Narrow reading was how I significantly improved my ability to read the news (Chinese HSK5 level at the time). My topic was the Biden/Trump election, and I read something like 10 articles in Chinese about it. The first one was really hard (it took me about a whole day to read). Then the second one took half a day, and it decreased quickly because I encountered the same words over and over. It seems selecting a specific, narrow topic is a good way to make rare words less rare.
Studying Danish has taught me that the pronunciation difficulties I found were due to the discrepencies I found between reading and listening. For example this letter, ø, can be pronounced in 3 different ways. And for a learner, the differences can be difficult to hear. So, I started paying more attention to "the sounds" and less to "the letters". I improved by imitating what I was hearing; sort of like playing an instrument by ear instead of reading music. Both are great skills, bit I prioritized what I needed the most.
I had the benefit of learning Norwegian at university, so I was taught how the Danish language influenced Norwegian (Dansk->Riksmål->Bokmål/Nynorsk). I was lucky and happened to fall into learning Norwegian because it was the only Scandinavia language my college offered. However, I've seen it for years since then, that if you want to learn multiple Scandinavian languages, that you should learn Norwegian first because one written standard looks like Danish, another written standard approaches Icelandic and Faroese, and it sounds like Swedish. I lived in Sweden for a year after university and can actually comprehend spoken Swedish better than Norwegian, even today more than a decade later. Anyways, I do understand the pain you are going through, so I thought I would give you a gift, in case you've never seen it yet. And if you have, it always brings a laugh. Værsågod og kamelåså: ua-cam.com/video/s-mOy8VUEBk/v-deo.htmlsi=bsPUdAVJ20JEQ_I_
I am also learning Danish (with very modest goals, to get to a mid-B1 conversational level). As you've pointed out, Danish is very non-phonetic, so that listening becomes an even more essential aspect of learning. I'm not a fan of language apps, but for Danish I found Mango Languages (web app) good for getting started (sorry if mentioning specific apps is not permitted), along with a very old 'nature method' (target language only) text and a 1960's edition of 'Hugo Simplified System - Danish in Three Months'. Obviously, the old texts don't have accompanying audio. But all three resources, including the online app, have phonetic representations of what you're hearing or reading. Even with listening, it's sometime unclear what you're actually hearing, and the phonetic spellings are a big help for that. This is just my experience, and may not suit others learning preferences. BTW, very interesting series of interviews. THANK YOU.
Output can make you more confident as a speaker and can solicit more input (which are both good things), but it doesn't directly affect your acquisition of the language.
Another important aspect of output that you forget to mention is retrieval practice. Retrieval practice is extremely effective because it strengthens pathways in the brain. Something can be stored in long-term memory but difficult to access because pathways have deteriorated or were never built strongly to begin with (think how sometimes you can't think of the word or a name of an actor even though you know it - it's stored in long-term memory but the pathway to it is flimsy or gone). Well, retrieval practice strengthens the ability to retrieve information that is already stored in the long-term memory. This applies to every kind of knowledge, not just languages.
Thanks for a great series of interviews! I started watching television (travel shows, news, sports) in English when I was around 15 and that's how I have learned most of my English. I have watched neither Star Trek Wars nor The Lord of The Rings and I couldn't suffer through the first episode of Friends, having laughed exactly zero times. However, I have watched every season of IT Crowd, Community, and The Big Bang Theory more times than I care to remember.
Fascinating discussion. I have been learning English (I´m B1 level) and this is the first time I have searched and questioned about "how to learn English".I perceived a cross between an "input acquire" methodology and an "old grammar stuff/output" methodology. I don´t know where I need to stand, but I think it´s possible to stand in the middle, at least for me it´s important to be open to a diversity of types of learning/acquiring, to achieve my goal of being fluent in the language, Thnks for this contempt.
Both are needed, at the start you need at least basic grammar rules to understand how the language is supposed to work, especially if it is very different from your native language. Then you need a massive input take, to learn to recognise the words, recognise the patterns, and learn new words, even if you use specific vocab memorization exercises on the side. Anytime you want you can go into grammar if you feel the need to. This is how did for English anyway
"Chunks" or "language chunks" is another word or term that I have heard used to describe those groupings of words that just go together in languages, like prepositional phrases, colloquialisms, and the like. @loistalagrand, I think I remember you asking in this interview if there are maybe more "chunks" than there are words. I don't think there necessarily is, but there are just a lot of them, especially when you start thinking of all of the different word combinations. A fun one in English is the difference between someone who is "on the go" and someone who is "on the run". "He's always on the go" implies that person is always busy, but not necessarily hectically, while "She's on the run again" implies this person is evading the authorities (and not for the first time).
Friends has been studied because it's been used as a resource to learn English for a long time, by a lot of people. It was an interesting case study. It also has a lot of material, as it's a long running series, it features different speakers, with different voices and styles, and topics that might interest young adults more than what kids shows talk about. But there's nothing unique about it, it's just statistics working. Someone made a comparison between Friends and Spongebob, and there's not a huge difference in terms of vocabulary learned. The video is called "Can Kids TV Create Fluency in Another Language?" by One Word at a Time, here on youtube. Recommended!
Wow, how interesting! Lots of interesting suggestions to add to my “toolkit”. And an added fun aspect for me is that Hungarian happens to be the language I’m learning! It’s my fifth language and I’m currently just starting the B1 Magyarok course book with private online lessons, adapting the speaking exercises as I go to suit an individual learner (me).
Say, amazing! Would you be able to provide the actual name of the actual textbook? How are you finding it? I grew up hearing Hungarian but only from the age of 6 up and I was angry about the adults using this language that we didn’t understand. I actively blocked it. However, 60 years later, I’m coming back to it and I’m seeing that my pronunciation is excellent, and I actually do have some vocabulary in the bank. So a good A1 textbook might help me. Many thanks and good luck with the Hungarian--I know it’s a nutcracker :)
Thanks a lot for these interviews - these are really insightful! I also would love to see a scientific discussion between the "input only camp" and a more diversified approach. E. g. a discussion between Jeff McQuillan and Paul Nation.
Can't help but think of superlearning that developed i think in bulgaria during the Cold War. if memory serves one thing they were doing was developing personas for classroom use. So alongside this discussion also the importance of affect and sociolinguistic factors, and there's so much more and more and more in language learning. I laughed when he said learning vocab is unlimited or like a mountain.
@@loistalagrandthis would be great content for the viewer. Am pretty sure you could make a public video asking for motivated scholars for a debate and you would get lots of responses, as long as it's in a respectful debate settings
@@loistalagrandI wish they would because I have been in the comprehensible input only camp from day one with a few of my languages now and I’m hearing a lot of flaws from the other side that seem easy to debunk.
I wrote two books on how to learn a foreign language, and I run an online academy that teaches six languages. In my opinion, we need to consider input and output based on how similar the foreign language is to our own. If the foreign language is very distant from our mother tongue, we need to put more effort into output. However, if the foreign language is quite similar to our mother tongue, we can reach a certain level of fluency through input alone. One more thing, I never recommend using flashcards. It's hard work to learn a foreign language, contrary to what many people think.
@@spiderlandslint Learning another language through flashcards is like studying scattered pieces. To use a word you've learned from flashcards in a complete sentence, you need to learn it again. This means you're working twice on the same word. One more thing, we can connect new information to previous knowledge more effectively if it has a special meaning. The words on flashcards don’t carry specific meaning; they’re just isolated names. So, if you really want to use flashcards, I recommend using complete sentences or even short passages, not just individual words. I use Anki often, but I never add single words. Another tip: if you focus on sentences that truly matter to you, rather than every sentence you come across, your efficiency will increase significantly.
@@talkday1better yet, any popular novel, such as a detective, romance, young adult or family drama, is a randomized frequency list of vocabulary embedded in meaningful sentences. And provides far better motivation to keep going than a deck of cards.
Bonjour Loïs. I have been favorably impressed by the academic expertise of your guests as well as the intelligent conversations presented in these videos. They are truly interesting and helpful, so thanks very much. I have a question. Are there compiled lists of learning resources such as graded texts and TV series for different languages? I am struggling to break out of intermediate French and I think that a couple of good French sitcoms, roughly equivalent to "Friends" in complexity, would be extremely helpful.
I'm glad you are enjoying the interviews. I have created a page (recently) where I listed some of the best resources for learning languages: subscribepage.io/lois-talagrand
Okay: my understanding about “kick the bucket”. It’s about a farmer working all their life, milking cows, and working right up to the end of their life, finally dying at work, and kicking the bucket of milk. So it’s the idea of an old person dying at a good time, and it’s not said about a loved one, it’s about people at a great social remove. It’s not a gracious thing to say. “ Letting the cat out of the bag” is about actually having a cat (secret) in an actual bag (cats will stay nicely in zipped bag for a few minutes but then they don’t like it and when you unzip, the fight and get nutty and then take off like a streak. (Something a child might do, okay I did it, poor pussy-cats, I’m very very sorry!!!) So if you keep a secret in a bag , once it’s let loose it goes everywhere. Secret no longer. The cat in the bag got mixed up with “bought a pig in a poke. The pig in the sack idea is the saying “buying a pig in a poke”. A poke is an archaic word for sack. So you bought something without seeing it.
Letting the cat out of the bag is about spreading a secret you’ve been keeping--a secret held for a long time but you can’t stand it anymore and you tell the secret. It will go everywhere like a cat out of a bag. Pig in a poke is about buying a pig in a poke (sack) -- so buying something without having seen it.
@kmf634 2 questions: 1. Why was the cat in the bag in the first place? 2. Why is having a cat in a bag a metaphor for a secret or deception? I didn't say the 2 sayings mean the same thing. I said they have the same origin.
Whelp, idioms are strange things. There’s no definitive information on the exact origin of the cat or the pig. But I do not believe that the cat idiom and the pig idiom are connected. There is no way on earth that a medieval buyer at market would mistake a pig, even a piglet, for cat. Buying a pig in a sack (poke) is a an entirely different thing. That’s agreeing to buy something you’ve never seen. Some website commentaries claim these two things are connected. They’re very different. We also have a song with lyric “pack up your troubles in your old kit bag and smile”. This idea of putting troubles in a bag or a sack, or putting a secret in a bag (your own head) and then seeing that as a struggling cat, desperate to get out…that’s a great metaphor.
No I have never thought of anything in my life. But talking about this pig and this cat with you has been a lot of fun. Google is your friend. Look for yourself.
I have the simplest method of language learning that is not based on science: do what you feel like as much as want. It's worked for me. Using "input" and "output," old computerese terms explains nothing and are a charade to make it sound and look scientific (why not just say "read" and "listen" and "speak" and "write" - we aren't computers). There is one, and only one, ingredient that determines the success of language learning (as well as anything else): MOTIVATION.
But, given two individuals who are already motivated, wouldn't you agree that the individual who follows science-based methods would get better results?
So, when motivation, which is a finite resource, runs out, then what? These strategies are to help someone manage their finite energy in the most efficient method possible.
I don't agree. Output is a different skill apart from the language per se. It is perfectly possible to know a language and yet be a poor speaker or writer. I consider myself a poor speaker and writer even in my own native language. To be a good writer or speaker you need skills that go beyond the language per se. The fact that you are a poor speaker or writer doesn't mean that you don't know the language.
It's not what she said , she said if you want to achieve a high speaking level you need lots of practice, lots of output, and yes it is very obvious. Personally I believe you first need to have listen a lot because you need to be able to hear the nuances, because you can never produced a sound you don't hear. Books by Tomatis are a great read about that.
Why do we keep looking at language or language learning as "input" and "output?" It is more than that and I expect to see experts to simply go deeper. In developmental psychology when you look at L1 language acquisition it is referred to as "reception" and "expression." As a human being we have the choice to not listen to someone who is talking or we might daydream while we are reading, which limits language reception even though it is still directed at us as "input." The same can be said with our "output." An example, would be repetitive conversations that are nothing more than filler or in L2 language study with a Pimsleur lesson or shadowing, which tends to be a lot of parroting and not true expression.
In the SLA literature, what you're referring to is usually called "intake" (broadly speaking, it's the subset of the "input" that is actually processed). Not sure whether there's an equivalent concept for output.
😅according to this woman i cant understand french youtube at 99% comprehension. Output is not necessary.... because ive never done any. It is necessary to output better, though. The guy you interviewed who talked about transfer appropriate processing understood how memory works. Anyway, output is helpful but neither necessary nor sufficient for comprehension. Im not an input fanatic...just lazy with no need to speak.
@@loistalagrand Among other things, She said: "However as the level increases I think output becomes something that you cannot live without and I think that that's going to be for example the dividing line between someone who can achieve let's say an intermediate level of knowledge and say, C1 [level of knowledge]" Using the word "knowledge" is a red flag to someone who has studied cognition, but taking that word at face value, my internal "knowledge of French" is extremely high and I've never outputted. // Regarding Transfer Appropriate Processing--you get good at what you do. Language is not special in that regard. It is a set of skills. To understand more, you need to spend your time understanding. To output better you need to spend your time outputting (and understanding what you are outputting, which is why it is a bit of a dependent skill).
@@loistalagrand The way she talked during the entire interview didn't fill me with confidence. Bill VanPaten was more in line with how I think. So perhaps I'm biased. But there is no way to know because the necessary research to answer even the most basic and fundamental questions second language learners want to know about efficiency.... isn't there. Anyway, thank you very much for making these interviews happen!!! Now if only a government would spend the money to do proper studies rather than repackaging the same classroom experiences that have failed student for generations (based on which expert's advice, is what I always ask..).
The input/output dichotomy is actually misleading. Language acquisition is driven by communication. Communication is key. Obviously low-level students can't speak much, so they can communicate by empathizing with characters in stories. But when they reach higher levels and can speak, they can begin to communicate from their own personality. Communication drives acquisition.
Narrow reading was how I significantly improved my ability to read the news (Chinese HSK5 level at the time). My topic was the Biden/Trump election, and I read something like 10 articles in Chinese about it. The first one was really hard (it took me about a whole day to read). Then the second one took half a day, and it decreased quickly because I encountered the same words over and over. It seems selecting a specific, narrow topic is a good way to make rare words less rare.
Studying Danish has taught me that the pronunciation difficulties I found were due to the discrepencies I found between reading and listening. For example this letter, ø, can be pronounced in 3 different ways. And for a learner, the differences can be difficult to hear. So, I started paying more attention to "the sounds" and less to "the letters". I improved by imitating what I was hearing; sort of like playing an instrument by ear instead of reading music. Both are great skills, bit I prioritized what I needed the most.
Thanks for sharing!
I had the benefit of learning Norwegian at university, so I was taught how the Danish language influenced Norwegian (Dansk->Riksmål->Bokmål/Nynorsk). I was lucky and happened to fall into learning Norwegian because it was the only Scandinavia language my college offered. However, I've seen it for years since then, that if you want to learn multiple Scandinavian languages, that you should learn Norwegian first because one written standard looks like Danish, another written standard approaches Icelandic and Faroese, and it sounds like Swedish.
I lived in Sweden for a year after university and can actually comprehend spoken Swedish better than Norwegian, even today more than a decade later.
Anyways, I do understand the pain you are going through, so I thought I would give you a gift, in case you've never seen it yet. And if you have, it always brings a laugh. Værsågod og kamelåså:
ua-cam.com/video/s-mOy8VUEBk/v-deo.htmlsi=bsPUdAVJ20JEQ_I_
I am also learning Danish (with very modest goals, to get to a mid-B1 conversational level). As you've pointed out, Danish is very non-phonetic, so that listening becomes an even more essential aspect of learning. I'm not a fan of language apps, but for Danish I found Mango Languages (web app) good for getting started (sorry if mentioning specific apps is not permitted), along with a very old 'nature method' (target language only) text and a 1960's edition of 'Hugo Simplified System - Danish in Three Months'. Obviously, the old texts don't have accompanying audio. But all three resources, including the online app, have phonetic representations of what you're hearing or reading. Even with listening, it's sometime unclear what you're actually hearing, and the phonetic spellings are a big help for that. This is just my experience, and may not suit others learning preferences. BTW, very interesting series of interviews. THANK YOU.
@@Martin.T.C Thanks for sharing!
to be fair, the danish vowels are very difficult to master
Output can make you more confident as a speaker and can solicit more input (which are both good things), but it doesn't directly affect your acquisition of the language.
Another important aspect of output that you forget to mention is retrieval practice. Retrieval practice is extremely effective because it strengthens pathways in the brain. Something can be stored in long-term memory but difficult to access because pathways have deteriorated or were never built strongly to begin with (think how sometimes you can't think of the word or a name of an actor even though you know it - it's stored in long-term memory but the pathway to it is flimsy or gone). Well, retrieval practice strengthens the ability to retrieve information that is already stored in the long-term memory. This applies to every kind of knowledge, not just languages.
@loistalagrand Your're doing a great job with those science based and language Professors's-proof video!
Thanks!
Thanks for a great series of interviews!
I started watching television (travel shows, news, sports) in English when I was around 15 and that's how I have learned most of my English.
I have watched neither Star Trek Wars nor The Lord of The Rings and I couldn't suffer through the first episode of Friends, having laughed exactly zero times.
However, I have watched every season of IT Crowd, Community, and The Big Bang Theory more times than I care to remember.
"Friends" can be tricky as this sitcom is abundant with wordplays/puns.
Fascinating discussion. I have been learning English (I´m B1 level) and this is the first time I have searched and questioned about "how to learn English".I perceived a cross between an "input acquire" methodology and an "old grammar stuff/output" methodology. I don´t know where I need to stand, but I think it´s possible to stand in the middle, at least for me it´s important to be open to a diversity of types of learning/acquiring, to achieve my goal of being fluent in the language, Thnks for this contempt.
Your writing skills are very good - I would say beyond b1! (For your last word, it should be "content".)
Both are needed, at the start you need at least basic grammar rules to understand how the language is supposed to work, especially if it is very different from your native language.
Then you need a massive input take, to learn to recognise the words, recognise the patterns, and learn new words, even if you use specific vocab memorization exercises on the side.
Anytime you want you can go into grammar if you feel the need to.
This is how did for English anyway
"Chunks" or "language chunks" is another word or term that I have heard used to describe those groupings of words that just go together in languages, like prepositional phrases, colloquialisms, and the like.
@loistalagrand, I think I remember you asking in this interview if there are maybe more "chunks" than there are words. I don't think there necessarily is, but there are just a lot of them, especially when you start thinking of all of the different word combinations.
A fun one in English is the difference between someone who is "on the go" and someone who is "on the run". "He's always on the go" implies that person is always busy, but not necessarily hectically, while "She's on the run again" implies this person is evading the authorities (and not for the first time).
Friends has been studied because it's been used as a resource to learn English for a long time, by a lot of people. It was an interesting case study. It also has a lot of material, as it's a long running series, it features different speakers, with different voices and styles, and topics that might interest young adults more than what kids shows talk about.
But there's nothing unique about it, it's just statistics working.
Someone made a comparison between Friends and Spongebob, and there's not a huge difference in terms of vocabulary learned.
The video is called "Can Kids TV Create Fluency in Another Language?" by One Word at a Time, here on youtube. Recommended!
Thanks for sharing!
Excellent discussion. This will change how I study German. Thank you.
I'm glad!
Wow, how interesting! Lots of interesting suggestions to add to my “toolkit”. And an added fun aspect for me is that Hungarian happens to be the language I’m learning! It’s my fifth language and I’m currently just starting the B1 Magyarok course book with private online lessons, adapting the speaking exercises as I go to suit an individual learner (me).
Say, amazing! Would you be able to provide the actual name of the actual textbook? How are you finding it? I grew up hearing Hungarian but only from the age of 6 up and I was angry about the adults using this language that we didn’t understand. I actively blocked it. However, 60 years later, I’m coming back to it and I’m seeing that my pronunciation is excellent, and I actually do have some vocabulary in the bank. So a good A1 textbook might help me. Many thanks and good luck with the Hungarian--I know it’s a nutcracker :)
verb: to pronounce
noun: pronUnciation
Thanks a lot for these interviews - these are really insightful! I also would love to see a scientific discussion between the "input only camp" and a more diversified approach. E. g. a discussion between Jeff McQuillan and Paul Nation.
Can't help but think of superlearning that developed i think in bulgaria during the Cold War. if memory serves one thing they were doing was developing personas for classroom use. So alongside this discussion also the importance of affect and sociolinguistic factors, and there's so much more and more and more in language learning. I laughed when he said learning vocab is unlimited or like a mountain.
I am thinking of doing this, but I don't know if the guests would enjoy debating on video.
@@loistalagrandthis would be great content for the viewer.
Am pretty sure you could make a public video asking for motivated scholars for a debate and you would get lots of responses, as long as it's in a respectful debate settings
@@loistalagrandI wish they would because I have been in the comprehensible input only camp from day one with a few of my languages now and I’m hearing a lot of flaws from the other side that seem easy to debunk.
Excellent interview. I was surprised when you said you were not a native English speaker. Which is your mother tongue?
I'm a French speaker.
*what
I wrote two books on how to learn a foreign language, and I run an online academy that teaches six languages. In my opinion, we need to consider input and output based on how similar the foreign language is to our own. If the foreign language is very distant from our mother tongue, we need to put more effort into output. However, if the foreign language is quite similar to our mother tongue, we can reach a certain level of fluency through input alone. One more thing, I never recommend using flashcards. It's hard work to learn a foreign language, contrary to what many people think.
why
@@spiderlandslint Learning another language through flashcards is like studying scattered pieces. To use a word you've learned from flashcards in a complete sentence, you need to learn it again. This means you're working twice on the same word.
One more thing, we can connect new information to previous knowledge more effectively if it has a special meaning. The words on flashcards don’t carry specific meaning; they’re just isolated names. So, if you really want to use flashcards, I recommend using complete sentences or even short passages, not just individual words. I use Anki often, but I never add single words. Another tip: if you focus on sentences that truly matter to you, rather than every sentence you come across, your efficiency will increase significantly.
@@talkday1better yet, any popular novel, such as a detective, romance, young adult or family drama, is a randomized frequency list of vocabulary embedded in meaningful sentences. And provides far better motivation to keep going than a deck of cards.
Bonjour Loïs. I have been favorably impressed by the academic expertise of your guests as well as the intelligent conversations presented in these videos. They are truly interesting and helpful, so thanks very much. I have a question. Are there compiled lists of learning resources such as graded texts and TV series for different languages? I am struggling to break out of intermediate French and I think that a couple of good French sitcoms, roughly equivalent to "Friends" in complexity, would be extremely helpful.
I'm glad you are enjoying the interviews. I have created a page (recently) where I listed some of the best resources for learning languages: subscribepage.io/lois-talagrand
Thank you for such insightful video!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Okay: my understanding about “kick the bucket”. It’s about a farmer working all their life, milking cows, and working right up to the end of their life, finally dying at work, and kicking the bucket of milk. So it’s the idea of an old person dying at a good time, and it’s not said about a loved one, it’s about people at a great social remove. It’s not a gracious thing to say.
“ Letting the cat out of the bag” is about actually having a cat (secret) in an actual bag (cats will stay nicely in zipped bag for a few minutes but then they don’t like it and when you unzip, the fight and get nutty and then take off like a streak. (Something a child might do, okay I did it, poor pussy-cats, I’m very very sorry!!!) So if you keep a secret in a bag , once it’s let loose it goes everywhere. Secret no longer.
The cat in the bag got mixed up with “bought a pig in a poke. The pig in the sack idea is the saying “buying a pig in a poke”. A poke is an archaic word for sack. So you bought something without seeing it.
The subtitles are rarely the exact translation, or transcription (if it is the same language) of the spoken text though.
"Letting the cat out of the bag" has the same origin as "a pig in a poke."
Letting the cat out of the bag is about spreading a secret you’ve been keeping--a secret held for a long time but you can’t stand it anymore and you tell the secret. It will go everywhere like a cat out of a bag. Pig in a poke is about buying a pig in a poke (sack) -- so buying something without having seen it.
@kmf634 2 questions:
1. Why was the cat in the bag in the first place?
2. Why is having a cat in a bag a metaphor for a secret or deception?
I didn't say the 2 sayings mean the same thing. I said they have the same origin.
Whelp, idioms are strange things. There’s no definitive information on the exact origin of the cat or the pig. But I do not believe that the cat idiom and the pig idiom are connected. There is no way on earth that a medieval buyer at market would mistake a pig, even a piglet, for cat. Buying a pig in a sack (poke) is a an entirely different thing. That’s agreeing to buy something you’ve never seen. Some website commentaries claim these two things are connected. They’re very different. We also have a song with lyric “pack up your troubles in your old kit bag and smile”. This idea of putting troubles in a bag or a sack, or putting a secret in a bag (your own head) and then seeing that as a struggling cat, desperate to get out…that’s a great metaphor.
@ Have you ever thought about anything in your life?
Why is "buying a pig in a poke" used as a metaphor for buying something you've never seen?
No I have never thought of anything in my life. But talking about this pig and this cat with you has been a lot of fun. Google is your friend. Look for yourself.
I have the simplest method of language learning that is not based on science: do what you feel like as much as want. It's worked for me. Using "input" and "output," old computerese terms explains nothing and are a charade to make it sound and look scientific (why not just say "read" and "listen" and "speak" and "write" - we aren't computers). There is one, and only one, ingredient that determines the success of language learning (as well as anything else): MOTIVATION.
But, given two individuals who are already motivated, wouldn't you agree that the individual who follows science-based methods would get better results?
Because input can be reading or listening and output can be speaking or writing and they are shorter to say
So, when motivation, which is a finite resource, runs out, then what? These strategies are to help someone manage their finite energy in the most efficient method possible.
I don't agree.
Output is a different skill apart from the language per se.
It is perfectly possible to know a language and yet be a poor speaker or writer.
I consider myself a poor speaker and writer even in my own native language.
To be a good writer or speaker you need skills that go beyond the language per se.
The fact that you are a poor speaker or writer doesn't mean that you don't know the language.
It's not what she said , she said if you want to achieve a high speaking level you need lots of practice, lots of output, and yes it is very obvious.
Personally I believe you first need to have listen a lot because you need to be able to hear the nuances, because you can never produced a sound you don't hear.
Books by Tomatis are a great read about that.
At the end is she saying a problem with 3rd person 's'.
She said it several times. I've no idea what it is?
In English, you are supposed to say he eat"s", as opposed to he eat. This is what she is referring to.
Making it up.
Transparent = literal
Obscure= figurative.
Alguien estudia con input que yobestoy tratando de aprender de esa manera
Why do we keep looking at language or language learning as "input" and "output?" It is more than that and I expect to see experts to simply go deeper. In developmental psychology when you look at L1 language acquisition it is referred to as "reception" and "expression." As a human being we have the choice to not listen to someone who is talking or we might daydream while we are reading, which limits language reception even though it is still directed at us as "input." The same can be said with our "output." An example, would be repetitive conversations that are nothing more than filler or in L2 language study with a Pimsleur lesson or shadowing, which tends to be a lot of parroting and not true expression.
Great point
In the SLA literature, what you're referring to is usually called "intake" (broadly speaking, it's the subset of the "input" that is actually processed). Not sure whether there's an equivalent concept for output.
I never watched sitcoms. Didn’t grow up with television.
There definitely are some great sitcoms for learning languages.
😅according to this woman i cant understand french youtube at 99% comprehension. Output is not necessary.... because ive never done any. It is necessary to output better, though. The guy you interviewed who talked about transfer appropriate processing understood how memory works. Anyway, output is helpful but neither necessary nor sufficient for comprehension. Im not an input fanatic...just lazy with no need to speak.
I'm not sure whether I understand. What is it that Dr. Dóczi that you don't agree with?
@@loistalagrand
Among other things, She said: "However as the level increases I think output becomes something that you cannot live without and I think that that's going to be for example the dividing line between someone who can achieve let's say an intermediate level of knowledge and say, C1 [level of knowledge]" Using the word "knowledge" is a red flag to someone who has studied cognition, but taking that word at face value, my internal "knowledge of French" is extremely high and I've never outputted. // Regarding Transfer Appropriate Processing--you get good at what you do. Language is not special in that regard. It is a set of skills. To understand more, you need to spend your time understanding. To output better you need to spend your time outputting (and understanding what you are outputting, which is why it is a bit of a dependent skill).
@@michaeld3223 I'm not sure, but I think she meant "knowledge" in terms of output.
@@loistalagrand The way she talked during the entire interview didn't fill me with confidence. Bill VanPaten was more in line with how I think. So perhaps I'm biased. But there is no way to know because the necessary research to answer even the most basic and fundamental questions second language learners want to know about efficiency.... isn't there. Anyway, thank you very much for making these interviews happen!!! Now if only a government would spend the money to do proper studies rather than repackaging the same classroom experiences that have failed student for generations (based on which expert's advice, is what I always ask..).
@@nissevelli thanks for sharing
The input/output dichotomy is actually misleading. Language acquisition is driven by communication. Communication is key.
Obviously low-level students can't speak much, so they can communicate by empathizing with characters in stories.
But when they reach higher levels and can speak, they can begin to communicate from their own personality.
Communication drives acquisition.
The true theoretical dichotomy is implicit vs explicit knowledge/learning.
@@jesse_ledesmaexactly
.
She should learn more the research 😁