “classics” in e-book format a few weeks ago (hard-boiled crime novels, pulp fiction, etc.). If I find the time, I’ll give you some more concrete statistics.
Unfortunately, the number of words I’ve read in English on LingQ so far is already quite high (almost 2.3 million words, and many more outside of LingQ), so these stats probably won’t be as useful as if I were an English learner on a B1/B2 level.
I probably should’ve clarified that when I say “novels,” I usually just mean “contemporary popular fiction,” which is pretty much all I read and listen to. Lee Child, Jean-Cristophe Grange, Sebastian Fitzek, etc. The vocab in these books is very contemporary, and their dialog is pretty much what you’ll hear in a movie, because some movies are actually based on these books. I specifically don’t recommend reading classics as a language learner unless that’s what you’re really, really into.
“Should we use “novels” on a beginner or intermediate level for language learning?”
I have done just that. I started learning Spanish by doing comparative reading (of a contemporary popular fiction book.) It’s a very good way to do it, but of course it may not be for everyone.
It’s a very good way to do it, but of course it may not be for everyone.
Reading (longer) novels at the beginner / intermediate stages is definitely “effective”, esp. compared to shenanigans like Duolingo. But, I’d say it’s not the most “efficient” way.
My thesis is that focusing on the most frequent words (via SRS), less complex texts (non fiction / short stories, manga / comics, etc.), and dialog-heavy media (esp. podcasts, videos, Anime / animated series, and TV) is both faster and less tedious than reading long novels (contemporary or not).
Once a learner reaches a more advanced level (B2 and above) reading contemporary or classic novels will be much easier and more enjoyable - and from that point on it’s an endless journey.
Of course, it depends on what a learner wants to achieve first: a rich vocabulary or oral fluency?
But, at least from my own experience, it’s an illusion to believe that reading a lot leads directly or automatically to oral fluency. It doesn’t.
You can test that yourself: Once you’ve finished some novels in Spanish, just watch a few episodes of a Spanish TV series like “Elite”. You might be in for a surprise
So, reading (and writing) rather enhance(s) oral fluency. And this is the way native speakers usually learn and improve their L1, because no baby can read when he or she is born.
.
Note:
I should add that if “efficiency” isn’t an issue, this discussion doesn’t matter.
So if someone is simply fascinated by a novel, go for it, because the beauty of flexible audio readers à la LingQ is that they can help us tackle texts that are normally above our league.
Peter: Any recommendations for Brazilian podcasts with transcripts? I haven’t found many.