8 ms·

The problem is that the tools you need are "listening to and interacting with people in the target language". Human language is a problem of interpreting the cr

The problem is that the tools you need are "listening to and interacting with people in the target language". Human language is a problem of interpreting the creative social signals of other human beings, and there's no way to automate that. With the Web, YouTube and internet radio, the actual amount of target-language material that a person can expose themselves to is hugely, hugely more available than it was 20-30 years ago. You have to keep in mind what a tool is trying to accomplish relative to the personal development it takes to grow into another human language. Different levels of learners require different kinds of instruction. Bilingual instruction is quickest if a person has zero knowledge of the language whatever. Absolute beginners need direct instruction in phonology. An Anki deck is to build basic vocabulary or literacy for a person who has some. Duolingo is there to get you comfortable with basic grammar or phrases, to get you interacting with native speakers in the first place once you stumble off the plane. A more advanced speaker might need accent reduction work. Anki is fantastic at flashcards. Duolingo is fantastic at translation exercises, way better than what we had a few decades ago. Definitely the author in the OP should be using Anki rather than postcards on her bed. "Mastery"-level linguistic tasks include things like writing creative poetry in the language that another person finds moving, describing the movements of a complex machine, or composing an essay in a specific literary style—things that native speakers may find difficult without formal training. There's just no way Duolingo can do that. I took a survey recently that clarified a lot of this for me. The questions were all things like: What percentage of your time do you spend listening to music in the target language (and your native language)? What percentage of your time do you spend watching moveis in the target language (and your native language)? What percentage of your time do you spend reading books in the target language (and your native language)? What percentage of your time do you spend thinking and interacting with other people and thinking in the target language (and your native language)? If I spend 1% of my time or less in the target language and 99% in my native language, it's no wonder that I have plateaued in it.

blacksqr 7y ago
The fact that digital tools can't be used to achieve total native-level fluency shouldn't be used as a reason not to try to improve what's available. It should be possible at least to use digital tools to learn to listen to and understand foreign language media at a useful level... I'd love to be able to watch a movie in the language I'm studying and understand 90% of what's going on. But that seems like an impossible dream given the available tools and my current rate of progress. If I could reach just that goal, I'd be delighted to explore other more personally immersive avenues for taking my language skills to the next level.
- irq11 7y ago
  If you go to language-learning forums (e.g. the Japanese learning subreddit) you’ll find a lot of people who spend 95% of their time wanking with learning tools, and 5% (or less) actually studying. Everyone thinks the tools are the problem. Moreover, fixing tools is easier and less painful than doing the grueling work of learning a language. As a result, lots of people get caught in the trap of believing that fluency is One Good Tool Away. It isn’t. The most important part of the parent’s comment is the one you overlooked: you need to listen and interact with people in the native language. The more hours you spend talking with people in your target language, the better you’ll become. Tools help on the margins, but there’s no magic bullet that will eliminate the time and exposure required.
  - blacksqr 7y ago
    >you’ll find a lot of people who spend 95% of their time futzing with learning tools, and 5% (or less) actually studying Exactly my point. It shouldn't be necessary to spend all that time futzing with tools, the tools should be there, ready to use. >you need to listen and interact with people in the native language. Such people are not available in all areas. Online availability does not scale. These are precisely the issues that digital tools should be good at addressing, but have failed to do so.
    - irq11 7y ago
      ”Exactly my point. It shouldn't be necessary to spend all that time futzing with tools, the tools should be there, ready to use.” It isn’t necessary. The tools are fine, and/or improving them won’t solve the fundamental problem. People are just procrastinating. ”Online availability does not scale. These are precisely the issues that digital tools should be good at addressing, but have failed to do so.” Short of making an AGI that fluently speaks your target language, there are no obvious improvements to learning tools that will address the fundamental problem: you need to talk to actual humans.
      - blacksqr 7y ago
jbscpa 7y ago
My overly simplified but not entirely irrational way of saying this: To master another language I must learn to speak another...culture.
laurex 7y ago
To learn conversational language, you really do need to converse. It is a much faster route to basic fluency. Apps like Marco Polo or even Zoom or Skype along with a native speaking contact are going to work more quickly than any gamified experience where you're only taking to an app.
- blacksqr 7y ago
  It is a wonderful privilege to have the money and people available to pursue those options, but it is a privilege many do not enjoy. Meanwhile, for many of those many, learning a new language is more than a fun pastime or intellectual challenge, it is a matter of economic or even physical survival. Duolingo's mascot likes to breezily inform me that most people using Duolingo in Sweden are refugees trying to learn Swedish. Don't those people deserve more emphasis on practical mastery, and less on social engagement? Do they have the money and opportunity to pursue quality interactions with native speakers? If digital tools could provide reasonable sub-levels of mastery short of full conversational fluency, like ability to read a newspaper, understand a news broadcast or sitcom, babysit a child, or hold a business conversation in an office, I wouldn't complain. But I'm not aware of any digital teaching tools that prepare a person adequately for any of that. Fine, digital tools are inadequate for reaching full conversational fluency. But should we then let them off the hook for not delivering any level of practical skill in a reasonable amount of time? Is it really impossible for them to do any better at delivering real-world value?
kazinator 7y ago
As an adult learner, you will never get far simply by listening and interacting. You need listening and interacting, plus intensive vocab memorization and a good modicum of grammar study. In some ten years of being married to my Japanese wife, speaking as much as possible, and consuming Japanese entertainment (movies, music), I got pretty good at what you might call "household Japanese". That's it. I would forever be stuck at that stage if I didn't embark on intensive study.

blacksqr 7y ago

The fact that digital tools can't be used to achieve total native-level fluency shouldn't be used as a reason not to try to improve what's available. It should be possible at least to use digital tools to learn to listen to and understand foreign language media at a useful level... I'd love to be able to watch a movie in the language I'm studying and understand 90% of what's going on. But that seems like an impossible dream given the available tools and my current rate of progress. If I could reach just that goal, I'd be delighted to explore other more personally immersive avenues for taking my language skills to the next level.

irq11 7y ago
If you go to language-learning forums (e.g. the Japanese learning subreddit) you’ll find a lot of people who spend 95% of their time wanking with learning tools, and 5% (or less) actually studying. Everyone thinks the tools are the problem. Moreover, fixing tools is easier and less painful than doing the grueling work of learning a language. As a result, lots of people get caught in the trap of believing that fluency is One Good Tool Away. It isn’t. The most important part of the parent’s comment is the one you overlooked: you need to listen and interact with people in the native language. The more hours you spend talking with people in your target language, the better you’ll become. Tools help on the margins, but there’s no magic bullet that will eliminate the time and exposure required.
- blacksqr 7y ago
  >you’ll find a lot of people who spend 95% of their time futzing with learning tools, and 5% (or less) actually studying Exactly my point. It shouldn't be necessary to spend all that time futzing with tools, the tools should be there, ready to use. >you need to listen and interact with people in the native language. Such people are not available in all areas. Online availability does not scale. These are precisely the issues that digital tools should be good at addressing, but have failed to do so.
  - irq11 7y ago
    ”Exactly my point. It shouldn't be necessary to spend all that time futzing with tools, the tools should be there, ready to use.” It isn’t necessary. The tools are fine, and/or improving them won’t solve the fundamental problem. People are just procrastinating. ”Online availability does not scale. These are precisely the issues that digital tools should be good at addressing, but have failed to do so.” Short of making an AGI that fluently speaks your target language, there are no obvious improvements to learning tools that will address the fundamental problem: you need to talk to actual humans.
    - blacksqr 7y ago

jbscpa 7y ago

My overly simplified but not entirely irrational way of saying this: To master another language I must learn to speak another...culture.

laurex 7y ago

To learn conversational language, you really do need to converse. It is a much faster route to basic fluency. Apps like Marco Polo or even Zoom or Skype along with a native speaking contact are going to work more quickly than any gamified experience where you're only taking to an app.

blacksqr 7y ago
It is a wonderful privilege to have the money and people available to pursue those options, but it is a privilege many do not enjoy. Meanwhile, for many of those many, learning a new language is more than a fun pastime or intellectual challenge, it is a matter of economic or even physical survival. Duolingo's mascot likes to breezily inform me that most people using Duolingo in Sweden are refugees trying to learn Swedish. Don't those people deserve more emphasis on practical mastery, and less on social engagement? Do they have the money and opportunity to pursue quality interactions with native speakers? If digital tools could provide reasonable sub-levels of mastery short of full conversational fluency, like ability to read a newspaper, understand a news broadcast or sitcom, babysit a child, or hold a business conversation in an office, I wouldn't complain. But I'm not aware of any digital teaching tools that prepare a person adequately for any of that. Fine, digital tools are inadequate for reaching full conversational fluency. But should we then let them off the hook for not delivering any level of practical skill in a reasonable amount of time? Is it really impossible for them to do any better at delivering real-world value?

kazinator 7y ago

As an adult learner, you will never get far simply by listening and interacting. You need listening and interacting, plus intensive vocab memorization and a good modicum of grammar study. In some ten years of being married to my Japanese wife, speaking as much as possible, and consuming Japanese entertainment (movies, music), I got pretty good at what you might call "household Japanese". That's it. I would forever be stuck at that stage if I didn't embark on intensive study.