Stephen Krashen
Formal learning involves the type of courses we take in school or on training programs. In school, it is mostly done to us (while we sit passively). It is explicit and presented in structured, generic packages, on a pre-ordained schedule, etc.
Informal learning, by contrast, constitutes everything beyond the formal - anything we learn through reading, listening, conversation, discovery, collaboration in work, etc. Notably it also includes first language acquisition. Informal learning generally involves a greater degree of volition, or at least participation, on the part of the learner.
The formal/informal learning distinction resonates, to my mind, with Stephen Krashen’s learning/acquisition distinction. I’d like to take a closer look. Bear with me, if you would. (Note that I’m not saying they’re the same thing, but I guess I’m trying to probe the similarities.)
Krashen claims that, in the language learning arena, there are 2 separate learning mechanisms. The first is explicit learning: grammar, rules, abstractions - the things we can know about about a language. This is what traditionally gets taught in classrooms and textbooks.
The second learning mechanism is implicit: the natural, psychological, sub-conscious, process of acquisition. Acquisition accounts for how we learned our first language, or when we learn a second language in the environment where it is spoken. Clearly, you can reach fluency without formal instruction.
From Wikipedia:
… language acquisition … occurs naturally, just like first language acquisition, under appropriate conditions. This view constituted a dramatic shift from an earlier position in Krashen’s published work reflecting a commitment to direct instruction and consistent error correction.
Simply by using the language (rather than describing it) we acquire it. Furthermore, Krashen believes there is no relation between formal language learning and acquisition. The domains are wholly separate. In fact, says Krashen, you could formally study the language forever and it would never impact your ability to produce fluent, natural speech.
Now if this is true, then it has major implications for the language teacher and perhaps for formal trainers of any stripe. To me, it is clear why. The lecture format relies almost entirely on the listener’s ability to absorb information along a single dimension, through a single modality. Break out of the lecture format and you get thinking, discussion, inference, interaction, etc, including in the classroom or online. You have feelings, judgments, a social and emotional dimension to the experience. These things involve the broader personality of the learner and mobilize a greater variety of his cognitive faculties. Greater cognitive depth means greater learning.
Notice too that Krashen’s theories pertain to the learner only. He has essentially nothing to say about the role of the teacher. (Some say, resentfully, that he is anti-pedagogy.) I’m seeing an analogy in the realms of e-learning. The more you read on that topic the more you realize that is the emphasis is shifting away from training (the stuff that’d done to us) towards learning (the stuff we do for ourselves).
Formal training programs may have as little effect upon work performance as lectures on grammar would have on individual spoken fluency. Thus far I haven’t read anyone in the e-learning literature make that kind of learning/acquisition distinction, but I think it’s one to explore.
Ken Carroll
I wonder though…
Most people point to first language acquisition that’s done without any classroom work, but when you look at the first language abilities of people with little formal education they’re pretty dismal. Yes, they function in society, but not much above the level of immediate fulfillment of needs. When my Chinese gets to that level I’ll feel as if I’ve made it about halfway to my goal.
As for Krashen, it seems to me (in my own experience) that formal learning part of the equation helps me make sense of things when I encounter them the first few times, and the informal acquisition side lets me eventually internalize and use the new language myself. They both play a role.
John,
From a scientific perspective, language is an incredibly complex thing. Someone once suggested that, in linguistic terms, ‘Confucius walks with the Macdeonian swineherd’. The difference in their language abilities is entirely superficial, that is at the level of grammatical convention. Languages without written forms display no less complexity than those that have them. This complexity came about long before the culturally driven conventions of grammar.
If illiterate people struggle in society it’s not because they are linguistically inferior but because it’s a convention of modern society to adopt formal standards.
Ken Carroll
John B said:
“when you look at the first language abilities of people with little formal education they’re pretty dismal”
I would question this on many, many grounds- empirical, in terms of how you would measure dismal, and through counter examples of many who, without a formal education, have reached dizzying heights of language skills.
A larger problem is what is meant by “language skills”. If you mean speaking correctly, and by that I mean grammatically correctly, it is intuitive to assume that only grammar training can prepare us to speak in a grammatically correct fashion. Krashen (and many others) questions this. Correct me if I’m wrong but I see Krashen as saying that most grammar is learned best by immersing ourselves in language and “intuiting” or “acquiring” the rules.
http://www.philosophynow.org/a.....digan1.htm
Ken and Michael,
Maybe the ability to articulate oneself on a wide variety of abstract topics that tends to come with formal education is not the result of language learning (though… if you learn about, say, nuclear physics in a language, then aren’t you also getting language lessons on how to talk about nuclear physics?). Of course there are pleny of counterexamples – if you choose from a large enough population there are bound to be outliers – but on the whole it still seems (to my very non-expert self) that education and ability with a language is strongly related.
Also, I wasn’t suggesting that literacy was all-important. Living in Shanghai and listening to Shanghainese shows how well people can communicate with a language that lacks a written form. But there are certainly articulate and graceful Shanghainese speakers, and inarticulate and rough speakers. I always assumed this was a result of education. Maybe not.
Oh, and it was Plato that was with the swineherd. “When it comes to linguistic form, Plato walks with the Macedonian swineherd, Confucius with the head-hunting savage of Assam.”
Family still asleep, so I can post one more
Ken,
one needs to be careful though, not to underestimate the power of formal knowledge transfer. I am convinced that identifying abstract patterns, codifying them, and teaching them is a major pillar of our current civilazation (pretty daring hypothesis, uh?).
Isn’t “formal” learning the most efficient way to distribute knowledge across time and space and to coordinate action? I firmly believe that grammar rules are no exception. Of course abstract knowledge is by far not enough, and it can only be a crutch. But sometimes you need a crutch to built up muscle material. Besides it can be very welcome to move ahead quickly.
Example: Yes, I developed a guts feeling over time on the usage of 的 in conjunction with adjectives. But that feeling was still insecure, unreliable, feeble. Only when Amber told me the rule behind it I gained confidence. I can apply that rule now to check (and correct) my own guts feeling. Especially when trying to write - which is a sentence building practice that is relevant for speaking as well. Of course even without the rule my feeling would have developed over time and within 2 or 3 years it would have been firm…
Can’t wait for the Grammar guide…
Furthermore: I wouldn’t throw away the lecture format all too easy, either. Didn’t most non-native English speakers start with the good old lecture format - at least to build that foundation on which later informally acquired language in build on?
So I think ideally you have both in combination.
Ken,
The Lexical Approach by Michael Lewis was where I first read about the idea that most problems in language learning can be plotted on a line with two endpoints. Between these two endpoints will fall an almost endless range of options.
I’ve always thought that this works for Krashen and his “learning and acquisition distinction” and it sounds like the same holds true for your “teacher….learner” and “formal……informal” distinctions. I guess that these aren’t either or distinctions but endpoints with a number of possibilities in between.
The problem with Krashen is, after such a long career (what, about 25 years now) that it is hard to talk about him because everyone has a different mental picture of Krashen. The most recent Krashen is strongly in favor of reading and believes (I think) that much learning can occur without a lot of real time interaction between humans. A much earlier Krashen might have said that the lecture format would be fine as long as everything the teacher was saying was done at a level that is comprehensible to the student (he was strongly in favor of listening in years past).
Others have come along and said that language learning needs strong doses of interaction with others. It is the process of negotiation that produces language learning NOT the process of simply having understood what is said.
So, is it true that formal learning has little effect on performance? I wonder, but if it is true I wonder what this means in terms of how you would go about training language teachers?
I once was told by a couple of Japanese friends that my Japanese was spoken with a female ‘accent’. I had learned using both male and female instruction, but I had no idea of the distinction.
In light of this as just an example, as outstanding of a teacher Jenny is, has there been thought of having other(s) leading podcasts? Of course, there could be huge managerial issues, but perhaps it could be learning beneficial?
Hello all,
I find this explicit/implicit, learning/acquisition debate fascinating. In the interest of full disclosure, I must unabashedly admit to being a grammar freak…I peronally must understand at least some of the whys and wherefores of syntax and word order, the abstract frame of the language, to be able to piece vocabulary and acquired phrases together with confidence. That being said, I understand myself to be rather in the minority when it comes to my fascination with noun clauses, prepositions of movement, and how precisely to express what we in English call the past perfect progressive in any given language. A great many people do not react well to having the words they hear and acquire so classified, tagged and labeled. However, I think it’s a bit dangerous to discuss these two (I belive)essential aspects of language learning in terms of one being more beneficial than the other. Krashen says that there is no relation between formal language learning and acquisition. While that may very well be true in a neurological sense, practically speaking, I cannot agree with him. To my way of thinking, explicit language study, or the learning aspect, if you will, is something like a skeleton and the implicit language practice, or acquisition, something like muscle…each nothing without the other. One certainly cannot successfully learn a language by a study of it’s grammar, syntax and vocabulary only. Of course language learners need strong doses of interaction with others…isn’t that the whole point of language, interaction with others??? But to go about learning to communicate effectively with someone whose mother tongue is not the same as one’s own by listening comprehension and trial and error only, without understanding the logic behind the connection of those acquired words and phrases is equally futile and perhaps even more frustrating. I’m not in any way advocating lecturing or long dry lessons with a book in hand for grammar acquisition, but I do believe it is important to acquire that linguistic structure in bits and pieces, through discussion and explanation, question and answer, to reinforce the language acquisition that the learner must expose him/herself to. The “aha!” moments that every language teacher and avid language learner live for do not come when we correctly use an acquired new word or phrase, but when we understand such words and phrases in their linguistic context that was previously foreign, but now suddenly logical, to us. The argument that first language acquisition is entirely implicit is entirely irrelevant…we are none of us acquiring our first language here! None of us using ChinesePod to learn this remarkably intricate and complex method of communication has the ability to take in, process, store, and use linguistic information that a young child learning its first words has. At this point in our lives, we’re inputting such information about our second, or for some of us, third or fourth language into an entirely different part of our distracted, overtaxed brains…particularly the linguistic information dealing with grammar and syntax. See this brief article: http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/second.html
All right, I’m off my soapbox now…
I am a professor in a biology dept. One thing I have found is that students tend to delude themselves concerning what they know and do not know. If, for example, one were to only study Chinese through Chinese pod or a book, that person might eventually come to the conclusion that he/she was becoming fluent in the language. There has to be a way to test your abilities. As mentioned above, interaction with native Chinese can be one way to do that. A case in point: I have been studying Chinese with Chinese pod and taking a class with a native Chinese speaker since last Sept. So, I began thinking that I was not doing too bad. I could converse with my teacher in a limited way and she felt that I was making good progress. Recently I acquired a Chinese tutor. He wants to improve his English, I want to improve my Chinese. After two sessions with him I have come to the conclusion that I have a very long way to go. While I can understand the Chinese pod casts and exercises, when my tutor speaks with me I have a very difficult time understanding anything he says. So, now I have an added stimulus to workout other ways to learn the languange and in fact study a bit harder. That little dose of realited has made the diffence.
I’m posting this here because I don’t know where else to ask - I’ve tried to register on the forums but only got the initial email. I still cannot login and post. I’ve sent emails but received no response.
I’m a newbie, and quite hard on myself in terms of learning, or my perceived lack thereof. I see informal learning in action on a daily basis. My daughter is not yet 2 years old, and if I think about it I should be pleased with my progress if it is as fast as hers. She’ll outstrip me for sure, but it is a fine example of what you are talking about.
Ron in DC says:
I once was told by a couple of Japanese friends that my Japanese was spoken with a female ‘accent’. I had learned using both male and female instruction, but I had no idea of the distinction.
This is a huge issue for me as well. I have asked here in the forums for native male speakers, and I have asked at iMandarinPod.com.
The answer I got back from iMandarinPod.com was that almost all teachers in China are female. However, that should not matter, because from the point of view of the podcasts, all that is needed is to hire some male speakers for short-term speaking and recording tasks. They could be college/Uni students.
Ron I agree.
I too studied Japanese (in Japan) at one time. One big difference (at the level of individual words) between Chinese and Japanese was that in the 1980s there were certain word forms for women and certain word forms for men. However this big difference doesn’t really exist in Chinese.
That said, I feel Chinese women speak with a broader range of pitch than men do. Men tend to sound a bit more flat than women. If men pattern ourselves totally after these women we run the risk of sounding feminine.
However, why did I in Japan unknowingly pick up a female intonation? I believe that the female voice is easier to “hear” than the male voice. This makes it easier for newbies to “pick up” sounds if spoken by a woman. If I remember correctly studies have been make on this subject (the diferences between the comphrensibility of male and female voices). These studies suggest that there are some significant differences.
I’d agree with Ron, add male voices, but especially do it at the upper levels. This is particularly important for those learners that only have very limited speech models.
Thew dialogs mix male and female vocies. They’re also written by a combination of male and female writers, so as to avoid becoming too much one way or the other. Jenny takes this issue into account when recording, too.
All in all, I’m not too worried that we’re training the guys to speak like girls. However, I do agree that it would be good to have a male equivalent in Jenny’s role for some lessons - not least to have the male perspective on Chinesee culture. I actually interviewed a coupel of guys few months ago but it didn’t work out. After V3 I’ll reviosit that.
Ken Carroll
When imitating a Chinese speaker, the student has a choice of imitating the exact pitches, or imitating the relative pitches. (For instance, imitating the voice of a female speaker down a 3rd)
I choose to imitate the pitches exactly rather than relatively because I feel that this is the best way to ensure accuracy. But this can be a little uncomfortable with a female voice. Sometimes I will imitate a female voice down an octave, which I feel is still more likely to be accurate than taking it down some other interval. But then my voice is unnaturally low. Having to do this can be a little bothersome at times, but it is not a serious problem. The tones are
filed away in my brain in a relative manner rather than a “perfect pitch” kind of way.
When it comes to tones, I think its more important for beginners to have a model of the same sex than it is for someone who has been doing it for a longer time.
My ear tells me that Mandarin sentences do indeed have an overall tonal contour which is superimposed on the individual tones of the words. This modulation seems to me to vary somewhat according to the sex of the speaker. I don’t hear this kind of thing in isolated sentences though, I hear it in dialogs with emotional content. I’m sure that linguists have studied this kind of thing to death. At any rate, at an intermediate and advanced level, I want to hear female speakers act out dialogs with female type content, and male speaker act out dialogs with typically male content. I think Chinese pod is already doing this.
One of the posters here talked about “singing” the language. Thats the right way to describe it I think.
Part of the process of acquiring a good accent consists in learning to do this in a purely imitative manner, in private. This is pure technique.
The other part is learning to do this in free conversation with native speakers in an unselfconscious way, as an actor in a play would. This is more art. It requires a letting go of the ego, trying to think of yourself as being a native speaker. (I thought that John did this rather well in one of his dialogs.) I personally find this to be the most difficult part, but it helps a lot if you have the technique down cold.
At any rate, at an intermediate and advanced level, I want to hear female speakers act out dialogs with female type content, and male speaker act out dialogs with typically male content.
I don’t care about female/male appropriate content. I just want to hear native male voices so I can start to immitate them.
It has been very clear to me so far up to about lesson 40 in the intermediate series when a 外国男人 has been used. They simply do not help. There has been one case where I think a native male speaker has been used, though.
“I’m posting this here because I don’t know where else to ask - I’ve tried to register on the forums but only got the initial email. I still cannot login and post. I’ve sent emails but received no response.”
Hi Dave,
If you can send me an email at chinesepod[@]gmail[dot]com, I can forward your inquiry to Bazza or Marchey since they are the ones screening the forum applicants and they might know about the issue than I do.
Eileen
John B says:
“…but when you look at the first language abilities of people with little formal education they’re pretty dismal…”
I agree to some extent but could the cause of one’s language abilities simply be their environment rather than their education? A lot of this is tied closely together, but I feel that a considerable amount of my language abilities are the result of living in an environment of people who speak grammatically correct and even reading a lot. I can cite one instance when I was in just second grade or so when, during a language arts worksheet discussion, I was asked why I placed a certain word where I did in the fill in (I had gotten it right and was asked to explain). Unfortunately, I didn’t care too much at the time about nouns, verbs, pronouns, and all that jazz and had to give the simple response of “…because it sounds right…?” I guess what I am trying to say is that maybe “good” first language abilities come from a “good” formal education because of the environment and what a person is exposed to, rather than just that they understand structure, style, vocabulary, etc… better than a person who did not have as “good” a formal education. Though, of course, education would enhance this form of learning and offer a better understanding and, tied in with the environment, bring about better language abilities. It is almost like a form of intuition, knowing how a language “should” be. Once a person has a firm grasp on a language, it flows more naturally and “intuitively” and they are not thinking, “ok, this part of speech goes here, and this part of speech here, etc.”
I happen to think that Eddie Murphy has an exceptional command of the English language. I doubt that he owes his facility to reading books or grammar classes.
All the writing classes in the world won’t turn a person who doesn’t read into a writer.
Grammar classes are great for learning how to punctuate correctly. Maybe I should take one sometime…………………………nahhh
IMO, the distinction between formal and informal learning is an important one to take note of, but it isn’t a black and white argument.
As others have stated, both processes can complement each other. In fact, one would be at a distinct disadvantage if one focused exclusively on informal the learning path to fluency. Grammar rules are not intended to be memorized but can form important background knowledge.
The “learning to drive a car” analogy is a good example of this. We all learn to drive through more or less an informal approach. We don’t need to understand the mechanics of automobile engineering to be proficient drivers. However, a formal course in auto mechanics is still beneficial. After all, what’s the use of being a “fluent” driver if you don’t have a clue about how to change a flat tire ?
Richard has good points about the male speaker issues.
Not only a problem with learning materials but also I found it is much harder to find male language exchange partners. Gender appropriate language is not just about pitch (and even pitch difference and significance various amongst languages and cultures). I was kindly given a couple of recordings of a friends husband speaking to practice with and it made a significant difference. Somebody else pointed out that my speech now sounded more appropriate to their expectations based on my English voice.
Then there are all the softening sounds la’s ya’s ma’s etc that are sometimes thrown in. It was a great relief when I was told that as an older male talking to mainland Chinese people I could really just work on the principle of not useing them at all if they were not serving a gramatical purpose (I can always slip in a little male appropriate softening when I have got a better grasp on the other stuff). There are the odd second syllables that are carried as first tone by women and toneless by men (although these always generate much debate when I mention them, I know it happens). There are the occaisional little phrases also (that I can’t remember any of right now), that men just don’t really use but you can’t tell that unless you listen to a lot of male speech or specifically ask (some very macho phrases may sound girly when translated directly into to English and vice a versa, you have no way to know, for example English men never ask someone to come out to play but that is fine in Chinese).
Most people will not tell you that you are talking like a girl (or even writing like one) and even if they make allowances then I have been told that Western men that have modelled their voices on women too much often come accross as sounding a little nervous or even slightly hysterical.
Having said that, there are male voices on Chinesepod and I have been told by both a Chinese person and a Westerner that John’s Chinese voice is a good model. So I guess you just have to be particularly attentive to these (actually, if somebody the size of John Pasden was wondering around China talking like a school girl I don’t think he would have survived this long ;)).
You also get some very girly speech in the love story Intermediate lessons and it is not difficult to work out where that is so us males can use that as examples of how not to speak (still important to learn to regonise it though).
I think if you identify the issues then there is enough content around to keep things in check.
Maybe Chinesepod could identify the lessons that teach gender specific stuff or even add a few ‘gender notes’.
“I’m a newbie, and quite hard on myself in terms of learning, or my perceived lack thereof.”
F1B1- I can relate. In many areas of academia, I’ve found setting self high-expectations has worked well, but not for language learning. Your daughter’s learning process may be something to emulate to the extent that is practical.
I finally figured out why whenever Jenny says names like John or Ken on the recordings it sounds so funny. What was even more interesting is that when she says words like “idioms” she has absolutely no problems.
I think it has to do with people importing assumptions/practices from their native language into their second/third language.
Whenever I hear Jenny say the name John on the mp3 it sounds funny because she clips/shortens the ‘n’ sound as if she was speaking in Chinese, but Mandarin has no ‘m’ finals and definitely no ‘ms’ finals, so she has learned them in the English fashion and indeed has picked up some Australian idioms along the way.
Why do I bring this up? Jenny’s english is very good and she has an awesome grasp of Australian idiom (eg, “I don’t know what you use to line your stomach”) not to mention more general idiom (”Don’t get carried away,” although on one mp3 she says “Don’t get carried off.”) but it takes a lot of work to consistently use the phonology of a foreign language and subtle problems like the one I have mentioned serves to reinforce the differences between languages.
We should all pay attention to these differences if we want to stop sounding so foreign.
I for myself know that I do definately do *not at all* sound “female” in Mandarin. I sound *foreign*. And all those subtleties you are discussing here are buried deep down under tone mistakes, misguided pinyin pronounciation, uneven language flow, etc. etc.
If one day I am advanced enough that a native speaker is able to recognize subtleties on that level I consider myself to have reached the goal. When that day will come I might follow those complaints here and whine: “You know, my pronounciation is really sub standard. Sometimes the change of pitch sounds just a little female - just listen to my voice recording on slo-mo!”. Kudos to all those here who are already there.
Besides: I wish I had reached Jenny’s level of English pronounciation instead of uttering that rather brutal Krautish. I guess you have to listen as carefully as Richard Sharpe to find out where that sweet little touch comes from that I notice in Jenny’s voice once in a while. Never considered that to be “foreign”.
Henning says:
Besides: I wish I had reached Jenny’s level of English pronounciation instead of uttering that rather brutal Krautish.
One of the experiences I most remember was sitting in the reception area of the Freitzeit Inn in Goetingen at around 5AM in the morning because I couldn’t sleep. I was pounding away on the keyboard of my laptop, and listening to the staff as they came to work and greeted each other with “Morgen.” It was gave me such a feeling of tranquility and reinforced my views of how pleasant and helpful the German people are.
Everytime I hear German people speak my ears prick up and I wish I could read Goethe, because apart from a tendency to create words that are 400 characters long, the language sounds interesting.
Henning, so if you speak at too high a pitch you won’t sound feminine? If you hit the first tone at exactly the same pitch as Jenny you won’t sound feminine? If you pepper your speach with far to many la’s, ya’s ma’s and haohaoahhhhhhhhh’s (because you learnt to speak from your favorite Tawainese, college soap drama female lead).
You don’t have to be able to speak English very well to sound feminine or masculine. Not sure about German? The German language generally comes across as fairly masculine to English speakers. Maybe your German base has protected you. All I know is that even after a few months I managed to acheive a remarked upon improvement in the masculinity of my Chinese voice (and I still have many many issues with pronounciation in general) and I have heard the comment of many Western males sounding slightly hysterical when they first alight on Chinese soil, from more than one source.
I remember one of our Australian friends remarking that he had been warned that he had been listening to too many female voices and that he aught to adjust to avoid the wrong sort of attention…
And yes Jenny is excellent, and yes if only I could ever be so good at Mandarin. But She does not sound like a native speaker, and I only ever point this out to counteract the ridiculous belief that many Asians can sound native in English and only Da Shan can ever sound native in Mandarin (it is just a numbers and time game, seriously guys). You do right to admire her Henning, but if only when the time comes to test my final Mandarin ability …. I can be judged by a native Vietnamese speaker or similar ;).
Finally, I had next to no time to type this so don’t look too carefully at the grammar or spelling, it is a touch-typed braindump.
BTW I can only speak a few words of German so I am aware that in that respect you have the moral highground :p
All this talk of Western guys speaking like girls when they speak Mandarin is interesting. If you fall into this category…check out one of the Advanced CPOD lessons called Tong2Xing4Lian4 (same sex contact) or homosexual relationships. Hey, there’s a lesson for everyone.
I’ve been studying Putonghua now for two years, and one thing that helps me with different “speech models” is to watch contemporary dramas like the excellent “Chinese Style Divorce” series.
http://www.womenofchina.com.cn.....y/1684.jsp
This drama in particular covers a wide variety of contemporary Chinese social themes and through careful listening, helps me with “real language” as it’s used in different contexts: informal, familial, combative, professional, public, parent-child, etc.
At first, the level of language was too fast for me, but with the help of a native speaker, it has become easier to understand. Amazingly, there are even websites devoted to the translation and analysis of the script.
Maybe CPod can tie in some advanced lessons to this show
How about other shows? Any recommendations for Mandarin language shows or movies which provide good language reference?
Cheers,
Jim in SF
df
I’ve studied Putonghua now for about two years, and one thing that helps me with “speech models” is to watch a contemporary dramatic series like “Chinese Style Divorce”.
http://www.womenofchina.com.cn.....y/1684.jsp
This show touches on a wide variety of modern themes, and features “real language” as it’s spoken in many different contexts: workplace, familial, parent-child, girl/boy friend, fighting, formal, casual, etc. The acting is very good, and the story is engaging. Amazingly, there are even websites devoted to the translation and analysis of the script for students learning Mandarin.
Anyone else catch this show? Any recommendations for similar programming featuring real, contemporary language?
Cheers,
Jim in SF
Oops! sorry for the repeat posts. Please delete the extra!
Thanks,
Jim
The first two and a half years of my Mandarin learning was heavily influenced by females. Why? Maybe one out of thirty people I spoke with were female. Seemed like only females really had the interest, and frankly the courage to talk with the foreigner. Therefore it was not all that surprising that when at the end of my time in Asia, it was not all that uncommon for Chinese people to comment that my Chinese did have a bit of a feminine sound to it.
你去搞個杯子!
As for your comment Dick, argh, why even bother……………
John B,
Good job on the first entry of this blog, - since I agree with you. Here is my perspective on the importance of formal education: Language is about communication. Communication is about a speaker/writer/signer getting ideas across to an audience. The swineherd may be perfectly capable of communicating all the nuances and abstraction that his audience may be capable of absorbing, but Plato’s words have echoed for millennia. His audience is vastly larger and more sophisticated. Of course I never heard Plato speak, but clearly he was able to make a lasting impression on those that listened to him.
My point is that learning language in school may not make our speaking any more grammatical, but it gives us the ability to be more expressive and persuasive. It allows us to exploit our language to the maximal effect. We are able express complex, abstract ideas to a broad audience. The entries in this blog, clearly give evidence of a group of people who took their language lessons in school very seriously … and none of you (or Krashen for that matter) would ever consider having your child skip their language arts class in favor of something more practical.
Chinesepod clearly does a deep dive into grammar explanations and language patterns. So if this information is irrelevant to our language acquisition, perhaps they could save us all a lot of time and just post the dialogs and be done with it. This one fact alone seems to demonstrate the importance of learning. I appreciate the fact that help us keep in touch with the “convention of modern society to adopt formal standards”.
Well said Eric.
Eric,
Some people want/need to know explicit information about the target language (grammar, structures). That’s fine. In a self-service context (such as they way we’ve tried to design ChinesePod) the learners are free to consume the input as they wish, to go where their interest takes them. That will include a greater or lesser element of grammar. Crucially, however, they access it ‘informally’, and on their own terms. They are not tied to lectures, and especially not lectures on someone else’s schedule.
We all make decisions as to the amount of grammar we wish to study. Part of the reason we ‘explain’ the dialogs is in order to aid comprehension and build background. At the end of the day I agree with Krashen that grammar does not impact spoken fluency. Only a combination of comprehensible input and spoken practice does that.
Ken Carroll
I have not studied Krashen, so I am in over my head here, but … I do not see learning and acquisition as two extremes of a dichotomy. I see them as two steps in the process of becoming a competent speaker of a foreign language.
Acquisition happens when interpreting the sounds of a language becomes reflex. Learning is just the first step in that process. The learning occurs through demonstration and experimentation, as happens with children, or it can be more formal like memorization. But something has to happen to make the learning become more deeply rooted in the brain. That something is called “practice” – conversations, exercises, reading, listening to chinesepod dialogs, etc. It is during practice when we are able to experience a language element in multiple contexts. Then suddenly the knowledge sinks deeper, becomes less ephemeral and the interpretation more reflexive.
“Language acquisition does not require extensive use of conscious grammatical rules, and does not require tedious drill.” Stephen Krashen
I agree with this, but learning these rules makes it easier to interpret the language. Thus the language input/practice is more likely to trigger acquisition.
“The best methods are therefore those that supply ‘comprehensible input’ in low anxiety situations, containing messages that students really want to hear.” Stephen Krashen
This really resonates with me. There are three parts to this sentence: 1) comprehensible input 2) low anxiety situations and 3) messages that students really want to hear. I think Chinesepod gets top marks for #3 but not for #1 and #2. The low marks are because each dialog is filled with words that are substantially unique from the previous dialogs. So unless the learner is listening to material that is below his/her current level, the first pass will be incomprehensible (and maybe induce anxiety).
“In the real world, conversations with sympathetic native speakers who are willing to help the acquirer understand are very helpful.” Stephen Krashen
I love this quote because it really explains why I have been able achieve some measure of ability at mandarin. Yes, I study hard. Yes, I memorize the tones, the rules, and the vocabulary. But is it those moments when my Chinese friends have been patient enough to speak with me that I am actually able to improve.
Erik Grimm
There was another famous Greek whose “words have echoed for millennia” His name was Plato, and he was blind, so I can’t see how he would have had a formal education.
I didn’t learn what I know about English from school. I was put in the slow learners section in grade one, kicked out of two classes in high school. I barely graduated. My father didn’t like me bringing books home or reading them.
I have known several high school English teachers who never cracked a book in real life. I could tell you horror stories about the pure ignorance of many of my school teachers, and of many teachers I have known since. I apologize to the good teachers reading this. I had a few of those too, but not many.
The only thing a person really needs to get a literary education is a library card and a taste for reading.
Big Macs Make You Fat - About the sounding like a girly boy in Chinese. It’s all about the ratios, if all you ever eat are Big Macs, well then things will happen. If you have a well rounded diet of fruits and vegetables then you will generally be healthy.
It’s really unlikely that a person will become fluent only from exposure to Chinesepod, add to that then that the fem input becomes less with exposure to John’s Chinese, Ken’s if he ever talks on-mike again in Chinese, and Le Guan’s 50% contribution in many podcasts. To sound like Jenny’s fem voice would be quite tough for most male Adam apples, and she for the most part does not impart much fem particles in the newbie, elementary and intermediate podcasts.
So IMO, it’d be like blaming one’s beer belly on Big Macs when the only eatery in town is the local pub. That said, there’s no denying we could do with a local pub representative on Cpod, IF he’s interesting and entertaining, and bright. Pretty tough requirements for a male in any country.
Now if one starts to learn Chinese with a Chinese girlfriend that talks in pretty fem language, watches only Chinese dramas and ignores any input from male actors in those casts, and doesn’t pay any attention at all…well sure it’s possible.
There’s also a big difference between standard Chinese and guy Chinese, so let’s not confuse that with fem Chinese. I’m sure most Cpod learners only listening and influenced by Jenny will sound ’standard’ rather than feminine.
All that said, it’s way easier to sound girly by accident in Japanese, ne.
Its about role models - or rather mental models. I am able to speak two other ‘foreign’ languages reasonably fluently both with ‘a good accent’. I have a mental model of what a Russian man sounds like, what a French man sounds like and I reproduce that (as best I can). This comes from hearing men speaking. (One of my conscious or unconscious models in Russian, is a male radio announcer for example).
I don’t have such a model for a Chinese male voice.
So, I really would like to hear more native Chinese males. It’s the whole package - not just register, or particles … that I would like to have a good feel for and institutionalise it within myself.
Not sure what the fuss is all about… Most of CPod dialogues are recorded in both female and male voices. CPod also did a great job with the Intermediate lesson featuring some specifically female vocabulary - this will both help those who are anxious to avoid these expressions and those who like diversifying their vocabulary.
This issue is much-much bigger in Japanese where it permeates all levels: grammar (sentence structure, particles, choice of predicate), vocabulary (including personal pronouns) and intonation. Even most basic sentences are affected by it.
Hmmm not a fuss, I was just trying to articulate what I need and why. Mike summed it up perfectly though, I just need the mental model to mimic.
Most of the male voices on Cpod just don’t quite fit my mental model (and maybe voice box) to allow me to mimic comfortably.
I can extrapolate from female speech but not mimic. I think I have enough of my friends husbands voice to work with
Yup I am with Mike, other people obviously are not.
So you end up sounding like Gong Li, big deal…there are worse things in the world. Now, can you act? And how do you look in a cheongsam (旗袍 qípáo) and a wig?
My wife taught EFL at Beijing University while I was a student there. More than a few of her male students had some pretty fem English, apparently owing to the predominence of female teachers at Beida. One such student, who studied physics, announced one day in class: “I just adore Albert Einstein.”
I’d be inmterested to know if we could make people LOOK like Gong Li. Really interested.
Ken Carroll
The same thing happens on SpanishSense. In a recent lesson they say “Estoy encantado de conocerlo”…”I am delighted to know you”. A male is speaking but this definitely has a feminine flavor. You wouldn’t say this to a guy that you meet in a regular bar (not the other kind). A male would normally say “Mucho gusto de conocerlo”…”Pleased to meet you” or just plain “Mucho gusto”. I think it would be helpful to have a strong male voice to listen to…someone with John’s level of ability but maybe with a deeper, clearer voice (no offense John). These are not world ending differences but if you are trying to make a good impression then why not shoot for excellence?
Eric Grimm says
Here is my perspective on the importance of formal education: Language is about communication.
I can see you have not read any of Dan Sperber’s works on communication.
I tend to agree with one view of what Sperber says that language is about manipulating other people’s internal states.
manipulating other people’s internal states, I love it. right now I have some news to tell my wife that she could take in number of ways, ranging from good to bad via indifference.
I read this an realised that I am not searching for words to communicate the news but, looking for right words to favorably manipulate her internal state. Now I also realise why language practice that has some emotional content is much much more useful.
Before the gender thing spirals out of control, Mike from Eweshot hit the nail on the head already. If you use mimicry as a significant part of your language aquisition arsenal, then it is of more importance to find an appropriate model to mimic (one that fits your own natural voice and background).
Gruff - It’s interesting, this thing about finding our second language voice. (or 8-9 th voice) I have noticed lately that I am starting to ‘acquire’ the local way of speaking putonghua where I currently live, it’s not necessarily the ‘voice’ that I want.
To balance this out a bit, I have taken to occasional chatting with myself, repetition, and acting the voices of several ‘male’ voices whom I want as voice models as I watch various movies. It’s kind of the only thing I can do to counterbalance things. What do other’s think? Chinese DVDs available where you are? One two-hour movie is like 8-10 podcast scripted dialogues.
To be frank, I think I start to talk like a guy as I talk with other guys. I am more ’standard’ when talking with women. I really don’t think the cpod materials affect me that much one way or the other. But I don’t listen to the same podcasts over and over either.
Shoot for one’s gender and hope for androgynous. Actually, when I lived in Beijing, I always worried more about sounding like a toothless octagenarian, complete with pepples, than with sounding like a girly. Come to think of it, though, that would have eliminated any insignificant gender concerns I might have had.
Thoughts on “mimicry“:
In the first stage of learning a language and when learning new material (vocabulary or sentences) learners should try to mimic as closely as possible the pure sounds that they are hearing. That means pronouncing the phonemes, tones, rhythm, and intonation contour of the sentence as closely as possible. In doing this, even natural mimics can benefit by having some academic knowledge of the phonology of the target language.
In attempting this, it helps if your model is slightly slower than normal speech. Accuracy first, then speed. An high intermediate learner, maybe even and advanced learner may still want to have new material for mimicry presented at a relaxed pace, with spaces between sentences.
As I said in a previous post, I look upon this first stage mimicry as pure technique. If I am trying to tweak the pronunciation of a word, I don’t even think about the meaning, I’m too busy concentrating on the sounds. After I have the pronunciation as good as I can get it, I will pronounce it a few times more trying to visualize the meaning (if it’s a concrete noun say) and/or learn to pronounce a few sentences with the word in it. There is no emotion involved in this procedure.
For an advanced learner, who has long mastered this first stage type of mimicry, and who enters a total immersion type of environment, a new type of mimicry kicks in. In any group of speakers, there are all kinds of subtle and not-so-subtle types of communication going on that go far beyond the process of hearing and saying words while understanding their dictionary definitions. Things like body language, facial expressions, levels of speech, who speaks when and how much, it is impossible to adequately codify and teach these things in a language learning program.
This is where we language learners must learn to re-activate the kinds of natural human impulses of mimicry that we had as a child. A child will naturally tend to mimic the language and mannerisms of someone he identifies and admires. Its much more difficult for we adults to do this, with our already developed and fixed identities. But if we want to achieve a high level of communicative ability in another language, we must try. Or perhaps it is not a matter of “trying” to do anything, but simply of flowing into a new identity.
What factors facilitate this kind of learning? I believe that the ideal situation is to be in a group with both sexes, where you like everybody and admire some of them, and where you feel that these feelings are reciprocated. I also think that it is best if you are the only person who speaks English, and if they are all native speakers. In such an environment, the good language learner, who is flexible, may feel comfortable enough to enter into the new reality of the new culture. This is what people mean when they say, “When you learn a new language, you become a new person”
( I
think that this is where the typical woman language learner is much better than the typical male language learner.)
I don’t believe you can get this kind of knowledge from a language tutor. You must observe native speakers interacting with each other, and eventually become part of that interaction.
Many language learners are, like myself, highly verbal persons in their own language. But in a new language, we must learn to speak less and listen more. Eavesdropping is great at any stage. I also believe that the smart language learner, when first entering a native language group, should spend almost all of their time opening themselves up and observing. But I have seen so many language learners who, when in that situation, get excited and start inappropriately moving their tongues, in a frantic attempt to “get some practice with native speakers” A better way is to adopt a policy of: “Children should be seen more than heard”
I also see no need to hurry the process of insertion into a native speaker environment. With the materials that we now have available, we can learn to pronounce and understand the language without extensive contact with native speakers. When I can easily understand pretty well everything I hear in the Chinese media, and in the Mandarin conversations I overhear, then I will be ready to look for more native speaker interaction.
“indentifies” should read “indentifies with” ….grrrrr
After listening to some more of the MP3s today, I am intrigued about Ken’s mispronunciation of 如果. He pronounces it as lu2 guo3 rather than ru2 guo3.
Now, I cannot imagine that Ken cannot distinguish between ‘l’ and ‘r,’ and I believe I have heard a Chinese person in Mountain View saying lu2 guo3 as well, so I wonder if this is a common pronunciation difference in parts of China?
Richard
Yes it does. In the South in my experience may people can’t say ‘r’ but substitute ‘l’.
Mike in Ewshot says:
In the South in my experience may people can’t say ‘r’ but substitute ‘l’.
Heh. My wife, is from Hong Kong. After some effort she no longer has problems with the combination of ‘bl’ in problem, however, when she is angry her concentration goes to hell, which leads to probrems
Guys,
My wife is from Taiwan. I blame her influence for my ‘l’ rather than the more standard ‘r’ in ‘ru guo’. (How’s that for shirking responsibility - blaming your wife!)
Ken Carroll