The Linguist On Language

6. I learn languages with the goal of being able to communicate, to understand what is said, and to be able to express myself. That is a long road. I have the impression that Rosettta Stone only takes you a very short way. I do not see it as a useful or necessary step.

7. I feel that a lot of listening to interesting content is a better start than doing multiple-choice questions. I am in a hurry to engage with the language, real language situations, and to let my brain get used to it.

Live Mocha

Live Mocha has done a good job at attracting media attention, something that LingQ will also be doing, in its own way.

I sniffed around the outside of Live Mocha without leaving my email address. Some of you may want to try it out in more detail and give me your views. I did notice that the courses 101, 102, 201, 202, seemed to cover the same parts of speech or grammatical issues in every language, which strikes me as strange. While I am not in favour of a grammar-based approach, I do know that the grammatical issues (like continuous form of the verb, tenses, prepositions etc.) are quite different in say, Chinese and Spanish. I noticed that the phrase translator that is provided in the Writing section brings up an error in Japanese and had trouble giving a useful answer in other languages.

The system all ows members to leave sample recordings and writing samples for other members to correct. At LingQ we are doing this with a little more structure. The idea is a good one; the question is how to make it work in the long term.

To me, Live Mocha has many good ideas, and I am glad to see more people thinking of how to use the web for language training. At the risk of looking like I am knocking the competition I believe they embody four major misconceptions about language learning.

Language Learning Misconceptions at Live Mocha

1. You can learn the language by learning a few handy phrases to use in different situations (the store, the bank etc.)

In my view these handy phrases are very difficult to use, and at best you will get an answer that will leave you lost. I believe in learning the language so that you can react with confidence to most situations that come at you. This takes a lot of work. You need to learn a lot of words.

You need to listen to and read a lot of content. You need to be efficient. You need to enjoy spending a lot of time with the language.

2. You need to fol ow courses which cover different grammatical aspects of the language.

Mocha has their 101, 102, 201, 202 etc. To me you just need the language, graded to your vocabulary level and directed at subjects that are of interest to you. You need exposure to that kind of content. You will gradual y learn through observation, or by asking questions of tutors.

You will learn to speak correctly on your own time, and not on the timetable imposed by a teacher or course.

3. You need a lot of correction.

An important part of Live Mocha is the volunteer correction of speaking and writing. This is a good idea, but it needs to be done properly and should not be overdone. There is much research that shows that correction is not as effective as continuous exposure to meaningful content.

4. You just need to talk.

An attraction of Live Mocha is the chance to link up with native speakers. This is a good thing to do no doubt. But it is not realistic to do a lot of it. I have been listening to Portuguese for the last four days, perhaps one hour a day, while doing other tasks. I have been reading in Portuguese. I am getting more and more familiar with the language. I will speak to our member Mairo soon, but I am in no hurry. And I know that I cannot talk enough with him to rely on that as a major way to improve.

I hope we get more companies in the business of providing language services on the web, so that people will look to the web and to other modern technology, and to their own initiative to learn languages.

Censorship and favouritism at Wikipedia?

I just had a Wikipedia entry on LingQ deleted. It was not even finished. The culture of the anonymous, holier than thou, moderator-censor is alive and well at Wikipedia, just like at the language learners' forum I was on.

I started editing a post on LingQ and went to lunch. When I came back it was gone, deleted. It was not even "proposed for deletion". I was not asked to edit or improve my entry. It was "speed deleted" (one of their deletion categories) as advertizing, which, of course, it is.

But look up Pimsleur, Rosetta Stone (software), Live Mocha, Berlitz language Schools or any other language system on Wikipedia, and you are likely to find it there. When does information become advertizing, and according to whom, and why all ow some and not others?

Trying to figure out how to challenge the deletion on the Wikipedia website is like going through a maze.