3 ms·
The problem is that's how Duolingo sells itself: "learn a language in 15 min" With Duolingo I can do half an hour in transit, but the remembrance is not great.
by wouldbecouldbe 4y ago
The problem is that's how Duolingo sells itself: "learn a language in 15 min"
With Duolingo I can do half an hour in transit, but the remembrance is not great.
I do think there are more effective ways of learning a language. Probably the most effective and not so well known is Pimsleur.
Half an hour of Pimsleur asks so much focus of me, and im tired after, but I learn quickly.
It's an audio class that has a very smart way of repeating and reproducing conversations. The repetition is done in a way that it advances the conversation and slightly alters the repetition so it forces you to use your active focus & memory.
(no affiliation)
- rcarr 4y ago15 minutes a day gets you your 480 hours in 5.2 years. The problem is not the marketing line, the problem is people expecting to learn a language in 1 year with only 15 minutes a day practice. There is a reason why a full time university course in a foreign language is typically 3 to 4 years long including one year spent abroad. In your defence, the 480 hours is also only for group 1 languages. If you are learning a harder language it may take many more hours than this. Category 5 languages take 2200 hours. 15 minutes a day is totally reasonable for a category 1 language. For a category 5 language, not so much as it’s going to take you about 20 years. But I strongly suspect that the main problem is not the “15 minutes a day” but the fact that people are not expecting (or willing) to do it for years.
- wouldbecouldbe 4y agoThe marketing line speaks of learning a language with little effort. So it's setting an expectation.
- comfypotato 4y agoAnd it meets expectations! That’s the point of the person you’re arguing with. The “low effort” is made possible by Duolingo segmenting lessons into tiny chunks. It doesn’t lower the total hours necessary because that would be witchcraft.
- hydrok9 4y agoBut it definitely lulls people into a false sense of security. The ads make it seem like the language just seeps into your brain because of 15 min on the app a day. When in reality you learn very little.
- comfypotato 4y agoYour viewpoint definitely agrees with the majority of commenters here, but if you read the immediately surrounding context you’ll see that there is strong opposition. The takeaway is that Duolingo has definitely made learning the basics possible where every other popular alternative has failed for many people.
- hydrok9 4y agoI have my own anecdotal evidence, which is that a large quantity of people use this because they really do think they can use it and only it to learn a language, and don't really grasp how much of it is just a game. But I'm not disputing that Duolingo has uses and that its helped a lot of people.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- comfypotato 4y agoYour “anecdotal” snark is unwelcome. What’s your purpose here? It’s been communicated that Duolingo is the only thing that works for me and others, and you continue to make time to berate the tool. It comes across that you’re a language learning snob, a gatekeeper, or both. Kindly let me enjoy myself in peace.
- hydrok9 4y agoIm saying it (meaning "Duolingo's marketing") lulls a lot of people into a false sense of security, as witnessed by myself. It doesn't mean the app doesn't work for others in various ways.