The joy of being a linguist and the power of input.

[bbryant0620]

Has anybody made the point of the suffix "-ist" meaning "One who practices, likes, or does something" and the Latin word "lingua" meaning "language"?

Using the etymology and common sense, we can draw the conclusion that a linguist (lingua + -ist) is a person who likes and practices languages.

Please let me know if I'm wrong. In particular, I would like to know where the idea comes from that a linguist must be a "scientist" of linguistics.

[lingosteve]

@bbryant0620 That is the way I use it, and that is the way most English speakers who are not students of linguistics use the word. This is not the case in other languages though.

[01sammy100]

@lingosteve

Im still and young and and want to become a linguist. I love learning languages(Mainly Asian ones). Im learning my first foreign language which is Mandarin Chinese. Is being a linguist considered a career and if so do they make enough to live on? How would i get started? Any help would be great! Thanks!!

[TREUMER0304703199]

I think that is is a matter of generalization versus specialization in a specific language; I was myself born in a preschool age as a linguist when participated in speech therapy. Today I speak nine languages and still expanding in case of the derivations. The method is comprising folklore and its literature of thought!

[GriffenJC]

you sir are a genius! I like your and Moses videos way better than bennys and the other guy!

[Iceland1944]

Yeah, I agree. The Thugtown bald guy is extremely negative and hateful. Thanks for the video, Steve. I am not one of your sycophants, as Thugtown says about people who enjoy your videos. I am just a normal polyglot who likes videos about learning languages.

[sk8tertater]

Se parla italiano, si dice un linguista per qualcuno che studia la linguistica. Qualcuno che puo parlare diversi lingui bene si dice una poliglotta.

[lingosteve]

@sk8tertater e in inglese non è il caso

[sk8tertater]

@lingosteve Vero. Ma, se non tu è una poliglotta ma un linguista poi cosa si chiama?

[TheSeductiveArts]

@christopheclugston is a total waste of time and a distractor to the common cause of language learning and most likely has no interest at all in the Polyglot Community. Just one of those online trolls pretending to be a skeptic in order to distract people from learning and get the focus on himself by way of having these fake intellectual debates as a way of making videos on himself so people can look at him yap off at the mouth. Attention whoring at its best: Him and his little crew. *Yawn*

[TheSeductiveArts]

a photo in my profile, nor use my real name therefore I must be a coward. Wow, that makes total sense. So everyone on Youtube is a coward and not worthy of listening to because they don't want to post valuable personal information about themselves, for what? Maybe for him to get his kicks in probably stalking people on and offline if they are not using real names and have photos of themselves. Yes, we all know THAT kind of weird who likes to Google you up in order to bully you.

[TheSeductiveArts]

I wouldn't get involved with @christopheclugston, because he is not interested in linguistics, nor languages learning. Just a Narcissistic brat looking for someone to pick on and to bully and his current victim of the month is Steve Kaufman at that moment. @christopheclugston constantly deletes or edits posts on his comment section of his videos. And I was quite nice to him. Then when @christopheclugston can't take intellectual opposition he posts that I must be a troll because my I don't have..

[marckami]

Once again I absolutely agree. I am studying Japanese and have the subject "Introduction to Linguistics" which I find very boring and meaningless. In Poland "linguist" means the scientist and "polyglot" means someone who knows many lanugages. So I guess the terms are reversed here.

[GoSuMonSteR]

I agree with Steve. All these childish people saying the other guy schooled him. Nothing of the sort. The etymology of the word "linguist" has nothing to do with the scientific study of "linguistics".

[LittleLangs]

Grammar books, language classes and linguistics doesn't make Steve money.

Over here at LingQ....

[christopheclugston]

@LittleLangsHow the truth breaks out!!!!!

[LittleLangs]

The dictionary records very well what people GET WRONG. It's a common mistake that people use the term 'linguist' to refer to people who speak many languages. It's a dictionarie's job to record usage, and not be prescriptive.

Just because it's in the dictionary, that doesn't mean it's precise. This usage is a vague term used by people who don't understand the difference between studying a language and learning one.

[Jate0000]

For those who still don't accept what a linguist is, and reject Christophe Clugston's videos for his style, there is a video made in 31/08/2009 by Glossika called "Polyglots vs Linguists vs Philologists", check that out and see what another linguist and youtuber has to say.

[lingosteve]

@Jate0000 I'll go with the dictionary and common usage, not the jargon of a relatively small group of linguistics specialists. The case is closed as far as I am concerned.

[Jate0000]

@lingosteve As you wish. Just one more thing: on "LingQ - The Dawn of Language" you talk about how people learned languages throughout history, and how they should do it today. Again, down talking against schools and courses is present. Plus, the way the brain works is discussed, without researches been quoted nor proved. "We can all be learners and teachers" it is said in the video, which is simply not true. It is clear to me that people will understand that an expert is in charge.

[aofsamos]

This guy, like Benny, is a fraud. Let's hear him speak Thai or Khmer, languages he, unlike us "geolocked" sycophants, can use everday. If he is a real linguist, or simply not full of it, he should be able to record himself having a conversation in these languages. But, like Benny, he can't, because he is full of BS. Benny hides behind being a clown, and this guy hides behind titles and self-proclaimed prestige. Sad, sad people.Intellectually geolocked, I say.

[lingosteve]

@aofsamos I have to speak Thai or Khmer or I am full of BS? Mandarin, Japanese, Cantonese, in which I have done a number of videos, just don't count? Why are you so full of conceit about your self-claimed achievements and so quick to insult others? Anyone who has learned to speak more than his own language is a linguist according to me.

[aofsamos]

@lingosteve Steve, I apologize for not being clearer. I was referring to the guy attacking you. I actually support you all the way. I appreciate the man who has achieved things in the field more than some guy with a piece of paper.BTW, this other guy called the people that enjoy your work "geolocked", which is why I used the term.

[lingosteve]

@aofsamos Oh sorry. You can imagine that I read these comments quickly and sometimes don't take enough time in my answer. I thought you were saying that "this guy" meaning me, was geolocked because I did not speak Thai etc. Now that I re-read your post I fully understand. Thanks and sorry.

[AnthonySullivan]

Clugston is schooling you old man!

[lingosteve]

@AnthonySullivan What do you mean by shooling? Producing videos that no one takes seriously, that attract so many dislikes that the votes count has been turned off by him?

[christopheclugston]

@lingosteve Probably means doesn't attract pseudo intellectuals that couldn't reason their way out of the bathroom, Steve. I nailed you and other specious linguaphiles inferiority compared to real linguists: Steve Kaufman (German for salesman--which is what you are doing isn't it?) has a big problem. Prove me wrong--bet you can't.

[Jate0000]

@lingosteve Why can you accept that the term "linguist" leads to confusion? Why are you so obstinate? I've read many of your commentaries talking down linguistics and now you pissed off someone who's welling to prove you wrong. You must admit that you have always rejected any scientific approach to this subject. A couple of times I myself was about to mention that language learning is an intellectual activity, therefore can be systematized, but is not easy to change your mind.

[lingosteve]

@Jate0000 Why must I accept your view.I do not want to convince you of anything, I just offer my views. You can keep yours. What is the problem? I certainly do not agree that language learning needs to be an intellectual activity, the less intellectual it is the better, in my view, Why should it be easy to change someone's mind?

[Jate0000]

@lingosteve There you go again, "the less intellectual the better", "linguists do not help people to learn languages". Why can't you accept others methodologies? If you don't like them and choose to use others fine by me, but you discredit the others in favor of yours. In various of your videos you run down grammar books, manuals, etc. That is the problem. I'm not saying that you should like them or agree with me, but attacking others in order to prove your points isn't elegant.

[lingosteve]

@Jate0000 I wonder why you cannot accept that I am going to challenge some sacred cows, even cows that you hold sacred. I am going to continue to express my views, and you can express yours. I do not expect to convince you and you should not expect to convince me. Diversity!!

[Jate0000]

@lingosteve Haha, I'm sorry but, when "expressing your views" you're trying to convince the viewers. Nothing wrong with that. I'll say it again, I do not expect you to agree with me, but you are disrespectful sometimes, a little of self-criticism would be useful. I ask respect for all people, not just sacred cows (who are those?).

[lingosteve]

@Jate0000 I try to convince viewers but I know that there are those, like you who do not agree, others see my point of view, that much if not most of linguistics, and social science in general, is pseudo-science and pretentious.

[LittleLangs]

@lingosteve Psudo-science??? What on earth are you on about man? Thumbs up if you think that Steve has gone from "I don't need Linguistics to learn languages" to "Linguistics is all snake oil" because he hasn't the intelligence to understand it.

Like a fucking creationist bitch calling scientists out as the fruadsters they are! :p

[christopheclugston]

@LittleLangs Exactly, I am the Richard Dawkins against the creationistic fervor of Kaufman's acolytes. (They won't probably understand the allusion it's too erudite for them.)

[Jate0000]

@lingosteve Do you think you can challenge some "sacred cows" with a couple of assumptions on language learning? Where's the respect for the science they do? I don't go and say to my physics professor "hey, dude, take it easy with all the calculus, do you need to complicate it that much?" You even say that they shouldn't be testing students. See what I mean? no proofs, no research, no nothing. I told you before that you are an "Hedonic learner", that's your personality, fine, but with respect.

[christopheclugston]

@Jate0000 I did prove him wrong in the new video titled (so he might find it) Steve Kaufman has a big problem: Christophe Clugston tells why. Low brow your way out of this one Steve the linguaphile.

[Jate0000]

Another thing is the dictionaries, if the term appears in one of them, it depends of which dictionary you're talking about what, you can do with it. Not all of them have the same objective, some of them are just meant to collect the general vocabulary, others are specifics (e.g. etymologies). What I mean is: that definition of the word maybe appears in any common dictionary, but is not the dictionary what gives you the "right" to use it.

[CityHunter84]

the colour of your wall changed from lemon to lime hehe

[jeremiah3754]

I absolutely agree. Anyone who has taken the time to learn another language has valuable input. It's like someone who loses 100 lbs, they have great input on weight loss.

[thelinguistblogger]

Academia sometimes hurts more than helps and being pedantic doesn't make anyone more intelligent than anyone else.

[christopheclugston]

@thelinguistblogger Yeah, ignorance is working much better for you.

[thelinguistblogger]

@christopheclugston I suppose I would see life like you do too if I thought my only options were to be pedantic or ignorant.

[christopheclugston]

@thelinguistblogger Oh wait, I was wrong: You need to climb up two levels to reach ignorant.

[nephrenmalinari]

Why is this even an issue? Linguist has two official meanings: 1. a specialist in linguistics 2. a person who is skilled in several languages; polyglot

Should it even be a matter of semantics?

[brandoscostumes]

on credentials and stuff. for example, although even a brief study of phonetics will necessarily improve foreign accents -- and more advanced study can achieve close to perfection -- they are not interested. it seems odd to be passionate about something but on only a superficial level limited by personal habits and preferences (like learning styles).

[lingosteve]

@brandoscostumes "although even a brief study of phonetics will necessarily improve foreign accents -- and more advanced study can achieve close to perfection -"

I beg to differ. I have simply not seen any evidence of this and have soon lots of evidence to the contrary.

[brandoscostumes]

i dont understand what you are disputing.

above all what i dont understand is how one can be satisfied with explanations like "approximate to the english SH" or "a guttural sound" when it is possible and indeed easy to consult a source (much like you admit to doing with reference grammars) and learn the exact native sound. you seem to dismiss the notion of phonemes vs allophones as if it were unimportant for accent development rather than indispensable.

[lingosteve]

@brandoscostumes I prefer to listen and imitate. I have never used the IPA nor explanations of sounds. Nor have I seen evidence that studying a description of a sound allows us to achieve near perfection. A lot of listening and practice will, however, enable us to improve, I think.

[brandoscostumes]

@lingosteve come, now. you know it is a fact that many things unrepresented in our native language's phonological system can even be imperceptible to those without a keen ear, so learning them through careful analysis is much safer and more accurate than sheer imitation. if your tongue does not contact your teeth to pronounce a spanish 't', you are simply doing it wrong. which is fine if you dont mind having a thick foreign accent. obviously listening and imitating is lifelong practice.

[lingosteve]

@brandoscostumes I personally find that listening and imitating works better for me, and for most of the people whom I know who pronounce foreign languages well. I don't worry about my "t" in Spanish and get nothing but compliments on my Spanish pronunciation. My wife pronounces well and just imitates what she hears.

[laoshu505000]

@lingosteve Imitation is so great! I agree with that.

[brandoscostumes]

compliments from natives, arbiter of skill? uh, okay, but you cant deny that mine is the more detailed, thorough, precise, and informative approach. and not just for individual phonemes; with knowledge of phonetics one can even anticipate phenomena of rapid speech and thus comprehend easier. whether or not it is possible to acquire these skills without study is irrelevant -- at any rate taking the time to understand their motivations does nothing but increase your sophistication in the area.

[christopheclugston]

@brandoscostumes They are unable to handle a phonological sketch. Phonotactics is far beyond these hackneyed anti erudite linguaphiles. You are3 100% correct and any REAL academic will agree with you.

[christopheclugston]

@brandoscostumes Because Steve the linguaphile doesn't have a clue about real linguistics. And it seems he doesn't know about speech pathologists who use articulatory phonetics while working with people who have speech problems in their L 1. You are correct that Spanish dentalizes and fronts the stops. Steve is also unfamiliar with phontactics (which would save him a lot of time from his hackneyed ways). As you have noticed these NON linguists just aren't erudite enough to learn more.

[brandoscostumes]

in fact, a pedantic linguist would follow the dogma that native speakers and common usage outweigh other (especially etymological) arguments for a definition. clugston accurately points out anti-intellectualism among the 'lingaphile' crowd, but the debate over the term only puts them off more. they are understandably defensive about their choice to ignore the valuable insights gained from a scientific analysis of language. however, clugston makes it seem even less accessible by insisting

[christopheclugston]

@brandoscostumes They (the linguaphiles) don't have the "right stuff" to be erudite so they discount the skills and credentials of others. It makes them feel as if they are equal to those that have done far more and understand things they won't ever understand.

[daysin1234]

Credentials for languages = Uselessness.

[christopheclugston]

@daysin1234 Fake YT accounts with no name and no photo equals COWARD

[MagicMaximo]

Bravo, Steve. The joy of learning languages is one my main motivations, besides meeting and socializing with the people that speak them.

[rickjones53]

The controversy in regards to the usage of the word linguist is an example of overzealous academics being a bit too pedantic. The common use of the word linguist is in harmony with the way that Steve Kaufmann is using the word. While it is more precise to refer to people who are multi-lingual as polyglot the term does not have a lot of purchase in the English speaking world. Thus linguists are both polyglots and specialists in the field of linguistics.

[michaelcorayer]

I won't be spending any more of my time on Christophe's channel. Mr. Kaufman's videos have provided insight and inspiration; all the videos of Christophe's I have seen are personal attacks and vain attempts to show-off his own knowledge (by holding up books and rambling).

After repeated viewing and consideration, I attempted to comment on his videos but was denied, though he did post a reply to my channel encouraging me to watch more of his videos (as he has also done here).

[JNatAlkhimia]

Great video! I believe it is basicaly vain to fight those who criticize like those are doing here in your video. They will continue to think this despite all the proofs and explanations we may give. But you know, truth is truth no matter how angry or envy people may get. I'm a linguist both by their definition and your definition, and I don't think I'm any better than you for having taken a couple college classes! You have,by far, more experience in languages than I do and that makes you better!

[OZwizard64]

Hi Steve

There will be always people, who are against you when you are good in something...I am from Slovakia, but I spak also Hungarian a bit because of my mother and I can tell you that Benny Irish p. cant speak Hungarian, just veeery basic...I believe also in input method, it seems to me logical...I use your website for learining chinese, I am listening the dialog of Wolf and Huahua over and over, and when I look at words, I can hear them, it just comes from my mind...I wish

you the best.

[OZwizard64]

Hi Steve

There will be always people, who are against you when you are good in something...I am from Slovakia, but I spak also Hungarian a bit because of my mother and I can tell you that Benny Irish p. cant speak Hungarian, just veeery basic...I believe also in input method, it seems to me logical...I use your website for learining chinese, I am listening the dialog of Wolf and Huahua over and over, and when I look at words, I can hear them, it just comes from my mind...I wish you the best.

[rotarydialz]

This argument over the term linguist is similar to the popular definition of doctor. If there is a medical emergency and the call is put out for a doctor, I wouldn't expect a doctor of education or engineering to show up.

[LearningFrenchNow]

On Christophe's video page, I posted:

(A). Webster and Oxford dictionaries list that one definition of the word linguist, is polyglot.

(B). Steve Kaufmann is a polyglot.

(C). Therefore, by definition Steve Kaufmann is a linguist.

The comment was marked "pending approval" and was eventually never posted.

If Christophe thinks his definition is superior to the dictionary, and he is screening out logical discourse, then I wonder what his point is.

[christopheclugston]

@LearningFrenchNow Your syllogism is faulty.. Your specious faltering is discussed in the Kaufman schooled on linguistics video

[LearningFrenchNow]

@christopheclugston Christophe, you have made a logical error in your argument. Let's dust off your freshman-level Logic 101 text and review some basics. The dictionary proposes two definitions for the word linguist. You claim that both definitions are describing attributes of a linguist. This is an error on your part. If both definitions describes attributes of a linguist, then the following would be true: [continued below..]

[LearningFrenchNow]

@christopheclugston [Part 2]

1. A linguist is one who speaks many languages.

2. Christophe claims that one must be able to argue Sartre in order to speak a language.

3. Christophe cannot argue Sartre in many languages. Therefore, conditions (1) and (2) are not met, and Christophe is not a linguist.

Your error: The dictionary contains two definitions for a linguist, not two criteria of a linguist. Otherwise, you have proven that you are not a linguist using your own definition.

[LearningFrenchNow]

@christopheclugston [Part 3]

Another error in your video: The word "doctor" is not a protected term. "Board-certified physician" is. Anyone with a doctorate already has the title of doctor. Your "doctor" analogy is incorrect, showing your ignorance in both the fields of medicine and linguistics. The word linguist is not a protected term and no board certifications are required to use the title of linguist. They didn't teach you that in linguistics school?

[LearningFrenchNow]

@christopheclugston [Part 4] Christophe, what conclusions would you draw when someone makes erroneous claims in a video, then disables ratings and only allows pre-approved comments? The negative ratings you have received on previous videos show that your message is not well accepted. In addition, screening responses shows that you are incapable of defending your views. Your claims regarding the use of the word linguist have been proven false. Stick with kickboxing -- it's safer.

[christopheclugston]

@LearningFrenchNow Troll somewhere else little man. And get someone who passed logic class to explain non sequitur, Red Herring, Personal Incredulity, Fault by popularity, Base premise fault, and a host of others (u exemplify those faults). Stick to being a sycophant who is a coward.

[LearningFrenchNow]

@christopheclugston Ad-hominem attacks are weak. Let's review the facts. You have an opinion about the word "linguist" which is unsubstantiated. You claim the dictionary is wrong, but have no sources to back your imaginary definition. A tour of the front covers of old college texts does not substantiate your claim. Instead of trolling language learning sites, maybe you should spend that time doing a little research.

[christopheclugston]

@LearningFrenchNow Since you didn't get the first time--have an adult explain it to you: Troll somewhere else little man. And get someone who passed logic class to explain non sequitur, Red Herring, Personal Incredulity, Fault by popularity, Base premise fault, and a host of others (u exemplify those faults). Stick to being a sycophant who is a coward.

[LearningFrenchNow]

@christopheclugston A few days ago, we actually thought that the dictionary definition was more accurate than what the Kung Fu guy said. We were such fools. We should have just trusted the Kung Fu guy. Afterall, he's no coward, and he says he's right. Christophe... from the bottom of my red herring-smelling foot: thanks for enlightening all of us.

[orazuma]

he is so right it hurts, they complicate stuff so much simplicity is the key.

[FelixPotain85]

If there were many more Stephe Kaufmann's and many MANY less people like this dude rambling about "credentials", the language learning world would be a MUCH better place. I don't care about people's "credentials", I like FACTS. And the facts are: Kaufmann speaks 11 languages and has founded a wonderful site that people use to perfect their language skills.That dude has a few irrelevant and unpopular videos on youtube. Hence the aforementioned conclusion. Just my 2 cents. A linguaphile ;-) FP

[Bortrun]

I have a degree in linguistics, but I think it's perfectly acceptable for Steve to use the word this way. I think he is correct that most English speakers understand the word to mean someone who speaks multiple languages. People who study linguistics are always asked "How many languages do you speak?". This confusion is unlikely to be resolved soon.

[Fasulye2009]

I have now checked several English dictonaries of mine and it seems that the definiton of "linguist" in English is broader than the definition of "linguist" in my main languages German and Dutch. I hadn't known this before. Then your usage of the word "linguist" in English is correct. But in other languages it's different. Of course the knowlege of linguistics isn't necessary to become a polyglot. There are polylots who are engineers or what ever kind of profession they have. Fasulye

[Fasulye2009]

I have also experienced that the meaning of the word "polyglot" is not so wellknown, it was even unkwnon among my own close friends. So I showed them some You Tube videos about myself and other polyglots. So it's neceassary to promote the word "polyglot" and to leave the word "linguist" to those with the academic degree in linguistics, like for example Iversen and Glossika. Fasulye

[lingosteve]

@Fasulye2009 Why is this necessary? Necessary for whom? Besides, a small group of youtube polyglots will have little effect on English usage. I prefer to accept the meaning of the term "linguist" in the sense of speaking many languages, and encourage people to become linguists.

[nihongogogo]

@lingosteve I play the viola and has considered myself a violist long before gaining a music degree, so I don't see why people can't accept this for linguists.

[Fasulye2009]

For me a linguist is a person who has obtained an academic degree in linguistics. I have studied 6 semesters of linguistics in my philology studies, but I even woudln't call myself a linguist because I haven't obtained the academic degree. For me you are not a linguist, but a polyglot. I don't know why Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary gives this definition of a person who speaks several languages well to be called a linguist. In German or Dutch such a definition would make no sense at all.

[lingosteve]

@Fasulye2009 But we are not talking about German or Dutch but English. We are talking about how the word is commonly used in English. Dictionaries just reflect usage.

[christopheclugston]

@Fasulye2009 I know Steve is all about the low brow stuff, but to gain more insight into the reality view the Kaufman schooled on linguistics video

[propugnatorfidei]

Even if the dictionary condones the use of "linguist" to refer to a speaker of multiple languages, why do it? Why not just tell someone what "polyglot" means if they haven't heard the word before? It's much easier to have the words {polyglot, linguist} than {linguist, person who has learned linguistics to a professional level}. It also makes more sense, since it's rather awkward to say that there is no necessary connection between a "linguist" (in your preferred definition) and "linguistics."

[LearningFrenchNow]

Ultimately, the dictionary exists to define the meaning of words. One of the definitions of a linguist is a polyglot. Since Steve Kaufmann is a polyglot, therefore, he is a linguist. Case closed.

[dzheremi]

As someone who is trained in linguistics (with all the technical terminology, not the OED definition you gave), I would object to your use of the term only in so far as it continues a false impression of what linguistics is: It is NOT "learning many languages", and it is possible (though not common) to be a linguist and be monolingual. Polyglot activities are commendable, but are not intrinsic to the scientific study of language (linguistics). But keep learning as you wish! It is inspiring.

[lingosteve]

@dzheremi I am not talking about the meaning of the word "linguistics", but of the word "linguist". Is there any doubt that when we say someone is an "accomplished linguist", we mean that this person speaks many languages? Most people are not into linguistics, and have no interest in linguistics. So the meaning of the term to students or practitioners of linguistics is less important, in my view, than the meaning of the word to the average person.

[dzheremi]

@lingosteve As a secondary definition, if you will, a linguist is also "someone engaged in the scientific study of language". This is the sense in which those in the field use the term. It doesn't make your usage 'wrong', so much as in conflict with the understanding of the academic field of linguistics itself. Just like if you were to define "mathematician" as "someone who knows a lot of numbers" -- it's not necessarily wrong, but mathematicians likely wouldn't put it that way.

[christopheclugston]

@dzheremi To reinforce your view look at the Kaufman schooled on linguistics video

[dzheremi]

@christopheclugston I'm not looking to "school" anyone. My view is only that polyglots who are not (academic) linguists should understand why their use of the term finds opposition among some in linguistics, and not be upset by that. As Bortrun points out, the use of "linguist" by those who are polyglots and not linguists causes confusion about what (academic) linguists do. If Steve doesn't care about that, fine, but don't knock linguistics and academic linguists in the process.

[christopheclugston]

@dzheremi View the video before critiquing. As for why the non academics r confused is that they confuse an aspect of being a linguist as the sole semantic implication. I am a linguist--they are linguaphiles. What they do is PART of what I do, but I do aspects that they will never do (noy without considerable applied study). Their skill set is included in my much larger skill set.

[LearningFrenchNow]

@christopheclugston Christophe, let's review how to use a dictionary. The definitions for each word do not need to sum together. Each sufficiently defines the word. "Polyglot" sufficiently defines the word linguist.

Do you actually believe that your unsubstantiated opinion about the word "linguist" supercedes the dictionary definition, or are you just trolling us?

[daysin1234]

As Steve said, "To each his own" . This stuff about "he said" "he does" "he speaks better than" is way beyond its expiry date. Learn Languages the way that makes you happy and gives you results.

[bettytoo2]

steve forget the haters, l enjoy your video. l like the input method too .keep up the good work

[bettytoo2]

steve just ignore the haters its just jealous

[Kaytube19]

I totally agree!

[jfbssp]

Steve, I agree with you wholeheartedly! You can not say what you do not know. Therefore the formula is imput first output second. Have a great day! I am using Linq to learn Spanish as well as the BBC's online Spanish course. Jerry

[Bortrun]

Given that the two meanings of linguist are very different, there will inevitably be confusion. Linguistics, as a discipline, is concerned with studying language as a natural phenomenon. Linguists (meaning those who sutdy linguistics) are not studying individual languages in order to become fluent in them. They are studying language as a phenomenon, the same way a psychologist might study memory. The discipline has nothing to do with how to learn foreign languages.

[tias90]

I do not understand why that guy blatantly attacked you like that. You don't appear to be making videos for the purpose of causing anybody harm; rather, you appear to be trying to help people. Whether he or the other person concerned agrees with your methods or not, this is Youtube, a site where you can upload videos expressing your own opinion on a topic. If they don't like your opinions, they have every right to not watch your videos.

Just remember - they are jealous ;)

[scarabsl2000]

An interesting follow up to your comments on Dr. Blooms article is the manner in which Hebrew was learned in the Jewish community before the Enlightenment as compared to how it was learned after the rise of the Enlightenment (aka the Haskalah movement). In the past, hebrew was, in in religious communities today still is, learned entirely through exposure to the text (aka input). With the enlightenment came to concept of studying grammar, which the religious community fought against fervently.

[heloizyjhenifer]

OK, have watched his vid and a few others. Simply put, to me this person is a jerk, that's it. I wouldn't even ask him how many languages he has mastered but how many people has he helped in learning a language? How many people has "advanced linguistics" helped learn a language? I suspect, none.

"Moses learning icelandic? What for? He's not gonna use it"

He doesn't even deserve a minute of our time.

[Jate0000]

I've been watching your videos for quite some time now, I read your book (on Lingq ;) and you are clearly a "hedonic learner", if I may use the term. Other peaople need those "boring stuff" because is part of a body of knowlegde required in their professions. My point is that your criticisms to traditional methods just don't apply because your goals are different. By the way, I'd like to see some modern greek on Lingq ;)

[Jate0000]

I think the problem with the word "linguist" is that the common meaning does not concur with the academic one. They differ. It obviously creates confusion, and you might to be clarifying the sens all the time and it is not practical this way. About the learning process itself, there's a big difference bewteen a person who learns a language for fun, an another one who does it for academics or professional purposes. What I mean is, while to you something might be boring, for others are a necessity

[lingosteve]

@Jate0000 I think most people who are successful at learning languages enjoy doing it. I also quite comfortable with the term linguist for speaker of languages. This also concurs with the dictionary definition. It is the way the word is used most commonly in English, I believe.

[NomadSage]

I like this. That said, I still would not call myself a linguist were I you. I had always considered a linguist someone like Noam Chomsky why studies linguistic structures. So I may have to disagree, even with Oxford's Dictionary.

But yeah, you are absolutely right. I think polyglots give way better advice than professional linguists. Good job, I do love your advice. It's helped me a lot.

[jmmerone]

Where can we find the article you were referring to?

[lingosteve]

@jmmerone Just look in the notes to the video and check out the second link.

[paulinobrener]

I am a linguist also (in the same sense that you understand it, the first dictionary definition.) I do understand that academic linguists have an issue with "us" :-)

I DID studied some linguistics (basic linguistics) in college in my training as a language teacher. i do think it's important for language teachers to have at least a basic understanding of linguistics.

I also agree with you that one can study a language just for the JOY of it. Like I have studied Esperanto! :-)

[lingosteve]

@paulinobrener We are going to open LingQ up to any language for which members provide content and which members want to learn. I will be very disappointed if we don't get Esperanto up, and I will learn it.

[lingosteve]

@Mandalearn I don't know, but he has some trouble with English.

I left a comment there with the definition of the word "eschew" which he seems to think means to espouse or to promote something, rather than to avoid or shun it.

My comment was "awaiting authorization" for some time and then disappeared.

[SubjectAlpha100]

Yet another great video! I don't understand how some people can criticize you because you call yourself a linguist. I looked it up myself in a dictionary and it says that a Linguist is:

1) A person who is skilled in several lanuages; a polyglot

2) A person who has the capacity to learn and speak foreign languages

3) A person who studies linguistics

You ARE a linguist! It is also interesting to hear that people in the middle ages used your method of Language Learning! IT WORKS WONDERS!

[AnAmericanlinguist]

Great points! I don't think that you can make claims though, that "Benny doesn't like reading". That's just not how he likes to study languages. Also he enjoys to travel and he enjoys social company, so that's how he learns languages. He's had some success doing so and speaks a good number of languages, I think this is great! I would encourage people to do that if that's what they like!

[lingosteve]

@AnAmericanlinguist Well he says reading is "inhuman" and "antisocial", perhaps in the context of language learning, but that tells me how he views reading. To me reading is a wonderful and powerful way to connect with other people, other languages, other eras, other thoughts etc. To dismiss this as inhuman tells me something.

[irishpolyglot]

There are parts of this I disagree with, but I would say that Steve is correct about Moses' level in any given language being superior to mine in Czech, Hungarian and Thai as I don't care to maintain these languages. I've talked to Moses and would also defend his passion.

I personally would never call myself a linguist though. But it's true that most English speakers haven't heard of the word polyglot. Rather than accept that though, I'm changing it by attempting to be a high profile polyglot ;)

[irishpolyglot]

@AnAmericanlinguist Agreed. I think my comments about reading being "inhuman" have been taken out of context and I hope Steve and I can settle our disagreements somewhat in our next Skype chat.

[Jate0000]

@irishpolyglot That was canceled right? I'm not surprised, Steve thinks that to reject others' opinions works better for his own.

[irishpolyglot]

@Jate0000 Yes, that was cancelled by Steve even though I was initially all for it. Apparently maintaining this petty feud we have is more important than working together to encourage the language learning community.

[lingosteve]

@paulinobrener paulino, just go to the link I provided to my blog post and the direct link to Prof. Blum's artricle is there.

[paulinobrener]

@lingosteve Thanks!

[anjel5521]

Yeah, I hadn't heard the term polyglot before I started learning Korean and getting into the process of learning languages. Anyhow, I simply thought a linguist was someone who studied languages. But idk, not relevant. What is relevant is that I agree with you. The fact that you've learned so many languages is enough to inspire many and obviously your technique is useful so anyone can learn from that and with the passion and motivation you should be able to gain success. Good video. :)

[epsilon910]

What kind of computer did you get?