4 ms·

Having done this many times before (it was my main study method), I'll say that at least for me putting the new vocab in SRS software improved the efficiency of

Having done this many times before (it was my main study method), I'll say that at least for me putting the new vocab in SRS software improved the efficiency of reading dramatically. I changed my process to scanning the text and finding the first 20 pieces of vocab I didn't know. I'd put that in my SRS software (of my own invention because at that time Anki sucked, believe it or not :-)) I'd then memorise those 20 pieces of vocab and then read the text. Every day, I'd do that, and also do my SRS reviews. Every week or so, I'd reread the whole week's text. If it was a particularly difficult book, then I might do the same thing after a month (ie. read the whole month's work). Almost always, by the time I got to half way through the book, I didn't need the SRS software anymore. Authors tend to use the same vocab and grammar over and over again. So I could read several books written by that author with almost no difficulty (although it depends on the level). Anyway, what I found was that this was the fastest way to bootstrap me to free reading. If I didn't memorise vocab as I went, then I'd need to look up stuff for the entire book (and beyond). But if I did memorise vocab, then I could easily get to a point where I'm just reading casually without any desire to look stuff up. Studies (which I don't have pointers to at the moment, unfortunately) have shown that you need 95% comprehension (on average) to learn new vocabulary and grammar from context. So the key is to get yourself there (in the context of what you are reading) as quickly as possible. It makes a big difference.

troydj 8y ago
Thank you for sharing your methodology. A pointer to the study that you're probably thinking of is research done by Paul Nation and Robert Waring (vocabulary researchers). They cite their own 1985 study and a 1989 study with the following quote: "With a vocabulary size of 2,000 words, a learner knows 80% of the words in a text which means that 1 word in every 5 (approximately 2 words in every line) are unknown. Research by Liu Na and Nation (1985) has shown that this ratio of unknown to known words is not sufficient to allow reasonably successful guessing of the meaning of the unknown words. At least 95% coverage is needed for that. Research by Laufer (1989) suggests that 95% coverage is sufficient to allow reasonable comprehension of a text. A larger vocabulary size is clearly better." [1] 1. http://www.fltr.ucl.ac.be/fltr/germ/etan/bibs/vocab/cup.html http://www.fltr.ucl.ac.be/fltr/germ/etan/bibs/vocab/cup.html
- mikekchar 8y ago
  Interesting. I haven't actually seen that one. I was actually thinking about a paper from McGill university which I think it was discussing whether or not having annotations which translate certain words (the name of which escapes me at the moment) when free reading is helpful. If you can think of the name for those annotations (the ones that you can often find in English graded readers), then you can probably find the paper (search for that, "free reading" and "McGill"). However, I have no doubt that the paper I was reading, references this one. Great find. Thanks!
  - groovy2shoes 8y ago
    > annotations which translate certain words (the name of which escapes me at the moment) Perhaps you're thinking of glosses? I'm not familiar with graded readers, but I am rather familiar with mediæval manuscripts, wherein it's common to see copies of Latin works with little annotations near certain (sometimes all) words. When the gloss has been added above (or below) the word(s) they annotate, they're said to be interlinear, but marginal glosses aren't unheard of. The glosses were sometimes written by the same scribe that made the copy, but often they appear to have been added later, perhaps by the owner of the book—sometimes in a comically small hand so as to fit in narrow spaces :)
    - mikekchar 8y ago
      Yes. That's it. Thanks :-) Unfortunately I still can't find the paper. Oh well, the one provided above is quite good. Probably if one searched for papers that cite that one, it would uncover a lot of interesting new work.
- dwg 8y ago
  I wonder how this applies to Chinese/Japanese? I can sometimes guess the meaning of words I don't know because I recognize the kanji. Sometimes even if I don't recognize the kanji, but recognize the radicals, I can still guess. I'm not advanced enough for this to happen often, but it does happen.
dwg 8y ago
I tried using software too, but it always became a distraction for me. Probably because I'm in the software field and would always want to end up building better software >_<. Thus, I found myself to be more successful with a notebook. There is another reason though. In addition to the word I write the Japanese definition of the word as well (from a children's dictionary). I mostly avoid using/memorizing English translations. This is just my personal preference, and certainly not the speediest or most effective way depending on your goals.
- mikekchar 8y ago
  I have a friend who does exactly this. His Japanese is better than mine :-) Perhaps I should do it too (it would really help my writing too...)

troydj 8y ago

Thank you for sharing your methodology. A pointer to the study that you're probably thinking of is research done by Paul Nation and Robert Waring (vocabulary researchers). They cite their own 1985 study and a 1989 study with the following quote: "With a vocabulary size of 2,000 words, a learner knows 80% of the words in a text which means that 1 word in every 5 (approximately 2 words in every line) are unknown. Research by Liu Na and Nation (1985) has shown that this ratio of unknown to known words is not sufficient to allow reasonably successful guessing of the meaning of the unknown words. At least 95% coverage is needed for that. Research by Laufer (1989) suggests that 95% coverage is sufficient to allow reasonable comprehension of a text. A larger vocabulary size is clearly better." [1] 1. http://www.fltr.ucl.ac.be/fltr/germ/etan/bibs/vocab/cup.html http://www.fltr.ucl.ac.be/fltr/germ/etan/bibs/vocab/cup.html

mikekchar 8y ago
Interesting. I haven't actually seen that one. I was actually thinking about a paper from McGill university which I think it was discussing whether or not having annotations which translate certain words (the name of which escapes me at the moment) when free reading is helpful. If you can think of the name for those annotations (the ones that you can often find in English graded readers), then you can probably find the paper (search for that, "free reading" and "McGill"). However, I have no doubt that the paper I was reading, references this one. Great find. Thanks!
- groovy2shoes 8y ago
  > annotations which translate certain words (the name of which escapes me at the moment) Perhaps you're thinking of glosses? I'm not familiar with graded readers, but I am rather familiar with mediæval manuscripts, wherein it's common to see copies of Latin works with little annotations near certain (sometimes all) words. When the gloss has been added above (or below) the word(s) they annotate, they're said to be interlinear, but marginal glosses aren't unheard of. The glosses were sometimes written by the same scribe that made the copy, but often they appear to have been added later, perhaps by the owner of the book—sometimes in a comically small hand so as to fit in narrow spaces :)
  - mikekchar 8y ago
    Yes. That's it. Thanks :-) Unfortunately I still can't find the paper. Oh well, the one provided above is quite good. Probably if one searched for papers that cite that one, it would uncover a lot of interesting new work.
dwg 8y ago
I wonder how this applies to Chinese/Japanese? I can sometimes guess the meaning of words I don't know because I recognize the kanji. Sometimes even if I don't recognize the kanji, but recognize the radicals, I can still guess. I'm not advanced enough for this to happen often, but it does happen.

dwg 8y ago

I tried using software too, but it always became a distraction for me. Probably because I'm in the software field and would always want to end up building better software >_<. Thus, I found myself to be more successful with a notebook. There is another reason though. In addition to the word I write the Japanese definition of the word as well (from a children's dictionary). I mostly avoid using/memorizing English translations. This is just my personal preference, and certainly not the speediest or most effective way depending on your goals.

mikekchar 8y ago
I have a friend who does exactly this. His Japanese is better than mine :-) Perhaps I should do it too (it would really help my writing too...)