On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 03:30:46 -0600, Django Cat wrote in
<news:MsmdnT6HlO9buYDZRVnysg@brightview.com> on
misc.education.language.english,alt.english.usage,alt.usage.english :
>> .this is the course you should have taken when you first
>> started learning english
[quoted text clipped - 52 lines]
>
> Honest Heron, I mean we all know you post a lot of meaningless New Age
Yep, we all know he is a spammer...
> bollocks on a regular basis, but please don't try and waste people's
> time with this pompous drivel. You clearly don't have a clue what
> you're talking about.
Would such a method work, with teachers who do have a clue?
> As for your basic premise, no, babies are not 'stupid', in fact they're
> infinitely better at acquiring languages than adults are.
Indeed they are pretty good at acquiring a "native-like" linguistic
ability... ;)
> They also
> have 24 hours a day to concentrate on it,
You can do that as an adult if you want. Just move to a foreign
country... :)
> which any clients you attract
> won't.
X'Posted to:
misc.education.language.english,alt.english.usage,alt.usage.english
Django Cat - 20 Mar 2006 21:13 GMT
> > Honest Heron, I mean we all know you post a lot of meaningless New
> > Age
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
> Would such a method work, with teachers who do have a clue?
Well, maybe, but adults learn differently from babies and it wouldn't
necessarily be the best way for them to approach learning a second
language (and learning a second language is not the same as acquiring a
first one...). For instance, if you listen to children talking, they
go through stages of creating language and experimenting with rules.
This comes out with, say, irregular verbs, so a four year old might say
*"I goed to see my friend" instead of "I went". I bet if you think
about it, children do the same sort of thing in Italian.
This is part of growing up, and children move on to the next stage over
a period of months. But an adult has better developed intellectual
skills than a four year old. If an adult can learn a list of irregular
verbs on the train to work over a few weeks, why waste their limited
time waiting to acquire rules over months or years? And what Heron's
suggesting isn't a new idea, it's as old as the hills, and has been
used in a variety of contexts with greater or lesser success. What we
*do* talk about often is the concept of 'noticing', which involves
placing language in a student's grasp so that when it's appropriate he
or she starts to use it.
>
> > As for your basic premise, no, babies are not 'stupid', in fact
> > they're infinitely better at acquiring languages than adults are.
>
> Indeed they are pretty good at acquiring a "native-like" linguistic
> ability... ;)
Yes, if you like, and that's exactly what babies are pre-programmed to
do. We all learn throughout our lives, but a newborn is a 100% total
learning machine, learning about the planet and learning about language.
We had friends around yesterday, with their six-month daughter. The
little one was totally involved with us four grown ups, paying full
attention to what was going on (and this in two languages), smiling a
lot, but also frowning sometimes - you could see her puzzling out just
what was going on in this big world she's joined. It's completely
moronic to say 'babies are stupid'; babies aren't at all stupid, they
just don't know stuff yet.
> > They also
> > have 24 hours a day to concentrate on it,
>
> You can do that as an adult if you want. Just move to a foreign
> country... :)
That's true. And marry a local!
DC