Learning without learning

Vytenis said

"It's this misconception that you need to consciously study the meanings of words and the structure of language that is is responsible for generations upon generations of innocent kids languishing in language classes and never learning anything. "

I asked how one does learn then.

Guest said

"It's the art of learning without learning, kind of like Bruce Lee's "the ard'a fighdin' widout fighdin' " "

Any other comments on this?

I'm not sure what is left to learn once you skip the structure and vocabulary of a language. Certainly you'll never become fluent in it without studying these things.

For example, when you read an English text for a purpose other than learning English, you unconsciously study the structure of the language (since you translate it) and the meanings of words. But if you don't draw your attention to some difficult things they will not be learned.

"How to read English texts if you want to improve your English" at
http://www.antimoon.com/how/readhow.htm

This article emphasizes the importance of conscious learning.

Conscious learning MAY HELP but I refuse to believe that without it you cannot pick up vocabulary or structure of a language. As I said in another thread, "learning withour learning" basically means picking up a language naturally as opposed to memorizing abstract descriptions of grammar rules, learning dictionaries by heart and similar nonsence. Using conscious study to make adjustments but not as a basis of language learning. Taking language holistically, not atomistically. Seeing language as a plant that grows, not a building that has to be built brick-by-brick. Too much time, nerves, energy, money and what not has been wasted on this "building" and all we got are generations of people who say: "well, i did have ....-ish at school but I did not learn it"

By conscious learning I didn't mean the mossy grammar consisting of many formal rules, without any understanding of what they mean. What you described above is a conscious dumping of the brain with useless waste...

Conscious learning is when you do something deliberately, with the intention to learn English: reading (maybe, including grammar books), asking questions, e.t.c.

I think you must be made familiar with the basic structures of the language through conscious learning before you can pick up the language spontaneously and produce output. It is similar to learning to play a musical instrument: you have to be thoroughly familiar with the scores and with the basics of making the instrument sound as it should before you can start playing actual musical pieces, even the easiest ones. Therefore the actual use of the language should be preceded by a study of the basic grammatical structures separately - yes, separately -, then by pronunciation practice and by studying shorter samples of actual usage. Some coursebook series - such as Headway - provide short authentic or authentic-looking samples in various styles and from various fields of life even at beginner level, which I think is a useful idea. I my opinion, learners should be made aware how they can "do things" with the language, right from the start, at the level where they are at the moment. It is after this that you can start integrating the various structures into a larger whole.

The chief reason why some language classes are ineffective seems to be that language structures are learnt out of context, and that the phase of "doing things" is left out. I personally think it is important to relate the study of grammatical structures to actual usage (conforming to the level of students, of course). In other words, as much input in context must be provided as possible. If you learn with a teacher, then he or she - and hopefully the coursebook - will provide the necessary input and context at first, but as students make progress, they should be encouraged to start looking out for appropriate input themselves. If you choose self-study, it is best to start learning basic structures of the language from a coursebook, accompanied by some audio material for practising pronunciation, and an effort should be made to pair this up with searching out authentic content once you are familiar with the basics.

P.S. When I say that grammatical forms should be studied separately, I don't mean lengthy explanations of the use of grammatical structures, such as the Present Perfect - instead, I mean that you present the structure in question in a clear and concise manner, and then practise its use with a variety of motivating excercises. I would venture so far as to say that beginners do not even have to remember the names of structures, they just have to be aware that they exist and know how to use them in actual communication. This is the more true the younger the learners are. More conscious focus on the use of grammatical structures can come later, when they already have an idea of how to use them.

I believe that the most important thing for language learning is a lot of exposure to the language, spoken and written. This exposure should take place in the form of content that is interesting and authentic, except in the very beginning. The exposure should be repetitive and should consist of short doses at first with the length of the content items gradually increasing.

The learner should use a computer when reading text (which ideally comes with audio for repetitive listening) in order to instantly see the meaning of new words and phrases and to be able to store them for systematic study and review. The learner should be automatically directed towards content where the words and phrases he/she is learning reappear frequently. For the beginner there are a lot of unknown words, but eventually the number of unknown words should settle down to between 5-10% of any passage. All of this can be controlled by a computer program. This input activity should constitute at least 75% of the time spent by the learner.

There should be a minimum of grammatical explanation. There should be a minimum of additional isolated examples of these words and phrases in use, synonyms, related vocabulary etc. presented out of context. There should be a minimum or no quizzes and exercizes and all the other teacher oriented activity that is the norm today.

Up to 25% of the learner's activity should be in speaking and writing. The learner should use his/her newly learned words and phrases as much as possible and get credit for doing so. Inappropriate use of words and phrases will be the major problem for the learner. The learner should be encouraged to speak and not corrected too often while speaking.

Writing should be corrected more severly than speaking. Problems with the use of words and phrases should be identified systematically and the learner should be directed to become observant of how these words and phrases are used during his/her listening and reading. In other words, the output is not only an exercise in expression but also a chance to provide focus for the all important input acitivity.

Steve K and Easterner,

Three questions:

1. Making input meaningful: Are book translations useful? Some people swear by them, but others say to stay away from anything but the target language as much as possible (including movie subtitles in your own tongue).

2. Shadowing: I've read people who recommend shadowing (or echoing), i.e., repeating a recording (or live conversation) as you hear it. It's supposed to get help you transition from listening to speaking. But others discourage even reading out loud. Does this help to go from comprehension to production? (And in general, if one has no speakers with whom to practice, is it worthwhile to practice speaking by oneself?)

3. Long silent period: On the other end of the scale, there are people who take Krashen's silent period to the extreme--if one only learns by listening, why should the silent period be so short? Marvin Brown had a course in Thai, where he refused to let student's speak for the entire course--or at least the first 1000 hours! (He used two teachers to provide all the input.) He thought that students' speaking was not only a waste of time, but actually harmful. He claims that the ones who did not "show off" in the streets (use it for daily living in Thailand) approached native-speaker ability:

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/8111/marvin.html

Does this make sense, or is it best to try speak as soon as you have some basics down, warts and all?

I prefer dealing with the target language. The content should be interesting and stimulating. I do not know what you mean by book translations. Read in the target language with access to online dictionaries and an intelligent system for helping you learn the vocabulary so you can finally be ale to read comfortably away from the computer without having to look words up.

I think people will "shadow" as you say. But it is not really a natural thing to do so it should not be a major focus. Reading out loud is good for pronunciation practice. Speaking to yourself and repeating phrases you have heard is all to the good.

The idea of long silent periods may work. However it is impractical to expect most students to accept to do it. I do agree that output is not necessary at the beginning. But 1000 hours seems like a long time to go without trying to say something in the language. You want to communicate after all. Start to speak when you feel like it. There should neither be pressure to speak, nor to speak correctly, nor an interdiction of speaking. Motivation and enjoyment are so important to success. Let people do things they enjoy and which they find meaningful.

One more thing Mitch. I followed the threads you indicated on your post. Krashen recommends extensive reading and listening. I have found that repetitive listening and reading of the same content, when accompanied with an effective way of reveiwing words and phrases, is very effective. The words and phrases really start to be engraved in your mind and you start to notice them in other contexts.

I do not know what the experience of others has been.

Steve K,

By book translations I meant either books with side-by-side text (e.g., dual-language books), or actually having the the published translation of the entire book one is working on (e.g., having copies of Harry Potter in both English and Spanish).

Also, since you like material with both text and audio, do you recommend audio magazines like Champs Elysees (http://www.champs-elysees.com/)
or Fluent French Audio (http://www.fluentfrench.com/)? They're not exactly "authentic," as they're written for non-natives, but they make no attempt to simplify the content or language.

By the way, I'd be curious to your reaction to my friend's method of learning, especially since you're a successful learner of Mandarin. He taught English in Taiwan, and didn't have time for a Chinese class. He bought a text (the old DeFrancis book), but couldn't afford the tapes. He had some students record some of the dialogs (in their typical Taiwanese pronunciation), and he would listen to a dialog at night for hours until he understood it. The only "class" he had was asking a few questions of a professor once a week. It seemed a little bit brute force to me, be by the end of the year, he could speak Mandarin--like a Taiwanese.

hello,everyone,I am a chinese.Because of very liking to learn English,I want to make friends with anyone of you .I am very glad to see you all in this forum

Mitch,

I never liked dual-language books or translated books.

Champs Elysees is good. For English you can go to www.lingq.com. I avoid content written for non-natives as much as possible.

I think classes are largely unnecessary for a motivated learner. Lots of listening and reading with a good system for learning words and phrases is what you need. When you are ready and if you have the opportunity you go out and talk to people. If you have trouble speaking do no worry. Just keep listening and reading and you will bet better and eventually you will be able to talk to people and enjoy it. Just do not let yourself get frustrated.

zyl,

非常高兴认识你

I look fowrard to getting to know you through your posts on this forum.