Language acquisition

[kittyloly]

you made me laugh . But yeah too much jargon to learn :)

[LoveBigTime]

You are better than stephen krashen, steve

[Bortrun]

I understand what you're saying, but I think Krashen uses the term because people associate "learn" with the sort of learning done in schools. More like "memorize". He used acquisition to describe what you do at lingQ: learn naturally from input. Or, in other words, acquisition is largely unconscious, whereas "learning" is conscious and deliberate, and associated with traditional grammar/translation study of foreign languages.

[dsample]

I totally agree, there's too much terminology to language learning before you actually get onto learning the language.

I learnt French and German at school both from the same tutor and I find it hard to pick up a book on my new chosen language of Finnish because there's simply too much background reading to do and too much fluff around everything.

I'd be interested to hear what you think of the idea of Mind Maps though, something I've seen mentioned a few places and I'm not sure what to think.

[lingosteve]

I have never gotten into mind maps. I just strikes me as a little artificial, an unnecessary abstraction. But then I have not really spent a lot of time on them.

[eikoma]

generally i think acquisition is a term I reserve for language development in younger children anyways. enjoyed the rant. keep 'em coming lingosteve!

[lingosteve]

acquisition may be reserved for the language development in children but I see no reason for that. Our brains learn, they do not acquire things. Learn does not mean school or a classroom. Acquire means deliberately taking something and keeping it, and that is not what learning is all about. Sorry, I do not like the term. But it is not a big deal.

[seriousgeorge001]

thank you for reminding us to keep language learning real. this was something i needed to hear.

[biantai888]

Whoever came up with "copulative verb" was probably making an off-color joke.

Keep the jargon to a minimum. Use it if there is a meaningful distinction, subdivision or methodology.

[daysin1234]

hey steve, great video again.

You basically hit it on the point by saying "simple natural process is being distrupted"

I to believe language learning is significantly overcomplicated in the Western World which is ashame.

great video

[ILuvEire]

I think that the linguistic jargon (which I love to use and read) has its place, but that place is not in language learning. Call it what you want, I have to agree with you, who CARES? The point of teaching/learning a second language is to get it into the students head, who cares what the hell you call it?

This jargon is useful among academics, but besides that it really has no place in the language classroom.

[eikoma]

thats what i was going to say!

100% agree

[eikoma]

this was supposed to be a reply to ILuvEire

[DopeSpace9]

Good points. Language enthusiasts can be snobs and tend to get caught up in semantics.

[Kiyotaka25]

I think one should be careful to differentiate between linguistics and language learning. Linguistics terms often aren't very helpful in language learning. However linguistics terms can be useful in the field of linguistics just as scientific terms can be useful in any other field of science.

[saxquiz]

Steve, I know exactly what you're saying and it doesn't just apply to language learning, but in so many aspects of teaching jargon is added when it doesn't need to be in order to make things sound more scientific. All it ends up doing is complicating a topic that isn't complicated at all. Also, arguing over semantics (acquisition vs learning) is also a huge waste of time. We all know what we're talking about so why anyone would nit pick is beyond me.

[FourthDerivative]

As far as I understand it, the distinction that Krashen makes between "learning" and "acquiring" is that the former is where you analyze and learn ABOUT the language, whereas the latter is where you actually try to become fluent.

But ironically, if we spend too much time dwelling on meta-terminology like that, we end up not doing much learning OR acquiring. :)

[lingosteve]

Why should learning mean analyzing. The brain learns all the time without analyzing. It is the teachers who think we need to analyze to learn.

[FourthDerivative]

I agree, but I'm just pointing out the distinction as it applies specifically to Krashen's work. In everyday terms, there's no difference. Or, the difference might be something like "learning about" vs. "learning to".

[surrected4526]

C'est bon! Je suis de votre avis! Merci encore.

[yuriythebest]

For instance even though russian is my main language that I speak in, and I heard you say once "declension table" - I have no idea what that is and hope never to know.

[lingosteve]

Some terms are needed. Verb, noun, adjective, pronoun. There are few terms that help because they describe something that exists. The fact that nouns change their endings in some languages is a fact. It is called declension. We decline nouns. A table is a table. So I have no trouble with declension tables. But "interlanguage?"

[yuriythebest]

Agree completely. Unnecessary jargon that makes the speaker sound as if he has some secret knowledge deeply annoys me. Sure, in some fields specialised terms are necessary, like medicine or computers, and I'm sure the "language experts" will have a lot of fun with their "copulative adjectives", "ESL language acquisition processes" but for actual learners this stuff is excess baggage.