vileru Wrote:This is true only for common words. Once you start acquiring rare words that only show up once per 1,000,000 words, then that's when flash cards are useful. In fact, I use flash cards for rare English vocabulary.

Also, I should add that the average school-age child only learns a few words per day. With flash cards, it's possible to cram over a hundred words in a day.

As I said, any word worth knowing will show up enough times for you to remember it, if you are reading the right material. For instance, technology is full of rare and obscure words, but if you read a lot of science fiction those words are quite common. There is really never a need to 'study' in that sort of way. Not to mention context generally gives the meaning of the word away 90% of the time.

Now if you're reading something out of your comfort zone and find a rare word, the chances of you needing to actively recall it are almost 0. The chances of you seeing it again are also close to 0 so there's just no reason to devote it to memory. If you see it a few more times over the year, you will have the word remembered anyways. Thats the whole theoretical principle behind SRS. You only need to see something a few times over a period of time to store it in long-term memory.

The only reason you'd need flashcards is if you don't want to have to look it up next time you see it. But looking up a word takes such a short amount of time, so I really don't mind it.

amtrack Wrote:No one on earth learned their first language through flash cards. Why in god's name would you treat your second language differently.

- Because learning your first language is very different from learning your second language.
- Because learning as an adult can be much, much faster than learning as child (but you might have to do it differently).
- Because I did (as did other elementary/middle/high school students) study for vocab tests using flash cards.

It's hard to believe there are people on this forum saying "ONLY MY WAY IS CORRECT. EVERY OTHER WAY IS WRONG. EVEN IF YOU'RE GETTING GREAT RESULTS. YOU'RE STILL WRONG."

There are a lot of ways to learn a language. Different methods work for different people. Some people use a whole bunch of different methods. Some people like SRS, some people like extensive/intensive reading. Some people like sentence mining, some people like watching dramas.

It's dumb to claim a certain way as best. Especially without giving any hard evidence.

I still think the 10k is a pretty good yardstick, not because Khatzumoto said it, but because I've found that the language somehow opens up to you at that level.

If you're the "wax on, wax off" type, you can force yourself through Core6k and Core10k (-Core6k) using Anki. But many people find that tedious, to say the least.

drdunlap Wrote:According to my Anki, I have ~12,000 words in all of my decks combined.

Is that number being generated by a plugin or is that just how many vocab cards you have in your deck?

partner55083777 Wrote:It's hard to believe there are people on this forum saying "ONLY MY WAY IS CORRECT. EVERY OTHER WAY IS WRONG. EVEN IF YOU'RE GETTING GREAT RESULTS. YOU'RE STILL WRONG."

I never even said this. You are being far too sensitive. All I said was there was never a *need* (read: NEED) to drill words with flashcards. And there isn't. Now if you're trying to argue that you *have* to use flashcards, well then clearly you would be the person saying, "ONLY MY WAY IS CORRECT. EVERY OTHER WAY IS WRONG. EVEN IF YOU'RE GETTING GREAT RESULTS. YOU'RE STILL WRONG."

I said quite clearly that you dont "have" to do that, so I'm not sure where you are getting all the other stuff from.

Quote:There are a lot of ways to learn a language. Different methods work for different people. Some people use a whole bunch of different methods. Some people like SRS, some people like extensive/intensive reading. Some people like sentence mining, some people like watching dramas.

It's dumb to claim a certain way as best. Especially without giving any hard evidence.

I think I made my point yes? You really dove into some weird kinda argument all by yourself.

^to be fair, on the same basis of there is never a "need", to read outside of flash-cards in order to acquire vocabulary in the same manner there is never a "need" to read outside of literature in order to acquire vocabulary.

While you may state that you said something quite clearly, the manner in which you delivered the statement seemed to have very strong undertones in which you were advocating rather more strongly than what you've just re-iterated, in related to the merit of flashcard study, as in were, within the remit of vocabulary acquisition.

While you may not be sure how someone could eventually followed a certain undertone to one of it's hypothetical "ought" type declarative conclusions, the fact that it has occurred and there was some stimulus for it.

It is a little unfortunate, maybe (humourous, regardless), how effortlessly we are able to emotionally connect with language and find it within ourselves to give rise to emotional subtext, it is that due to this high propensity for miscommunication, that the author may be more tactful as to be aware of this potentiality. Or at least not be caught unaware when it does eventually happen.


On a side note:

Quote:You really dove into some weird kinda argument all by yourself.

It is not really possible for this to be entirely without your involvement here, and it is a little bit unfair to try and avoid all responsibility for the outcome by bringing up a notion of blame and pinning entirely on the responding party.

uisukii Wrote:^to be fair, on the same basis of there is never a "need", to read outside of flash-cards in order to acquire vocabulary in the same manner there is never a "need" to read outside of literature in order to acquire vocabulary.

Of course, I concur.

Quote:While you may state that you said something quite clearly, the manner in which you delivered the statement seemed to have very strong undertones in which you were advocating rather more strongly than what you've just re-iterated, in related to the merit of flashcard study, as in were, within the remit of vocabulary acquisition.

While I do admit I give my opinions in a very forward manner, I certainly do not think any undertones could justify an complete misinterpretation of my argument. I naturally *detest* flashcards, but at the same time I never came close to saying what I was accused of saying. In all fairness he did make a *leap* to that conclusion did he not?

Quote:It is a little unfortunate, maybe (humourous, regardless), how effortlessly we are able to emotionally connect with language and find it within ourselves to give rise to emotional subtext, it is that due to this high propensity for miscommunication, that the author may be more tactful as to be aware of this potentiality. Or at least not be caught unaware when it does eventually happen.

Well i wasn't caught by surprise really. Its common habit on the internet for individuals to feel like the whole world is attempting to invalidate the very core of their being. Still, I think that any sharp deviation from "civil" discussion shouldn't be tolerated nor defended in such a manner that it can pass as "understandable". I admit my language comes off as "pointed", but it is only because I prefer to be direct.

Quote:It is not really possible for this to be entirely without your involvement here, and it is a little bit unfair to try and avoid all responsibility for the outcome by bringing up a notion of blame and pinning entirely on the responding party.

It is the responding party's responsibility to respond to what was said, and in a manner appropriate to the tone of the conversation. If he thought I was being rude, or condescending, that's understandable and I would be partly to blame. But the degree to which he took this misunderstanding is so far removed from anything I said that I fail to see how I am responsible for any of it. There was nothing vague about what I said, thus that contrivance is on his imagination.

I don't personally know what the pros and cons of flashcards are, as I mostly study out of books, but partner55083777's post looks sensible to me, so I'm not sure why it's being criticised.

Mushi Wrote:I don't personally know what the pros and cons of flashcards are, as I mostly study out of books, but partner55083777's post looks sensible to me, so I'm not sure why it's being criticised.

Eh? But its not being criticized. There's nothing bad or wrong about his advice, I was just giving a different opinion on 'flashcards'. The only thing being criticized is his response to my response lol

tylerdevlin Wrote:

drdunlap Wrote:According to my Anki, I have ~12,000 words in all of my decks combined.

Is that number being generated by a plugin or is that just how many vocab cards you have in your deck?

That's how many vocab cards are in my decks.

My English vocab is according to some tests at around 12k. I managed to get a 90% score from a C2 level exam and I have no trouble comprehending anything that the internet throws at me. My written skills can fool natives. Only some novels and academic materials have words I don't know, but the context gives away the meaning.

^Same here. I "scored" 16k and I'm not a native either.

I am pretty clueless on terms involving food and cooking though...well, at least my kitchen vocabulary maches my awful cooking skills. :p

I managed to get a 7.5 in IELTS, which is about C1.

amtrack Wrote:Unless you are studying for a test, there's no reason to ever drill vocabulary. No one on earth learned their first language through flash cards. Why in god's name would you treat your second language differently.

I'm pretty sure you're saying here not to use flashcards. Which is a completely fine opinion to have. The problem is that you're not stating it as your opinion, but more as a fact.

I'm actually okay with this in general. You can state whatever you want and I don't really care. It doesn't really affect me.

However, I do worry about people new to studying. New people have a tendency to read stuff like that, not critically think about it, do it, and then end up giving up in frustration. Just look at all the people that read AJATT, start with RTK, and then give up half way through (without ever learning any real Japanese).

It's not easy to find a study method that works for you. It's very easy to get swept away in fads or advice from people who make ridiculous claims. If possible, I want to spread more sensible advice and study methods.

Years ago I put the word 炭 into Anki after seeing a short documentary on TV about a village where they were making charcoal. I didn't hear or see the word again for about 2 years. Then I was in a hookah bar in Osaka a few months ago with a friend and the word "coals" came up again and again as we were adjusting the heat and etc etc on the pipe. No big deal if I didn't know the word, of course, but I immediately knew what we were talking about because that card had been in Anki for years.

Anki helps to simulate the years it took to command your native language and condense it into a shorter period of time. Some decidedly normal words you just simply won't see a thousand times a day despite reading this that and everything else.

Of course simply drilling vocab is a silly way to study but I don't think that's what Anki is for! (It would probably be good to mention that I never used pre-made decks. So there's that, I guess.)

I scored 26k on that test with English being my native language and I consider myself well read and well educated. I fail to see how it can be accurate though as I know many specialised words in areas like mathematics, finance and medieval fantasy words from works like the lord of the rings and a tale of ice and fire which it didn't include.

I'm aiming for the well quoted 10,000 words before I consider myself fluent in Japanese.

amtrack Wrote:Unless you are studying for a test, there's no reason to ever drill vocabulary. No one on earth learned their first language through flash cards. Why in god's name would you treat your second language differently.

not to jump on the bandwagon but you took 10 years or so before being able to read adult literature in your native language. perhaps thats one good reason to treat the second language differently??

partner55083777 Wrote:However, I do worry about people new to studying. New people have a tendency to read stuff like that, not critically think about it, do it, and then end up giving up in frustration. Just look at all the people that read AJATT, start with RTK, and then give up half way through (without ever learning any real Japanese).

isn't this more an indictment of Heisig than Khatz?

dtcamero Wrote:

amtrack Wrote:Unless you are studying for a test, there's no reason to ever drill vocabulary. No one on earth learned their first language through flash cards. Why in god's name would you treat your second language differently.

not to jump on the bandwagon but you took 10 years or so before being able to read adult literature in your native language. perhaps thats one good reason to treat the second language differently??

I agree with dtcamero. If we were to try to learn your L2 like you would L1, wouldn't you spend your first 4-5 years being illiterate? I mean, from birth to ~4-5 years of age, you are unable to read or write. Just ALOT of listening (which is a good thing, don't get me wrong), trial and error in speech with parents corrections.

If you're up for 4-5 years of just listening to your L2, hoping it will eventually *click* and then start reading and writing, more power to you. But I would rather treat my language learning as an adult different by using a bit of every basic of a language (listen, read, write, speak). If it means using flashcards to give me more exposure to vocab, even better but not just strictly learning from flashcards of course. I see it as a tool to review what you've initially exposed yourself to. Others do large amounts of reading in context or lists, etc. The advantage of learning as an adult is the individual does what they feel is right for them. No "sink or swim" extreme option. Plus you get to read and write sooner ^_^

@amtrack: The part in your quote (especially the bold) is probably what set partner55083777 to reply the way he/she did. It has a somewhat aggressive tone to it. (at least the way I read it in my mind) :/

partner55083777 Wrote:I'm pretty sure you're saying here not to use flashcards. Which is a completely fine opinion to have. The problem is that you're not stating it as your opinion, but more as a fact.

Oh no, that's not what im saying. The subtext you are reading into is that I wouldn't recommend it personally, at least not for learning a language (certainly for expanding knowledge), but that hardly matters. Thats an entirely new discussion, one in which you are welcome to have with me in another thread so as to avoid complete derailment. On the surface, and this is what is relevant to the OP, I was trying to say it is not necessary, thus one shouldn't become preoccupied with reaching some specific number of vocab words...as vocabulary is a very fluid thing that accrues over time.

Quote:However, I do worry about people new to studying. New people have a tendency to read stuff like that, not critically think about it, do it, and then end up giving up in frustration. Just look at all the people that read AJATT, start with RTK, and then give up half way through (without ever learning any real Japanese).

Lets not remind me on AJATT; I tried that a cpl years back and it was not pretty. I definitely understand the sentiment so I'll try to make my advice more newbie-friendly.

Quote:It's not easy to find a study method that works for you. It's very easy to get swept away in fads or advice from people who make ridiculous claims. If possible, I want to spread more sensible advice and study methods.

Amen.

RawrPk Wrote:I agree with dtcamero. If we were to try to learn your L2 like you would L1, wouldn't you spend your first 4-5 years being illiterate?

Well not quite. The reason it takes you so long on L1 is because your brain is not developed enough to understand even simple concepts quickly. You can still learn an L2 like you did as a child, but with double the speed because you can understand basic things a lot easier. I mean think about it, it took you 4-5 years just to be able to read anything at all. Now, you could read a basic sentence in a foreign language after a few minutes. I think its a common misconception that you can't learn your L2 like your L1.

Then again its not surprising, since most of us have no idea how we learned our L1 anyways. Its a crazy debatable subject, and i'd be happy to talk about it, but obviously this is not the thread lol. On a closing note, I'd say Pimsleur had it right in regards to language acquisition. It basically mimics how you acquired your first language if you think about it.

Quote:@amtrack: The part in your quote (especially the bold) is probably what set partner55083777 to reply the way he/she did. It has a somewhat aggressive tone to it. (at least the way I read it in my mind) :/

It was aggressive, but that was only my personal disdain for flashcards. It really doesn't mean I was invalidating his approach; on the contrary, I was only showing my personal distaste of it.

amtrack Wrote:Oh no, that's not what im saying. The subtext you are reading into is that I wouldn't recommend it personally, at least not for learning a language (certainly for expanding knowledge), but that hardly matters.

That's what you -were- saying, but honestly, it doesn't really matter. Just try to phrase it in a more balanced way from the start next time and we can avoid derailments like these.

mourei Wrote:That's what you -were- saying, but honestly, it doesn't really matter. Just try to phrase it in a more balanced way from the start next time and we can avoid derailments like these.

Well i'll do my best, but no guarantees lol.

Zgarbas Wrote:

Isbilenper Wrote:For this reason I also think it is hard to provide you with your desired vocabulary numbers, although you might want to take a look at this site: http://testyourvocab.com/

I got 36k on that particular test.

中略

I did have many natives complain about my using "big" words though, even though they didn't seem big to me; they were the kind that bragged about getting a C in English for their A levels though, so I don't think they count (笑).

You've surpassed every single native speaker who has posted thus far! Unfortunately, I have just put an end to your reign by scoring 37k. Nevertheless, it feels more like an embarrassment than a victory, considering that I've spent years in universities and studied GRE vocabulary. I'm now afraid that magamo, Aijin, or some other advanced non-native speaker may outdo my score. Anyhow, have you ever lived in an English speaking country or attended classes taught in English (with native speakers as the intended audience)? Furthermore, you do realize that receiving C's in A levels is not ordinary for even a native speaker, yes? In any case, I'm curious to learn exactly how you acquired such remarkable proficiency in English.

On a related note, are there any other native speakers out there who can top Zgarbas? I'm a bit shocked that only a few of us have broke the 30k barrier. Judging by the level of discussions on here, I thought it was a given. I suppose vocabulary is not that important after all.

vileru Wrote:On a related note, are there any other native speakers out there who can top Zgarbas? I'm a bit shocked that only a few of us have broke the 30k barrier. Judging by the level of discussions on here, it thought it was a given. I suppose vocabulary is not so important after all.

Vocabulary really isn't, unless you plan on becoming a writer or something. But for understanding everyday material..you barely use any of it lol. Most of it is passive, and even words you don't passively know are easily understood through context. Wth i'll give it a shot.

vileru Wrote:On a related note, are there any other native speakers out there who can top Zgarbas? I'm a bit shocked that only a few of us have broke the 30k barrier. Judging by the level of discussions on here, it thought it was a given. I suppose vocabulary is not so important after all.

Not me, I only got 33k, and I scored in the 98% percentile of the verbal GRE over twelve years ago. I doubt my English vocabulary has got worse since then.

I got 34,900. (Native speaker of English, published writer.) I think knowing words like "adumbrate" and "uxoricide" is really a test of whether you read a lot, especially of literature and essays written in the 18th-19th centuries.

The vocabulary of English -- like the vocabulary of Japanese -- is enormous; but with English as with Japanese, lots of those words are so rare that you're only going to encounter them every once in a blue moon.

Fillanzea Wrote:I got 34,900. (Native speaker of English, published writer.) I think knowing words like "adumbrate" and "uxoricide" is really a test of whether you read a lot, especially of literature and essays written in the 18th-19th centuries.

The vocabulary of English -- like the vocabulary of Japanese -- is enormous; but with English as with Japanese, lots of those words are so rare that you're only going to encounter them every once in a blue moon.

"Adumbrate" is in many GRE vocab lists and, although "uxorcide" is not, "uxorious" is (which makes it easy to infer the meaning). Nevertheless, I missed "adumbrate" despite having studied it before. At any rate, it seems that a large portion of words after the 30,000 mark are almost of no use (except for boasting and condescension), even in an academic, professional, or literary context. I once made the mistake of using "pedantic" during a conversation with my brother (who majored in computer engineering and who is also well-read). After that, I've been very self-conscious about appearing pretentious...

To change the topic, a Japanese linguist once told me that amount of vocabulary needed to reach newspaper/academic/novel literacy in Japanese is much higher than English. He explained that, whereas the vocabulary used in spoken and written English correspond for the most part, the huge gap between written and spoken Japanese stands as an obstacle for learners. My experience confirms this. How about everyone else?