Hello!
The comments on this profile are unclaimed and thus are unverified.
Do they belong to you? Claim these comments.
Casey Johns
Is this you? Claim Profile »
9 months ago
in Why Language Classes Don’t Work: How to Cut Classes and Double Your Learning Rate (Plus: Madrid Update) on The Blog of Author Tim Ferriss
Hi, Tim.
Thanks for posting this article.
A great cook with a bad recipe? That sounds like my high school German classes. We were blessed with a native speaker, but his knowledge was neutralized by those ridiculously misguided ALM textbooks and "space age" language laboratories. It was like our teacher gave up on trying to teach.
And you advise avoiding classes where the slow students retard progress? As if ALM was not bad enough, most of my classmates seemed to be in a labor slowdown, just short of a labor strike. To start with, they had no idea of common words shared by English and German, such as "Blitz". Our instructor would go into rants, "Have you not heard of Blitzkrieg? What do they teach you in history class? Do you not watch the Hollywood war movies with your hearing switched on? Why did your Santa Claus name his reindeer blitzen?" LOL
I upset a lot of people with this opinion, but I must say that foreign language education in the U.S. is at a close to 95% failure rate, because most U.S. citizens do not know how to effectively speak their native language.
And Tim, how apropos that you mention learning the Konjunktiv in German, known as subjunctive in American English. That's a tough one, for Americans.
In college, a Ph.D. linguistics professor told me that I only imagined that English was one of the easiest languages to learn, as it was my native language, learned effortlessly. (ha!) I gave the counter-example of the subjunctive. Easy enough in American English, as we use the biggest word in English, "IF", along with whatever tense seems to fit. (However, in German, as well as most other languages, there is a separate set of irregular verb conjugations that must be used, if one is to avoid sounding like a comedy act, namely, the fool who utters nonsense by making word for word translations.)
The linguistics Ph.D. listened, quietly, then asked, "What is the subjunctive?"
Rant over. LOL
If you wondering about the subjunctive mood, see the following links. It seems, as I have suspected for many years, that the separate conjugations of the subjunctive are disappearing from American English, according to Mr. and Ms. Language Expert.
It's definitely fading from plain American English.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjunctive#Demise...
But it's still used explicitly in German.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjunctive#The_su...
Our president has got everyone confused, especially ESL students, who need a teacher who can distinguish tense from mood...
http://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic20035.html
... and the prez confuses himself...
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=...
Meanwhile, great artists muddle us up, ever worse, with updates that purge the subjunctive from old-fashioned lyrics. Who's next to get a corrected rewrite? Shakespeare?
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/arch...
Casey
Thanks for posting this article.
A great cook with a bad recipe? That sounds like my high school German classes. We were blessed with a native speaker, but his knowledge was neutralized by those ridiculously misguided ALM textbooks and "space age" language laboratories. It was like our teacher gave up on trying to teach.
And you advise avoiding classes where the slow students retard progress? As if ALM was not bad enough, most of my classmates seemed to be in a labor slowdown, just short of a labor strike. To start with, they had no idea of common words shared by English and German, such as "Blitz". Our instructor would go into rants, "Have you not heard of Blitzkrieg? What do they teach you in history class? Do you not watch the Hollywood war movies with your hearing switched on? Why did your Santa Claus name his reindeer blitzen?" LOL
I upset a lot of people with this opinion, but I must say that foreign language education in the U.S. is at a close to 95% failure rate, because most U.S. citizens do not know how to effectively speak their native language.
And Tim, how apropos that you mention learning the Konjunktiv in German, known as subjunctive in American English. That's a tough one, for Americans.
In college, a Ph.D. linguistics professor told me that I only imagined that English was one of the easiest languages to learn, as it was my native language, learned effortlessly. (ha!) I gave the counter-example of the subjunctive. Easy enough in American English, as we use the biggest word in English, "IF", along with whatever tense seems to fit. (However, in German, as well as most other languages, there is a separate set of irregular verb conjugations that must be used, if one is to avoid sounding like a comedy act, namely, the fool who utters nonsense by making word for word translations.)
The linguistics Ph.D. listened, quietly, then asked, "What is the subjunctive?"
Rant over. LOL
If you wondering about the subjunctive mood, see the following links. It seems, as I have suspected for many years, that the separate conjugations of the subjunctive are disappearing from American English, according to Mr. and Ms. Language Expert.
It's definitely fading from plain American English.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjunctive#Demise...
But it's still used explicitly in German.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjunctive#The_su...
Our president has got everyone confused, especially ESL students, who need a teacher who can distinguish tense from mood...
http://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic20035.html
... and the prez confuses himself...
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=...
Meanwhile, great artists muddle us up, ever worse, with updates that purge the subjunctive from old-fashioned lyrics. Who's next to get a corrected rewrite? Shakespeare?
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/arch...
Casey
9 months ago
in How to Learn (But Not Master) Any Language in 1 Hour (Plus: A Favor) on The Blog of Author Tim Ferriss
Hi, Tim.
Is your Princeton thesis research available? How much did your research focus on that neglected deconstruction step, for language learning?
And you were involved in redesigning curricula for Berlitz?
When I encountered Berlitz and ALM, many years ago, it was mostly listen and repeat, and wait for a miracle to happen. No analysis, please! It was against the rules of the methods, at least according to the instructors that I encountered. Perhaps some students experienced the long awaited flash of comprehension, but I never saw either method work, with anyone. Lately, the old fads are back, recombined as Rosetta Stone.
Interesting, that you drew the analogy that ones brain needs to be "formatted" for a new language.
I am not a teacher. However, I have always felt that language learning requires four steps.
-- First, learn model sentences. Understand the individual words and how the words work together, to produce any idiomatic meanings. (Of course, we assume capable instructors have chosen the model sentences.)
-- Second, learn how the language's grammar puts words together into sentences.
-- Third, learn as many idioms as possible.
-- If one wants to converse in person, a fourth step is required, learning pronunciation.
I don't know exactly how and when pronunciation should be blended in. Your article pointed out that the optimum study strategy will vary, depending on each student's prior knowledge base.
For the first step, learning the model sentences, your "Six Lines of Gold" analysis could be one technique for picking the model sentences.
For the second step, grammar, it seems like learning grammar might be the brain formatting task that you mentioned. Get the formatting right, and we ease the task of pouring in the content. However, not every expression that is grammatically correct has meaning. And often, if it has meaning, the meaning might be completely contrary to what you might expect.
Hence, the third step, idioms, which is rarely mentioned. As hard as grammar can be, learning idioms is probably the most difficult and time consuming task, in my humble opinion. There is no rhyme or reason to idioms, and there are so many of them, some with slippery nuances of meaning.
What is your experience with learning idioms? Any insights? Or is it the grim march that I envision?
And idioms continue to provide material for comedy writers. To choose a rather coarse example, don't ever do a word for word translation of the innocent sounding English phrase "I am hot", without prior verification of the possible meanings.
Casey
Is your Princeton thesis research available? How much did your research focus on that neglected deconstruction step, for language learning?
And you were involved in redesigning curricula for Berlitz?
When I encountered Berlitz and ALM, many years ago, it was mostly listen and repeat, and wait for a miracle to happen. No analysis, please! It was against the rules of the methods, at least according to the instructors that I encountered. Perhaps some students experienced the long awaited flash of comprehension, but I never saw either method work, with anyone. Lately, the old fads are back, recombined as Rosetta Stone.
Interesting, that you drew the analogy that ones brain needs to be "formatted" for a new language.
I am not a teacher. However, I have always felt that language learning requires four steps.
-- First, learn model sentences. Understand the individual words and how the words work together, to produce any idiomatic meanings. (Of course, we assume capable instructors have chosen the model sentences.)
-- Second, learn how the language's grammar puts words together into sentences.
-- Third, learn as many idioms as possible.
-- If one wants to converse in person, a fourth step is required, learning pronunciation.
I don't know exactly how and when pronunciation should be blended in. Your article pointed out that the optimum study strategy will vary, depending on each student's prior knowledge base.
For the first step, learning the model sentences, your "Six Lines of Gold" analysis could be one technique for picking the model sentences.
For the second step, grammar, it seems like learning grammar might be the brain formatting task that you mentioned. Get the formatting right, and we ease the task of pouring in the content. However, not every expression that is grammatically correct has meaning. And often, if it has meaning, the meaning might be completely contrary to what you might expect.
Hence, the third step, idioms, which is rarely mentioned. As hard as grammar can be, learning idioms is probably the most difficult and time consuming task, in my humble opinion. There is no rhyme or reason to idioms, and there are so many of them, some with slippery nuances of meaning.
What is your experience with learning idioms? Any insights? Or is it the grim march that I envision?
And idioms continue to provide material for comedy writers. To choose a rather coarse example, don't ever do a word for word translation of the innocent sounding English phrase "I am hot", without prior verification of the possible meanings.
Casey
9 months ago
in How to Learn (But Not Master) Any Language in 1 Hour (Plus: A Favor) on The Blog of Author Tim Ferriss
Very helpful post, Tim.
First, where is your article “Why Language Classes Don’t Work”? I would like to read that article. Nathalie mentioned it, in her comment of July 29th, 2008.
To get back to your article "How to Learn (But Not Master) Any Language in 1 Hour", I have been looking for detailed explanations concerning why, for a particular student, some foreign languages might be easier or more difficult to learn. Since I am not fluent in anything but American English, your post gave me specific reasons as to why effective foreign language teaching needs to be tailored to account for the structure and idiosyncrasies of the student's native language, as well as the target language. That would seem obvious, right? Well, it is not, for many people.
But more important, and harder to find, are suggestions on how, exactly, to develop effective lesson plans and drills that will ease the transition from the student's native language to the target language. Your article took that extra step.
It is also very interesting that some criticized your original post as not useful, because you made "complex leaps in thought-processes" that “normal people” cannot be expected to understand, although "academic linguists draw the inferences all the time".
This ignorance, or deliberate disregard of differences between languages, has led to the adoption of some stubbornly simpleminded and unproductive methods of language teaching. These methods unfortunately became long running fads, such as the direct method (used by Berlitz), audio-lingual method (Harcourt's ALM), and most recently, Rosetta Stone, with their dynamic immersion method. Why people continue to deceive themselves with these ineffective methods is a mystery to me.
The very strange case of Rosetta Stone throws an additional cloud of doubt over the truthfulness of anonymous online reviews, as well making me doubt the accuracy of reviews published in reputable newspapers and magazines. Whether online or in reputable print media, those who review Rosetta Stone are praising and recommending it, rather than criticizing it, by a margin of a hundred to one.
Please share more of your thoughts on the subject of how to effectively teach languages to students of different backgrounds.
First, where is your article “Why Language Classes Don’t Work”? I would like to read that article. Nathalie mentioned it, in her comment of July 29th, 2008.
To get back to your article "How to Learn (But Not Master) Any Language in 1 Hour", I have been looking for detailed explanations concerning why, for a particular student, some foreign languages might be easier or more difficult to learn. Since I am not fluent in anything but American English, your post gave me specific reasons as to why effective foreign language teaching needs to be tailored to account for the structure and idiosyncrasies of the student's native language, as well as the target language. That would seem obvious, right? Well, it is not, for many people.
But more important, and harder to find, are suggestions on how, exactly, to develop effective lesson plans and drills that will ease the transition from the student's native language to the target language. Your article took that extra step.
It is also very interesting that some criticized your original post as not useful, because you made "complex leaps in thought-processes" that “normal people” cannot be expected to understand, although "academic linguists draw the inferences all the time".
This ignorance, or deliberate disregard of differences between languages, has led to the adoption of some stubbornly simpleminded and unproductive methods of language teaching. These methods unfortunately became long running fads, such as the direct method (used by Berlitz), audio-lingual method (Harcourt's ALM), and most recently, Rosetta Stone, with their dynamic immersion method. Why people continue to deceive themselves with these ineffective methods is a mystery to me.
The very strange case of Rosetta Stone throws an additional cloud of doubt over the truthfulness of anonymous online reviews, as well making me doubt the accuracy of reviews published in reputable newspapers and magazines. Whether online or in reputable print media, those who review Rosetta Stone are praising and recommending it, rather than criticizing it, by a margin of a hundred to one.
Please share more of your thoughts on the subject of how to effectively teach languages to students of different backgrounds.
1 year ago
in Book Notes: Twenty Ads That Shook The World on Webomatica
I was stunned by the sexual innuendo of the "1984 Macintosh" commercial. Certainly designed to catch the attention of those football fans who might be sedated by too much food and alcohol!
However, many adults tell me that they cannot see any sexual content in the "1984 Macintosh" commercial. Can anyone comment on this? What were your reactions?
Athletic Anya Major runs, chest heaving, breathing deeply, from the effort of lugging that heavy hammer. Showing off long, shapely legs in red-hot short shorts, her breasts bounce and sway in oscillations that are positively hypnotic! Then she pirouettes. With each rhythmic rotation, a pulsating whooshing sound hints at building sexual tension. Releasing the hammer, she lets out an impassioned groan of relief that echoes throughout the hall. Now, plausibly, that moan is purely the result of her relief at exhaling a chest full of stale air, as she had to hold her breath for quite a while, despite her exhausting run, in order to brace her arms for the throw. However, does that moan not sound very much like the erotic vocalizations that some women make, when suddenly reaching a goal of another kind? Or do I have an overactive imagination?
In my humble opinion, the 1984 Macintosh commercial beats any other commercial for sexual innuendo, even the infamous Clairol "does she or doesn't she" commercial. How did they get "1984" past the censors?
This 1984 Mac TV commercial came to mind recently, when some of my colleagues in an exercise and stretching class, commented privately on the strangely sensual quality of the vocalizations often heard in class. It seems that some women, students as well as instructors, express their relief at finishing the more tormenting stretches, by letting out the most expressive sighs and moans, in their distinctively feminine voices. I am sure that their intent is only to express relief at finishing the stretch, and elation at achieving their goal. However, to masculine ears, it often sounds like they are expressing delight at achieving something else, altogether!
Don't their mothers explain this to them? It's like a woman letting the contours of her nipples show on the fabric of her blouse, on a cold day.
Or perhaps, these gals are deliberately toying with us, like the advertising artists?
Or perhaps, do I (and a few other men) have an overactive imagination?
Casey Johns
However, many adults tell me that they cannot see any sexual content in the "1984 Macintosh" commercial. Can anyone comment on this? What were your reactions?
Athletic Anya Major runs, chest heaving, breathing deeply, from the effort of lugging that heavy hammer. Showing off long, shapely legs in red-hot short shorts, her breasts bounce and sway in oscillations that are positively hypnotic! Then she pirouettes. With each rhythmic rotation, a pulsating whooshing sound hints at building sexual tension. Releasing the hammer, she lets out an impassioned groan of relief that echoes throughout the hall. Now, plausibly, that moan is purely the result of her relief at exhaling a chest full of stale air, as she had to hold her breath for quite a while, despite her exhausting run, in order to brace her arms for the throw. However, does that moan not sound very much like the erotic vocalizations that some women make, when suddenly reaching a goal of another kind? Or do I have an overactive imagination?
In my humble opinion, the 1984 Macintosh commercial beats any other commercial for sexual innuendo, even the infamous Clairol "does she or doesn't she" commercial. How did they get "1984" past the censors?
This 1984 Mac TV commercial came to mind recently, when some of my colleagues in an exercise and stretching class, commented privately on the strangely sensual quality of the vocalizations often heard in class. It seems that some women, students as well as instructors, express their relief at finishing the more tormenting stretches, by letting out the most expressive sighs and moans, in their distinctively feminine voices. I am sure that their intent is only to express relief at finishing the stretch, and elation at achieving their goal. However, to masculine ears, it often sounds like they are expressing delight at achieving something else, altogether!
Don't their mothers explain this to them? It's like a woman letting the contours of her nipples show on the fabric of her blouse, on a cold day.
Or perhaps, these gals are deliberately toying with us, like the advertising artists?
Or perhaps, do I (and a few other men) have an overactive imagination?
Casey Johns
