DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Even Greener Pastures
HTML https://evengreener.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Questions about Language Rules
*****************************************************
#Post#: 19405--------------------------------------------------
Should a foreign language only be taught in the target language?
By: SHL Date: September 11, 2019, 5:05 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I‘m sure this has been debated for decades, but I was wondering
if people think a foreign language should begin by being taught
only in the target language, or if it should (at least during
the first few years) be a blend of the students‘ native language
and the target language? I think it is the Kaschen approach
that advocates teaching only in the target language from the
beginning, but is this regally efficient? It would seem to make
things more difficult and turn the beginnings of learning a
foreign language into a game of charades.
After the basic grammar and some basic vocabulary is learned,
then I could see switching solely into the target language. But
at the very beginning?
Any thoughts?
,. -
#Post#: 19408--------------------------------------------------
Re: Should a foreign language only be taught in the target langu
age?
By: Chizuko hanji Date: September 11, 2019, 9:44 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I've studied English as a target language since junior high
school. It was taught by a Japanese woman in Japanese.
At high school, an American teacher came, but I didn't
understand what he was talking. I could read, but I could not
catch his words. My comprehension by listening was zero. Then I
had many lessons of oral conversations.
So, if I had taken a native English speaker's lessons in only
English when I was young, could I have spoken better?
My answer is yes, I could have. You get good ears for English
when you are young. Good listening skill leads to good
pronunciation as well. How about speaking? I think speaking is
just practicing and make it your habit. You always need the
native English speaker as your listener to correct your errors.
Speaking is the most difficult though, I think listening is the
most important at first. I think young children should learn
with native speakers in only the target languages(English) at
first, then learn grammar later in the native
language.(Japanese)
But still, there is a hard part.
For example, the past perfect tense "have done" or "had done"
doesn't exist in Japanese, so Japanese teacher can't teach well.
More than that, if it is taught in English by a native speaker,
it would be more complicated. Because students who don't
understand it in Japanese can't understand it in any languages.
I read the interesting discussion on italki about "I didn't need
to do it" and "I needn't have done it." I saw some learners who
don't understand the difference between them. The grammar of the
tense is really difficult.
We, all human lived at the same time in the past and will live
in the future. Time is the same everywhere!
But we have a different perspective on time. Why?
#Post#: 19411--------------------------------------------------
Re: Should a foreign language only be taught in the target langu
age?
By: SHL Date: September 12, 2019, 1:26 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Chizuko link=topic=1364.msg19408#msg19408
date=1568256266]
I've studied English as a target language since junior high
school. It was taught by a Japanese woman in Japanese.
At high school, an American teacher came, but I didn't
understand what he was talking. I could read, but I could not
catch his words. My comprehension by listening was zero. Then I
had many lessons of oral conversations.
So, if I had taken a native English speaker's lessons in only
English when I was young, could I have spoken better?
My answer is yes, I could have. You get good ears for English
when you are young. Good listening skill leads to good
pronunciation as well. How about speaking? I think speaking is
just practicing and make it your habit. You always need the
native English speaker as your listener to correct your errors.
Speaking is the most difficult though, I think listening is the
most important at first. I think young children should learn
with native speakers in only the target languages(English) at
first, then learn grammar later in the native
language.(Japanese)
But still, there is a hard part.
For example, the past perfect tense "have done" or "had done"
doesn't exist in Japanese, so Japanese teacher can't teach well.
More than that, if it is taught in English by a native speaker,
it would be more complicated. Because students who don't
understand it in Japanese can't understand it in any languages.
I read the interesting discussion on italki about "I didn't need
to do it" and "I needn't have done it." I saw some learners who
don't understand the difference between them. The grammar of the
tense is really difficult.
We, all human lived at the same time in the past and will live
in the future. Time is the same everywhere!
But we have a different perspective on time. Why?
[/quote]
Yes, Chizuko, you are correct. For some reason, age plays a
major role in 2nd language learning. I don’t mean learning two
native languages as a baby, which a few lucky people have the
opportunity to do. I mean if you start the learning process
younger, rather than later, you seem to end up speaking better.
I think for teenagers and young adults, a mix of the target
language with the student‘s native language to explain grammar
is the best and most efficient way to learn. You blend more of
the target language in as the students progress and are able to
handle it. That’s why an American guy showing up in a class of
Japanese learners of English, and just yapping away to the
students like he were talking to his fellow Americans is silly
and unproductive.
It usually should take about 2 years in a good University class,
or with a professional teacher with one-on-one instruction, to
master the basic grammar of a language , maybe 300 hours of
total in-class study, depending on the language. Once the basic
grammar and some basic vocabulary is learned, then I think in
the 3rd year the student can go onto reading literature in the
target language and having a professor/instructor teach only in
the target language. But, when I said basic grammar, I really
mean „basic“, not a trivial emphasis on relatively unimportant
nuances which native speakers don’t even know. Too much of that
kind of teaching does, unfortunately go on, and it interferes
with students‘ progress.
Most students goals are just to be able to speak their new
language as well as they do their native one. And, I think it
sounds a lot more difficult than it really is.
Some language instruction pertaining to grammar instruction, in
my opinion is just a waste of time. You gave what I consider a
classic example. You said there was an interesting discussion on
Italki about the difference between „I didn‘t need to do it“ and
„I needn’t have done it.“ Now, there may be some difference
between those two phrases, and someone who is a real expert,
like Su.Ki, could probably explain it, but I fail to see any
difference in meaning between either sentence. As a US native
English speaker, I never studied English grammar or English at
all, because frankly, I didn’t need to. The truth is, no one
„teaches“ you your native language. It’s something that just
grows in your head as a baby and young child and keeps growing,
with new vocabulary being added your whole life in small bits
past the teen years. That’s totally different than really
learning a foreign language. A foreign language is something you
indeed have to learn through study and practice.
So, the point is, I fail to see any value in a non-native
English speaker learning some trivial nuance between „I didn‘t
need to do it“ and „I needn’t have done it.“ I can guarantee
you, in California 99.9% of native English speaker who have not
studied English grammar and are not professionals in the field,
could not tell you what the difference between these two
sentences is and would treat/understand them as being totally
synonymous. So, why confuse and overly complicate grammar for
non-natives? It’s counter-productive and makes no sense.
There is some „wiggle room“ in the grammar of most languages as
well. In other words, you can say things incorrectly
(grammatically) and get away with it without it being noticed
because native speakers often do the same. If you make the same
„mistakes“ they make, no one will notice.
Just be sure not to make the sort of mistakes no native speakers
make and the student will be fine.
#Post#: 19423--------------------------------------------------
Re: Should a foreign language only be taught in the target langu
age?
By: Chizuko hanji Date: September 13, 2019, 8:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
SHL
Thanks for your comment for my post. I agree with you overall
except for one thing.
[quote]Some language instruction pertaining to grammar
instruction, in my opinion, is just a waste of time. You gave
what I consider a classic example. You said there was an
interesting discussion on Italki about the difference between „I
didn‘t need to do it“ and „I needn’t have done it.“ Now, there
may be some difference between those two phrases, and someone
who is a real expert, like Su.Ki could probably explain it,
[/quote]
In the italki discussion, Su.Ki explained it clearly and I
understood perfectly. I appreciate her contributions. My comment
about grammar is that some parts of grammar are too difficult to
understand in even your native languages. But I think the way of
think "Time(tense)" is 100% essential. "I needn't have done it."
is said that it's just British English, but I can see the good
point in the sentence. It's very clear.
Learning exact grammar is worthwhile. I like to know the various
idea of grammar. It's worth learning.
HTML https://www.italki.com/discussion/216919
HTML https://www.italki.com/question/481173
I think many English speakers think those two sentences are the
same. It was a very good discussion and I'm very happy to know
it.
SHL
[quote]So, the point is, I fail to see any value in a non-native
English speaker learning some trivial nuance between „I didn‘t
need to do it“ and „I needn’t have done it.“[/quote]
If the students are more intermediate level, they should know
the difference. It's not trivial nuance at all.
#Post#: 19544--------------------------------------------------
Re: Should a foreign language only be taught in the target langu
age?
By: Aliph Date: October 10, 2019, 1:05 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=SHL link=topic=1364.msg19405#msg19405
date=1568239534]
I‘m sure this has been debated for decades, but I was wondering
if people think a foreign language should begin by being taught
only in the target language...
Any thoughts?
[/quote]
I always learned most languages, I more or less know, the
traditional way with grammar, vocabulary memorizing and drills.
Except for English that I picked up through total immersion in a
100% anglophone environment, before the era of internet. It
worked, I was a teenager at the time.
There is a language method for learning Arabic, called the
Medina, financed by Saudi Arabia. It is well known all over the
world among Muslims. They claim that you should learn Arabic
only using this target language. I tried an online course
through Skype during three months, I wasn’t a total beginner
though. I had already acquired the basics the traditional way. I
found it hard to understand all the grammar explanations in
Arabic. Arabic has a completely different grammar with a
particular terminology that isn’t comparable to our grammar. So
I finally ended up buying a book in French that translates the
whole Medina course! Still I recommend this method since it is
accurate and offers a total immersion in a certain variation of
Arabic and Muslim culture. I definitely believe however that one
needs translation beside it, maybe offline in order to check if
he understood everything.
*****************************************************