Learning new languages

[welshbairn]

Anyone tried Rosetta Stone?

[Joey Jo Jo Junior Shabadoo]

8 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Anyone tried Rosetta Stone?

Prefer Saft Black, myself.

[101]

24 minutes ago, JTS98 said:

It doesn't though.

Of no use in most of Europe and of no use in the vast majority of the rest of the world outside the Americas. It's only spoken in small pockets of Africa and Asia.

This is the difficulty for English speakers. There isn't another language that is a safe bet the way English is in terms of use.

I've used German as a fall back when required in eastern Europe. I've used Polish as a fall back in other Slavic-language countries. But neither of these languages travel much further than that. Spanish doesn't really travel outwith its base countries either. It has a lot of base countries, but they're quite geographically concentrated. Someone learning Spanish at school then moving to central Europe or Asia isn't going to find it much use.

True if only Esperanto had caught on eh

[Guest JTS98]

5 minutes ago, Adam101 said:

True if only Esperanto had caught on eh

Ha!

Me and a mate gave that a go a couple of years ago. Dead easy, but we packed it in because we got fed up only speaking to each other.

[The_Kincardine]

32 minutes ago, Adam101 said:

I think everyone in the UK should learn their native tounge, Scots, Welsh and Gaelic etc. And Spanish as it's the most common 'second' language should should get you by all over the place. I agree learning French was the only thing I was taught as secondary school I have really needed I wish I had tried harder

How do you suggest they do that, though?  I have mentioned before that my auld man was a native Gaelic speaker but I learned nothing from him.  The languages that you highlighted, if they are to continue, have got to have community support and some utility.  

22 minutes ago, JTS98 said:

It doesn't though.

Of no use in most of Europe and of no use in the vast majority of the rest of the world outside the Americas. It's only spoken in small pockets of Africa and Asia.

This is the difficulty for English speakers. There isn't another language that is a safe bet the way English is in terms of use.

There isn't, of course, but I'm not sure that's entirely the point.  Having an easy facility with a second language makes learning a third, fourth etc much simpler.  BUT, for most of us, there's absolutely no need to do so given the ubiquity of English.  The reason we have a language deficit is entirely obvious but you're only going to change that if you decide that we should change education policy and mandate we introduce language learning from early years education onwards.  That's what happens in Sweden but the barriers to introducing it to the countries of The UK are immense.

[Guest JTS98]

1 minute ago, The_Kincardine said:

 

There isn't, of course, but I'm not sure that's entirely the point.  Having an easy facility with a second language makes learning a third, fourth etc much simpler.  BUT, for most of us, there's absolutely no need to do so given the ubiquity of English.  The reason we have a language deficit is entirely obvious but you're only going to change that if you decide that we should change education policy and mandate we introduce language learning from early years education onwards.  That's what happens in Sweden but the barriers to introducing it to the countries of The UK are immense.

I agree with your general point. I think languages should be given more prominence in our schools as there are lots of benefits of doing so.

My point is that it's quite hard to decide which languages we're going to focus on. It makes sense for Sweden to invest a lot of time and money in teaching its kids to speak English well. What language would make sense for us to invest in and why? And on a more personal level, which language should a Scottish kid invest time and energy in from a young age? For kids from non-English speaking countries this isn't as tough a question. A Swedish kid learning English is opening up the whole world. They can learn it knowing there's a good chance it'll be useful to them. There's your motivation. No language does that for a Scottish kid. We've already got the language the rest of the world is trying to learn.

[welshbairn]

6 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said:

The reason we have a language deficit is entirely obvious but you're only going to change that if you decide that we should change education policy and mandate we introduce language learning from early years education onwards.  That's what happens in Sweden but the barriers to introducing it to the countries of The UK are immense.

You learn languages ridiculously quickly at Primary School age, it's insane we don't make use of it. Went to school in Sweden between 8 and 11/12 years old, and came second in the class for Swedish after about 18 months, and 4th in English. It also triggers something in your brain that makes it easier to learn other languages. Even Latin would be worthwhile, especially for the grammar.

Edited May 31, 2019 by welshbairn

[Zen Archer (Raconteur)]

48 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Anyone tried Rosetta Stone?

Gothic pish.

[Guest JTS98]

5 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

You learn languages ridiculously quickly at Primary School age, it's insane we don't make use of it. Went to school in Sweden between 8 and 11/12 years old, and came second in the class for Swedish after about 18 months, and 4th in English. It also triggers something in your brain that makes it easier to learn other languages. Even Latin would be worthwhile, especially for the grammar.

I agree with this. I found studying Latin helped me make sense of German cases that I'd been struggling with for years. Wish I'd done it years earlier.

I think the main problem with starting late is that it builds the mindset that languages are hard. They're not. It's just another thing to learn. People learn things all the time.

[The_Kincardine]

3 minutes ago, JTS98 said:

I agree with your general point. I think languages should be given more prominence in our schools as there are lots of benefits of doing so.

My point is that it's quite hard to decide which languages we're going to focus on. It makes sense for Sweden to invest a lot of time and money in teaching its kids to speak English well. What language would make sense for us to invest in and why? And on a more personal level, which language should a Scottish kid invest time and energy in from a young age? For kids from non-English speaking countries this isn't as tough a question. A Swedish kid learning English is opening up the whole world. They can learn it knowing there's a good chance it'll be useful to them. There's your motivation. No language does that for a Scottish kid. We've already got the language the rest of the world is trying to learn.

On the basis that learning a second language is a gateway to a 3rd or 4th it actually doesn't matter that much - as long as you start early.  The key is in developing weans' capacity for language and that becomes a political decision rather than an educational one.

2 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

You learn languages ridiculously quickly at Primary School age, it's insane we don't make use of it. Went to school in Sweden between 8 and 11/12 years old, and came second in the class for Swedish after about 18 months, and 4th in English.

Steven Pinker reckons that you need to start with a language before the age of 6 to learn it as a native.  You being 4th in English is never a surprise

[101]

1 hour ago, The_Kincardine said:

How do you suggest they do that, though?  I have mentioned before that my auld man was a native Gaelic speaker but I learned nothing from him.  The languages that you highlighted, if they are to continue, have got to have community support and some utility.  

You are correct and I would have far more "mainstream" BBC shows in Gaelic and Scots with English subtitles, I think they have community support where they are still spoken, I obviously have no proof of this but that was my understanding. I don't think that any one could live only speaking Welsh, Scots or Gaelic in the UK it's just no possible but perhaps teaching kids about them would help us engage with our native land a bit more for example, I was never taught why we have Lochs not Lakes, Burns not streams  etc this is important for people to learn. Also understanding Rabbie Burns rather than I was taught how to recite never to understand, maybe I was unlucky with my school but I think for most Fifers this would be their experience.

[The_Kincardine]

4 minutes ago, Adam101 said:

Also understanding Rabbie Burns rather than I was taught how to recite never to understand, maybe I was unlucky with my school but I think for most Fifers this would be their experience.

Indeed.  The best laid schemes o' mice an' men gang aft agley.

[Miguel Sanchez]

I'd just like to say that I hated every minute I was made to attempt to learn French when in primary school (P6 & 7)

[Joey Jo Jo Junior Shabadoo]

The biggest barrier to learning foreign languages is not getting taught English properly at school. I've learned more English grammar in the last couple of years doing Spanish than I did in all my time at school. 

[The_Kincardine]

9 minutes ago, Joey Jo Jo Junior Shabadoo said:

The biggest barrier to learning foreign languages is not getting taught English properly at school. I've learned more English grammar in the last couple of years doing Spanish than I did in all my time at school. 

Cheap posting and a wee bit ignorant.  Most multilingual people worldwide have no formal lessons in grammar and manage just fine.  The best way to learn a language is informally rather than 'grammar rules' which is why early years language teaching is so important.

Edited May 31, 2019 by The_Kincardine

[welshbairn]

4 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said:

Cheap posting and a wee bit ignorant.  Most multilingual people worldwide have no formal lessons in grammar and manage just fine.  The best way to learn a language is informally rather than 'grammar rules' which is why early years language teaching is so important.

That's nonsense. Nearly every other country in Europe teaches far more grammar than we do, and it enables them to learn tenses etc in other languages accurately and much more quickly. 

[Joey Jo Jo Junior Shabadoo]

Just now, The_Kincardine said:

Cheap posting and a wee bit ignorant.  Most multilingual people worldwide have no formal lessons in grammar and manage just fine.

Nup. Most multilingual people worldwide don't have an ingrained lingua franca which is 'superior'. I'm specifically talking about UK English speakers. We weren't even taught a foreign word until we hit Secondary School. French lessons were impossible because we hadn't even been taught English. 

[The_Kincardine]

11 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said:

Most multilingual people worldwide have no formal lessons in grammar and manage just fine. 

 

4 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

That's nonsense

It isn't.  Most multilingual people worldwide have no formal lessons in grammar.

Are you daring to take issue with this?

[welshbairn]

1 minute ago, The_Kincardine said:

 

It isn't.  Most multilingual people worldwide have no formal lessons in grammar.

Are you daring to take issue with this?

If you're talking about a street seller in Bangkok, then no. If you're talking about people fluent in 3 or more European languages, I am. Without a grounding in grammar it takes years of total immersion to become fluent, with, it speeds up massively.

[Todd_is_God]

On 29/05/2019 at 06:32, Ross. said:

Schlager music is the work of the Devil. Horrible stuff. That fucking “Artem los” song is also the only song I have ever seen Swiss people get animated over in a pub.

Heathen. Atemlos durch die Nacht is a class tune.