fun and is counterproductive. I think we learn better if we just discover the language through input, lots of listening and efficient vocabulary accumulation. We train ourselves to become observant. I guess it is like the difference between just being the passenger in a car and doing the driving yourself. If you are the driver you notice things and you remember the route.
I was concerned that this approach only worked for 'grammar light' languages like Chinese or Japanese. Even though I had, in my own mind, confirmed this truth when learning German and Italian, I wanted to test it again in a 'grammar heavy' language like Russian.
Perhaps I am not objective, but I did find that I could not make sense of the grammar explanations of the cases etc. in Russian, but I was able to get used to how the language works through a lot of listening, reading, and vocabulary review.
We started the Linguist system with the local immigrant population in mind. I began buying infomercial time on local Chinese language radio stations . What made sense for the local Chinese community also made sense for the Koreans. There are a lot of Koreans in Vancouver.
Korea itself is also a large potential market. Speaking the language would give me credibility.
From a personal interest point of view there were other reasons. Learning Korean represented 'low-hanging fruit' in the sense that I had already learned Chinese and Japanese and could get a further return on my investment by studying the language. I also enjoyed the sound of the language. I find the male Korean language quite strong and masculine and the female version elegant and feminine. I was also intrigued by the writing system, Hangul, which is unique and quite efficient. (The official transliteration system into the Latin alphabet, on the other hand, is hopeless from the point of view of the foreigner. Fortunately, as a learner, you can essentially ignore it by relying on sound and Hangul.)
Incidentally, to me language learning confirms the French adage that ?l’appetit vient en mangeant?. Even if moderately interested in a language, for a true language learner, the more you get into it, the more you like it. I thought Cantonese sounded ugly until I started learning it. I guess the same wil happen to me when I start learning Dutch.
CHAPTER II: NATURAL LEARNING
In most classrooms, language teaching involves instructing students in a new language, then asking them to produce the language, and then correcting them. This is not how we learn a language naturally. I believe we learn better if we discover the language on our own, with a little help from our friends. I think we retain what we have learned better if we acquire the language natural y.
Before you can speak a language you must first understand it. I like to learn a language first, before I start speaking.
Some people say that they can read and understand a language but cannot speak it. I find far more people who say that they can speak a language, and, in fact, do manage to say things in the language, but obviously do not understand when spoken to at normal speed.
I believe anyone who understands wel , and who can enjoy reading a wide range of content, and who has acquired a large passive vocabulary, can easily learn to speak if and when the opportunity or necessity presents itself. The first job in language learning is to understand. If this is done thoroughly, then speaking wil come easily. It is pointless to put pressure on learners, or for learners to put pressure on themselves, to speak before they understand.
There must be mil ions if not hundreds of mil ions of people who study languages. Many of them are frustrated and do not achieve fluency. Often it is the false friends of language learning that let them down.
These false friends are:
? the classroom
? text books
? grammar explanations
? exercises and drills
? vocabulary lists and books
? conversation class
? thick dictionaries
Why are these false friends? Because they are not natural. They do not offer real communication in the language. Many people who are fluent in a second or third language did not learn primarily from these false friends. They learned by listening, reading and communicating in the language on subjects of interests. Maybe they learned from friends, from TV, or from movies or from necessity, but the key is that they were motivated to learn. They took over the learning process and did not rely on the false friends.
I am learning Russian and I want to be able to speak—fluently —one day. I have stated that I am in no hurry to start speaking with native speakers (although I am ready now). I am enjoying my listening and reading and vocabulary learning. I can do it whenever and wherever I want, stress free. I am discovering a new world. I have said that I do not want someone correcting my undoubtedly poor spoken Russian. This caused some controversy here on my blog. I know that I wil have to start speaking at some point. I know that it wil be difficult to try to remember everything that I have learned. I wil undoubtedly confuse Russian patterns with Japanese or Korean patterns, depending on where my brain decides to go in the confusion of trying to put together Russian phrases for me.
I believe that what happens in the language class is less important than what happens outside the language class. Therefore I think most of the research on language learning is irrelevant since it is based on learning in the classroom and not on how we learn natural y.
Along with the false friends of language learning, there are myths.
1. 'You have to have a talent for languages in order to learn.'
Is it likely that this talent for languages exists only with certain nations? Is it likely that the Dutch and Swedes are al born with this talent for languages whereas the English are not?
Is it likely that Singaporeans are al talented while the Chinese are not? I do not think so.
Instead it is a matter of attitude and exposure to the language.
