9 ms·

Listening comprehension, IMHO is the last skill to develop in learning a foreign language. The reason is that it's "all or nothing". You either know and recogn

Listening comprehension, IMHO is the last skill to develop in learning a foreign language. The reason is that it's "all or nothing". You either know and recognize all of the words in a sentence, or you can't cope with the sentence at all. The first phase of language learning is mostly theory. Mostly vocabulary and grammar. The second phase is mostly reading, reinforcing the theory, forming a good understanding of how the language is used. Additionally writing things, chatting and the like. Third phase is immersion with speaking and listening. Those phases overlap, of course, but in my opinion that's the overall process. I've used it successfully for English and Spanish (though I haven't completed phase 3 in Spanish yet). In Mandarin I'm currently struggling towards mastering HSK 4 vocabulary, though relatively advanced.

faitswulff 7y ago
The Pimsleur Method inverts those phases and focuses on speaking and listening first. I've found it to be quite effective.
- bayesian_horse 7y ago
  Hm, I'd say the Pimsleur method is quite good at teaching every-day language. Which is a worthwhile task, but the range of words is quite limited. I would suspect that in order to get up to HSK4 or even HSK5, just the audio portions of course, you'd need like double or triple the amount of lessons, which would be impractical. Of course, most people will start speakind and listening, in various forms, in phase 1 and 2. And that is actually necessary. But I think you won't be able to really grok "random" speech before having a good grasp at pretty much all the vocabulary you would encounter.
  - faitswulff 7y ago
    I would agree that Pimsleur lessons won't take you to HSK4/5, but they are a great way to get into the language first without all the more academic studies upfront.
  - thaumasiotes 7y ago
    > I would suspect that in order to get up to HSK4 or even HSK5, just the audio portions of course, you'd need like double or triple the amount of lessons, which would be impractical. I have passed HSK4. I am not competent in Mandarin listening comprehension, or in speaking (to be fair, speaking isn't a part of the test). Those skills aren't necessary to pass. The audio samples for HSK4 are a lot more generous with you than actual speech is.
    - bayesian_horse 7y ago
      I meant more like "HSK-4 vocabulary without characters".
  - DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
    The range of words you learn with Pimsleur is limited because the method makes sure you actually retain every word it tries to teach you. Having a solid grasp of a small vocabulary (a few hundred words) is an excellent way to start off with a language. > But I think you won't be able to really grok "random" speech before having a good grasp at pretty much all the vocabulary you would encounter. But you will be able to grok small conversations about subjects you're familiar with. You can expand from there. When you try to learn a new language, you should be speaking from day one, no matter how limited the range of subjects you can speak about.
    - bayesian_horse 7y ago
      Yes, which is why I say the phases overlap. I still think theory should dominate the first phase of learning a language, followed by mostly reading.
      - DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
        Having learned a few languages with different methodologies, I strongly disagree. The most effective introductory method I've encountered so far is Pimsleur, because of its focus on listening and speaking at the early stages. I've seen too many students who learn using the traditional theory-heavy approach and who, after years of study, are like deer caught in the headlights when they're confronted with the actual spoken language. They're also often saddled with poor pronunciation forever (which really degrades native speakers' perception of your language proficiency, regardless of how fluent you are). Some theory is helpful, particularly for languages with lots of grammar (i.e., Indo-European languages with case, gender, agreement, etc.), but like playing an instrument, learning a language is 90% practice.
dmix 7y ago
> The second phase is mostly reading Is that really practical with Mandarin and the crazy amount of Chinese characters? I always assumed learning to speak/understand Chinese alone would be sufficiently difficult.
- bayesian_horse 7y ago
  I think it's necessary. At least my strategy is to memorize the characters and words first. I've used "decipher chinese" to read simple texts, and that is also a great method. The thing about reading is that it is the fastest way to review and reinforce vocabulary and grammar. You can read at your own pace and look up anything. You can't do it that easily when listening, speaking or writing. And with a certain minimum level of theory under your belt, reading will be faster than spaced repetition of vocabulary you mostly know already. Of course, there are different levels of proficiency in Chinese you might want to achieve. If you want to be able to interact while traveling, you wouldn't need the full complement of HSK Level 4. However, if you want to have more interesting conversations or you want to understand technical texts...
- skosch 7y ago
  There is a huge asymmetry between learning to recognize characters and learning to write them. I've found that learning to read a basic repertoire of Chinese characters is surprisingly doable and a very helpful skill as a learner, to the point where I quickly found it easier to decipher the subtitles than to understand the audio when watching even children's movies. So, to answer your question, yes: it's practical, and a good idea. Writing, on the other hand, requires truly knowing each character, every little stroke in the right place. Totally different beast. It takes many years to master and constant practice to keep up (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Character_amnesia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Character_amnesia).
  - xvilka 7y ago
    Learning to writing characters is now largely unnecessary, since most the writing is done in computer/mobile phone/etc, where Pinyin is ubiquitous.
- 7y ago
jacobolus 7y ago
> Listening comprehension, IMHO is the last skill to develop in learning a foreign language. [...] The first phase of language learning is mostly theory. Mostly vocabulary and grammar. The second phase is mostly reading, reinforcing the theory, forming a good understanding of how the language is used. Additionally writing things, chatting and the like. Third phase is immersion with speaking and listening. To clarify: This is the way skills develop when people extensively study but barely learn a foreign language, the way typically happens in classrooms. It is a cruel method with poor results. All of the actual learning of the language per se happens from listening to (or reading) comprehensible input, which should start from day 1 (yes this takes considerable effort for teachers to implement). Front-loading explicit study of grammar is a total waste of time. Memorizing atomized vocabulary words is also relatively ineffective. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Input_hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Input_hypothesis
- EliRivers 7y ago
  Front-loading explicit study of grammar is a total waste of time. I am far more competent in written Japanese than spoken, both reading and writing it, essentially through understanding grammar. "Total waste of time" seems a harsh appraisal.
  - jacobolus 7y ago
    If you take two novices and dump one into arbitrarily extensive grammar lessons for 2 years, and the other into spending a couple hours per day listening (i.e. actively focusing attention on trying to understand what is being said) to the language for 2 years, at the end the first person won’t speak the language and the second person will. The first person is going to learn something, but it’s not an efficient use of their time if the goal is language fluency. If you want to learn to read, then by far the most effective use of time is to practice reading, with whatever minimal bootstrapping is necessary up front to start reading very basic material. This is not just speculation. There has been a ton of scholarly research on this topic.
    - tasogare 7y ago
thaumasiotes 7y ago
> Listening comprehension, IMHO is the last skill to develop in learning a foreign language. The skills you develop are the skills you practice. If you practice listening comprehension, you'll develop it. If not, you won't. That's all there is to the ordering.
g_langenderfer 7y ago
Does a child know grammar and vocabulary? Understanding and producing the sounds of a language seem to be the elementary units.
- bayesian_horse 7y ago
  A child knows grammar and vocabulary, most often by being taught explicitly. Yes they pick up stuff, but they are corrected all the time. And children don't have the level of language skill you normally want to achieve.
romaaeterna 7y ago
> Listening comprehension, IMHO is the last skill to develop in learning a foreign language. Completely backwards, in my experience. Start with simple audiobooks, listen to them a million times, and you will be amazed by how much comprehension and speaking ability it gives you
- topmonk 7y ago
  Sounds interesting. I've been trying to use movies (something called "substudy"* which converts subtitled movies to a csv file which I then import them as cards into anki), but I find it very difficult. Could you point me in the direction of some of these simple audio books? * substudy is here: http://www.randomhacks.net/substudy/ http://www.randomhacks.net/substudy/
  - romaaeterna 7y ago
    The problem with movies (and TV), I find, is that it is fewer words per minute than a book. Though availability of English language television seems to be a great aid for ESL learners, so it's not wasted time at all. Conversation practice with a native speaker is probably the ideal, but audiobooks are cheap and available. You can get around the disadvantage of not having a native trying to make themselves understood to you, by using an audiobook that you know well in translation. So I find that knowing the book well in my native language (or another language I know) is the most important initial requirement. Beyond that, it should be in simple language, though not boring. Maybe middle school or high school reading level. On the first listen of chapter one, I find, I don't pick up more than the characters' names. After one or two dozen listens of chapter one, and I can follow the plot along pretty well (if it's a book I know), and can pick up words from context, and can start listening to the whole book. Audio versions of the Bible are available in every language, and can be used as a first/last resort, depending on interest. If you can't find an audiobook Bible from the normal web apps, the Jehovah's Witnesses have audio versions in an insane number of languages (translated from their sometimes peculiar English version though). I like Tolkien, which is at about the right level, has audiobooks in many languages, and is familiar to me. Grammar comes in very slowly using this method, and can use some augmentation using traditional methods. Pronunciation and comprehension, however, are supercharged.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
jaredklewis 7y ago
This hasn't been my experience. My experience has been that listening is basically a way to learn the language with a minimum of effort. Context and non-verbal communication often make it clear what many unknown words in a sentence mean, making it not only possible to understand speech far above one's vocabulary level, but to actually to increase one's vocabulary through listening. These non-verbal cues and context are mostly absent in written texts. Your method also seems counter intuitive as children learn languages primarily through listening, as they are for the most part illiterate.
- bayesian_horse 7y ago
  "Children" take almost 20 years to learn English at high proficiency. And the context stuff doesn't work for me in audio, not until years into a language. It might be easier with a language close to my native, but otherwise...
james_s_tayler 7y ago
>Listening comprehension, IMHO is the last skill to develop in learning a foreign language. The reason is that it's "all or nothing". You either know and recognize all of the words in a sentence, or you can't cope with the sentence at all So not true. Maybe depends on the way you study but I focus on listening skills hardcore early on. It's what helps build the natural accent. It's definitely not all or nothing. There are islands of understanding. They tend to grow and grow. It starts out with single words, then grows to two words together then grows to partial sentences and then to full sentences among a paragraph. So on and so forth.
- bayesian_horse 7y ago
  We may not have the same definition of listening comprehension. When I start learning a new language, I can totally "listen comprehend" stuff that's close to the material I already studied. But the same isn't true for random content at realistic speed. And the "island" part is compatible with "all or nothing". Because yes, within those islands, you understand everything, and over time, as your proficiency in the language grows, there are more islands of knowing all the words. But it seems to be a lot easier at first to get told what a word means and how it is used, rather than depending on it to appear in a useful context a couple hundred times.
  - james_s_tayler 7y ago
    You do both at the same time if you want the fastest results. You get structured i+1 input that you can cope with for part of your learning and then you dive deep into the the native content and let your brain compute the statistics necessary to eventually be able to recognize the patterns at natural speed. My definition is of listening comprehension is any information I can glean from listening. Information being a reduction in uncertainty. Doesn't need to be complete. Progress is directional. I know my language learning algorithm well and I pound it on repeat until my goal is achieved.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
monoideism 7y ago
> he first phase of language learning is mostly theory. Mostly vocabulary and grammar. The second phase is mostly reading, reinforcing the theory, forming a good understanding of how the language is used. Additionally writing things, chatting and the like. Third phase is immersion with speaking and listening. This is an excellent description of the process I used to learn to speak 3 foreign languages to a level of professional fluency, and 3 others to conversational fluency (this was in my 20s, I now only maintain fluency in 2 languages, although sure I could regain it fairly quickly). I do think this depends on the individual. Some people successfully use other techniques.
- bayesian_horse 7y ago
  I don't think it depends on the individual, but rather on goals. If you want to speak a language in a useful but relatively broken way, as fast as possible (for example as a refugee), you might want to prioritize a smaller amount of theory and more practice early on. But that would actually prolong the time to proficiency.
lazyant 7y ago
> Listening comprehension, IMHO is the last skill to develop in learning a foreign language. Speaking is harder > The reason is that it's "all or nothing". You either know and recognize all of the words in a sentence, or you can't cope with the sentence at all. Disagree; you can make sense of parts of a sentence and infer the rest or get some clues; actually that's the normal state while learning. Eg: "How do I go to the station?" "It is XXXX, you YYYY ZZZZ walk there, you need to take a taxi WWWW KKKK Uber"
- bayesian_horse 7y ago
  In my experience I can have studied a language for a period of time and still only understand gibberish when confronted with truly random sentences by natives. Your example isn't really random. You already seem to recognize the pattern. But there are a LOT of patterns.

faitswulff 7y ago

The Pimsleur Method inverts those phases and focuses on speaking and listening first. I've found it to be quite effective.

bayesian_horse 7y ago
Hm, I'd say the Pimsleur method is quite good at teaching every-day language. Which is a worthwhile task, but the range of words is quite limited. I would suspect that in order to get up to HSK4 or even HSK5, just the audio portions of course, you'd need like double or triple the amount of lessons, which would be impractical. Of course, most people will start speakind and listening, in various forms, in phase 1 and 2. And that is actually necessary. But I think you won't be able to really grok "random" speech before having a good grasp at pretty much all the vocabulary you would encounter.
- faitswulff 7y ago
  I would agree that Pimsleur lessons won't take you to HSK4/5, but they are a great way to get into the language first without all the more academic studies upfront.
- thaumasiotes 7y ago
  > I would suspect that in order to get up to HSK4 or even HSK5, just the audio portions of course, you'd need like double or triple the amount of lessons, which would be impractical. I have passed HSK4. I am not competent in Mandarin listening comprehension, or in speaking (to be fair, speaking isn't a part of the test). Those skills aren't necessary to pass. The audio samples for HSK4 are a lot more generous with you than actual speech is.
  - bayesian_horse 7y ago
    I meant more like "HSK-4 vocabulary without characters".
- DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
  The range of words you learn with Pimsleur is limited because the method makes sure you actually retain every word it tries to teach you. Having a solid grasp of a small vocabulary (a few hundred words) is an excellent way to start off with a language. > But I think you won't be able to really grok "random" speech before having a good grasp at pretty much all the vocabulary you would encounter. But you will be able to grok small conversations about subjects you're familiar with. You can expand from there. When you try to learn a new language, you should be speaking from day one, no matter how limited the range of subjects you can speak about.
  - bayesian_horse 7y ago
    Yes, which is why I say the phases overlap. I still think theory should dominate the first phase of learning a language, followed by mostly reading.
    - DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
      Having learned a few languages with different methodologies, I strongly disagree. The most effective introductory method I've encountered so far is Pimsleur, because of its focus on listening and speaking at the early stages. I've seen too many students who learn using the traditional theory-heavy approach and who, after years of study, are like deer caught in the headlights when they're confronted with the actual spoken language. They're also often saddled with poor pronunciation forever (which really degrades native speakers' perception of your language proficiency, regardless of how fluent you are). Some theory is helpful, particularly for languages with lots of grammar (i.e., Indo-European languages with case, gender, agreement, etc.), but like playing an instrument, learning a language is 90% practice.

dmix 7y ago

> The second phase is mostly reading Is that really practical with Mandarin and the crazy amount of Chinese characters? I always assumed learning to speak/understand Chinese alone would be sufficiently difficult.

bayesian_horse 7y ago
I think it's necessary. At least my strategy is to memorize the characters and words first. I've used "decipher chinese" to read simple texts, and that is also a great method. The thing about reading is that it is the fastest way to review and reinforce vocabulary and grammar. You can read at your own pace and look up anything. You can't do it that easily when listening, speaking or writing. And with a certain minimum level of theory under your belt, reading will be faster than spaced repetition of vocabulary you mostly know already. Of course, there are different levels of proficiency in Chinese you might want to achieve. If you want to be able to interact while traveling, you wouldn't need the full complement of HSK Level 4. However, if you want to have more interesting conversations or you want to understand technical texts...
skosch 7y ago
There is a huge asymmetry between learning to recognize characters and learning to write them. I've found that learning to read a basic repertoire of Chinese characters is surprisingly doable and a very helpful skill as a learner, to the point where I quickly found it easier to decipher the subtitles than to understand the audio when watching even children's movies. So, to answer your question, yes: it's practical, and a good idea. Writing, on the other hand, requires truly knowing each character, every little stroke in the right place. Totally different beast. It takes many years to master and constant practice to keep up (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Character_amnesia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Character_amnesia).
- xvilka 7y ago
  Learning to writing characters is now largely unnecessary, since most the writing is done in computer/mobile phone/etc, where Pinyin is ubiquitous.
7y ago

jacobolus 7y ago

> Listening comprehension, IMHO is the last skill to develop in learning a foreign language. [...] The first phase of language learning is mostly theory. Mostly vocabulary and grammar. The second phase is mostly reading, reinforcing the theory, forming a good understanding of how the language is used. Additionally writing things, chatting and the like. Third phase is immersion with speaking and listening. To clarify: This is the way skills develop when people extensively study but barely learn a foreign language, the way typically happens in classrooms. It is a cruel method with poor results. All of the actual learning of the language per se happens from listening to (or reading) comprehensible input, which should start from day 1 (yes this takes considerable effort for teachers to implement). Front-loading explicit study of grammar is a total waste of time. Memorizing atomized vocabulary words is also relatively ineffective. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Input_hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Input_hypothesis

EliRivers 7y ago
Front-loading explicit study of grammar is a total waste of time. I am far more competent in written Japanese than spoken, both reading and writing it, essentially through understanding grammar. "Total waste of time" seems a harsh appraisal.
- jacobolus 7y ago
  If you take two novices and dump one into arbitrarily extensive grammar lessons for 2 years, and the other into spending a couple hours per day listening (i.e. actively focusing attention on trying to understand what is being said) to the language for 2 years, at the end the first person won’t speak the language and the second person will. The first person is going to learn something, but it’s not an efficient use of their time if the goal is language fluency. If you want to learn to read, then by far the most effective use of time is to practice reading, with whatever minimal bootstrapping is necessary up front to start reading very basic material. This is not just speculation. There has been a ton of scholarly research on this topic.
  - tasogare 7y ago

thaumasiotes 7y ago

> Listening comprehension, IMHO is the last skill to develop in learning a foreign language. The skills you develop are the skills you practice. If you practice listening comprehension, you'll develop it. If not, you won't. That's all there is to the ordering.

g_langenderfer 7y ago

Does a child know grammar and vocabulary? Understanding and producing the sounds of a language seem to be the elementary units.

bayesian_horse 7y ago
A child knows grammar and vocabulary, most often by being taught explicitly. Yes they pick up stuff, but they are corrected all the time. And children don't have the level of language skill you normally want to achieve.

romaaeterna 7y ago

> Listening comprehension, IMHO is the last skill to develop in learning a foreign language. Completely backwards, in my experience. Start with simple audiobooks, listen to them a million times, and you will be amazed by how much comprehension and speaking ability it gives you

topmonk 7y ago
Sounds interesting. I've been trying to use movies (something called "substudy"* which converts subtitled movies to a csv file which I then import them as cards into anki), but I find it very difficult. Could you point me in the direction of some of these simple audio books? * substudy is here: http://www.randomhacks.net/substudy/ http://www.randomhacks.net/substudy/
- romaaeterna 7y ago
  The problem with movies (and TV), I find, is that it is fewer words per minute than a book. Though availability of English language television seems to be a great aid for ESL learners, so it's not wasted time at all. Conversation practice with a native speaker is probably the ideal, but audiobooks are cheap and available. You can get around the disadvantage of not having a native trying to make themselves understood to you, by using an audiobook that you know well in translation. So I find that knowing the book well in my native language (or another language I know) is the most important initial requirement. Beyond that, it should be in simple language, though not boring. Maybe middle school or high school reading level. On the first listen of chapter one, I find, I don't pick up more than the characters' names. After one or two dozen listens of chapter one, and I can follow the plot along pretty well (if it's a book I know), and can pick up words from context, and can start listening to the whole book. Audio versions of the Bible are available in every language, and can be used as a first/last resort, depending on interest. If you can't find an audiobook Bible from the normal web apps, the Jehovah's Witnesses have audio versions in an insane number of languages (translated from their sometimes peculiar English version though). I like Tolkien, which is at about the right level, has audiobooks in many languages, and is familiar to me. Grammar comes in very slowly using this method, and can use some augmentation using traditional methods. Pronunciation and comprehension, however, are supercharged.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

jaredklewis 7y ago

This hasn't been my experience. My experience has been that listening is basically a way to learn the language with a minimum of effort. Context and non-verbal communication often make it clear what many unknown words in a sentence mean, making it not only possible to understand speech far above one's vocabulary level, but to actually to increase one's vocabulary through listening. These non-verbal cues and context are mostly absent in written texts. Your method also seems counter intuitive as children learn languages primarily through listening, as they are for the most part illiterate.

bayesian_horse 7y ago
"Children" take almost 20 years to learn English at high proficiency. And the context stuff doesn't work for me in audio, not until years into a language. It might be easier with a language close to my native, but otherwise...

james_s_tayler 7y ago

>Listening comprehension, IMHO is the last skill to develop in learning a foreign language. The reason is that it's "all or nothing". You either know and recognize all of the words in a sentence, or you can't cope with the sentence at all So not true. Maybe depends on the way you study but I focus on listening skills hardcore early on. It's what helps build the natural accent. It's definitely not all or nothing. There are islands of understanding. They tend to grow and grow. It starts out with single words, then grows to two words together then grows to partial sentences and then to full sentences among a paragraph. So on and so forth.

bayesian_horse 7y ago
We may not have the same definition of listening comprehension. When I start learning a new language, I can totally "listen comprehend" stuff that's close to the material I already studied. But the same isn't true for random content at realistic speed. And the "island" part is compatible with "all or nothing". Because yes, within those islands, you understand everything, and over time, as your proficiency in the language grows, there are more islands of knowing all the words. But it seems to be a lot easier at first to get told what a word means and how it is used, rather than depending on it to appear in a useful context a couple hundred times.
- james_s_tayler 7y ago
  You do both at the same time if you want the fastest results. You get structured i+1 input that you can cope with for part of your learning and then you dive deep into the the native content and let your brain compute the statistics necessary to eventually be able to recognize the patterns at natural speed. My definition is of listening comprehension is any information I can glean from listening. Information being a reduction in uncertainty. Doesn't need to be complete. Progress is directional. I know my language learning algorithm well and I pound it on repeat until my goal is achieved.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

monoideism 7y ago

> he first phase of language learning is mostly theory. Mostly vocabulary and grammar. The second phase is mostly reading, reinforcing the theory, forming a good understanding of how the language is used. Additionally writing things, chatting and the like. Third phase is immersion with speaking and listening. This is an excellent description of the process I used to learn to speak 3 foreign languages to a level of professional fluency, and 3 others to conversational fluency (this was in my 20s, I now only maintain fluency in 2 languages, although sure I could regain it fairly quickly). I do think this depends on the individual. Some people successfully use other techniques.

bayesian_horse 7y ago
I don't think it depends on the individual, but rather on goals. If you want to speak a language in a useful but relatively broken way, as fast as possible (for example as a refugee), you might want to prioritize a smaller amount of theory and more practice early on. But that would actually prolong the time to proficiency.

lazyant 7y ago

> Listening comprehension, IMHO is the last skill to develop in learning a foreign language. Speaking is harder > The reason is that it's "all or nothing". You either know and recognize all of the words in a sentence, or you can't cope with the sentence at all. Disagree; you can make sense of parts of a sentence and infer the rest or get some clues; actually that's the normal state while learning. Eg: "How do I go to the station?" "It is XXXX, you YYYY ZZZZ walk there, you need to take a taxi WWWW KKKK Uber"

bayesian_horse 7y ago
In my experience I can have studied a language for a period of time and still only understand gibberish when confronted with truly random sentences by natives. Your example isn't really random. You already seem to recognize the pattern. But there are a LOT of patterns.