Tobberoth Wrote:It's not that I disagree with what you're saying on any point really, just going to justify what I meant when i "shot down" their "anti-myths".

I humbly submit "Fired at" may be more appropriate. Did you read any of the explanation behind those myths on the site? I regret posting those here because it is futile to debate them without people taking the time to read the arguments behind them.

Don't you really think a lot of what goes on here has little to do with language learning? It's a lot of mental gymnastics for the sake of mental gymnastics, people mostly just arguing their opinions based on their limited individual experience. The goal is to improve language learning. What I can say is that I used to hold very similar opinions as you (although I probably would give the opposing opinion more room to save face; I've gotten so Japanese after 10 years of working in the environment) about language learning but my opinion has evolved based on research I've read and re-looking at my experience.

Personally Krashen's work speaks to me. Here is an article overviewing Paul Sulzberger's research. http://www.victoria.ac.nz/home/about/new...wslabel=hn

musigny Wrote:but my opinion has evolved based on research I've read and re-looking at my experience.

Everybody's has. Nobody here is perfect. Nobody here is 100% right. We all have opinions and we discuss them. Most of the time, we better ourselves by it. Sometimes, people just leave angry.

musigny Wrote:

Tobberoth Wrote:It's not that I disagree with what you're saying on any point really, just going to justify what I meant when i "shot down" their "anti-myths".

I humbly submit "Fired at" may be more appropriate. Did you read any of the explanation behind those myths on the site? I regret posting those here because it is futile to debate them without people taking the time to read the arguments behind them.

Don't you really think a lot of what goes on here has little to do with language learning? It's a lot of mental gymnastics for the sake of mental gymnastics, people mostly just arguing their opinions based on their limited individual experience. The goal is to improve language learning. What I can say is that I used to hold very similar opinions as you (although I probably would give the opposing opinion more room to save face; I've gotten so Japanese after 10 years of working in the environment) about language learning but my opinion has evolved based on research I've read and re-looking at my experience.

Personally Krashen's work speaks to me. Here is an article overviewing Paul Sulzberger's research. http://www.victoria.ac.nz/home/about/new...wslabel=hn

I wasn't trying to change their views on those myths, I was just giving my opinion on those myths as is. If I say "Hitler was a great person" (yeah, using Hitler in a forum debate, how original), you don't have to know my reasons for saying so to argue it. I'm arguing the myths as they were quoted, if they have reasons which make me change my mind about them on their site, obviously the actual myths were not properly written and that would be a completely different discussion.

Why a discussion on the internet exists isn't all that important. What comes out of it isn't either. If you enjoy a discussion, continue. If you don't, leave it. We don't have to have some ulterior motive for discussions like "improving learning". That isn't done by talking on forums, it's done by proper research and writing proper academic articles. None of that is going to happen here.

I don't see how that article you listed is in any way related to what we have discussed here...

Sure you do; additionally, you need to know the definition of "great". He brought a nation from bankruptcy and despair to a point where it controlled huge swaths of Europe and had massive industrial output, he was very popular internationally (especially in the US) even if the honeymoon did wear off, was personally a soldier decorated multiple times for bravery in action, and created an astounding amount of infrastructure in Germany. The definitions under which he is not "great" are very restrictive.

Hitler gets a lot of hate he doesn't deserve, even if there is a lot that he does deserve.

~J

A bit off topic, but could someone give me the rundown on how good Khatzumoto's japanese really is in the video he posted (japanese no where near good enough to have any opinion of my own)? What I've mostly heard is that he speaks very naturally with correct grammar, but without using complex sentences. Is this true?

cracky Wrote:True, but most Latino Americans are of Mexican descent. Most of the influx is also from Mexico. Birth rate isn't really a factor because then you have to assume that Spanish speaking people are having way more kids than the sum majority of English speakers. EDIT: Also most second generation children will speak English.

What I'm presenting is not an assumption or any new sort of information. The Spanish speaking population does not need to outgrow the English. It just needs to reach a certain saturation to become dominant.

cracky Wrote:Also, I'm not sure what this keyphrase 'dominant language' means then. The only thing I can find looking it up real quick was something to do with Linguistic imperialism or something.

Perhaps changing dominant to prominent will give you a better example. It could possibly become a language that people are "made" to learn.

cracky Wrote:It's true that a lot of history isn't all solid facts, but most of it is at least somewhat accurate. Learning about a society and their history can help you understand a good deal about how their society is now. It's not useless to try to understand people by looking at their past to see how they got where they are.

I specially emphasized "border" in borderline to avoid optimistic rebuttal. I failed. In order to avoid a political discussion I'll just say I stand by these words and we must agree to disagree on this issue.

Tobberoth Wrote:I'm arguing the myths as they were quoted, if they have reasons which make me change my mind about them on their site, obviously the actual myths were not properly written and that would be a completely different discussion.

I think most researchers would argue that a thesis needing supporting evidence does not "obviously" make it poorly written. On the contrary such statements do not prove an argument unto themselves by design, evidence does. "Drinking red wine lowers the risk of heart disease" needs to be argued with evidence. Yet it is not an invalid or poorly written statement because it is not self-evident. I would argue the most valuable and intriguing arguments, if well-supported, are the ones that are contrary to conventional belief because they cause a paradigm shift to the truth from a previously collectively believed falsehood, like from the "earth is flat" to the "earth is round".

I differ with you on the rest of what you said and certainly am offended again by your tone but I believe that is possibly your intent or it is cultural. Is your tone and language common and inoffensive in your country? Not in mine or Japan. I'm not British or American but having spent some time in the UK I wouldn't advise such a tone in friendly pub discussions with the locals.

Minder Wrote:A bit off topic, but could someone give me the rundown on how good Khatzumoto's japanese really is in the video he posted (japanese no where near good enough to have any opinion of my own)? What I've mostly heard is that he speaks very naturally with correct grammar, but without using complex sentences. Is this true?

Minder, I had a Japanese friend listen to it without seeing who it was and she couldn't distinguish that he was not Japanese. I would argue that two young Japanese in their 20s speak naturally with correct grammar without using complex sentences. That's normal.

woodwojr Wrote:Sure you do; additionally, you need to know the definition of "great". He brought a nation from bankruptcy and despair to a point where it controlled huge swaths of Europe and had massive industrial output, he was very popular internationally (especially in the US) even if the honeymoon did wear off, was personally a soldier decorated multiple times for bravery in action, and created an astounding amount of infrastructure in Germany. The definitions under which he is not "great" are very restrictive.

Hitler gets a lot of hate he doesn't deserve, even if there is a lot that he does deserve.

~J

Cuz, Hitler doesn't get enough support already...

The sum of a man is what makes him great. He may have been well accomplished, but the entire sum of his life overshadows this no matter how one tries to word it.

Why the #$%^ are we talking about Hitler again.

Perhaps they would agree with you.

http://www.veoh.com/collection/yorosen/w...01Nr9r7hcn

ちょっと可愛い

kazelee Wrote:The sum of a man is what makes him great. He may have been well accomplished, but the entire sum of his life overshadows this no matter how one tries to word it.

He changed the world, and not just by a little bit. That is "great" in sum for nearly every value of "great" that doesn't involve "being a good person".

~J

woodwojr Wrote:

kazelee Wrote:The sum of a man is what makes him great. He may have been well accomplished, but the entire sum of his life overshadows this no matter how one tries to word it.

He changed the world, and not just by a little bit. That is "great" in sum for nearly every value of "great" that doesn't involve "being a good person".

~J

No matter how you word it...

Oh, just go look up "great" already.

~J

liosama Wrote:I don't know why people still worship khatzumoto, so many have commented on how crap his japanese is, especially for a person staying in japan for 5 or whatever years and claiming to study '24/7' or whatever.

I think people should move on from using him as a benchmark.

I don't even know why this thread even exists. It is so stupid, unscientific, based on useless bias after meeting random people, and not the entire population, after not even considering the (even worse) Japanese skill of foreigners. As a matter of fact, my lecturer (an academic) is conducting (an academic) study as to why foreigners never reach a high level of Japanese, they usually reach JLPT4/3/2 profficiency but never higher. Again I don't mean to offend people with my emphasis on academia here, rather, i'm trying to say that these sorts of hypothesis are meaningless unless professionally done, even still they are still somewhat meaningless since it works for a very small sample of a population.

It gets you nowhere.

Liosama, you're going to have to link to where anyone posted about Khatzumoto's skills being "crap". Like Musigny and Tobberoth, I also asked some Japanese people to listen to him and read what he wrote. General comments are he is funny, writes natural and sounds like he's been in Japan and learning Japanese a LONG time (and by long, I mean 10 plus years). I think only Tobberoth mentioned that his girlfriend said Khatzumoto used simple grammar.

Now people are downplaying his abilities cause he's been in Japan for three years? From my understanding, he's got a full time job (which I think he quit, though he's not stated it), learning Chinese for the last 18 months.

However, people should not use him as a benchmark. I agree there. However, my reasoning mirrors what Khatz said: What he did is not original (Heisig, Antimoon, SRS), and is repeatable (Chinese project). However, just because the parts were not original, he can get credit by merging the above in a usable formula. Just because Chicken, flour, butter, 7 herbs and spices existed doesn't mean KFC doesn't have an original recipe. Then there's the sharing aspect (spreading the love),which I think as more important, that encouraged more people to try learning Japanese beyond mediocrity.

Plus don't look at what he did using years or months. Look at what he did using hours (and sentences). He probably listened to 10,000 hours (during work, during studying, while watching TV, in his sleep, reading manga). He probably watched 2000 hours of TV (Voyager and gods knows what else) all in Japanese. He did about 6000 sentences, which he wrote out quite often, so if "only" 10x that would be 60,000 sentences (2000 pages of Japanese).

He just was able to jam all the above into his life while going to college and holding down three part time jobs .... in UTAH.

As to the existence of this thread, well, it is a discussion forum. Of course you're going to get anecdotal, non-scientific, small sample evidence brought up in discussion. Didn't you just see yourself quoting a person's "evidence" that was based of a sample size of 1 person's opinion (native girlfriend)? Then you offer the ad hominim (sp?) fallacy saying that foreigners learning Japanese also don't get good. Just realize it is an internet discussion and take everything with a dash of salt, 2 shots of Tequila, 1 shot of vermouth, and shaved ice. Top with an orange slice.

woodwojr Wrote:Oh, just go look up "great" already.

~J

I don't need to look up great. I've read the definition several times already. I've also read about Hitler more than I ever cared to. People decide whether or not a person was/is "great" not a dictionary.

You can rationalize virtually anything, that doesn't always make it right.

Liosama Wrote:As a matter of fact, my lecturer (an academic) is conducting (an academic) study as to why foreigners never reach a high level of Japanese, they usually reach JLPT4/3/2 profficiency but never higher.

I can help him out with that one. It's because it takes too damned long and life is too short to try and squeeze in those last several hundred kanji and yomi. It's not that different from any other endeavor undertaken by the general population. Much like going after a masters or doctorate or 3, if a person truly wants to reach level 1 or above, that person will. Most just settle for an associates or bachelors degree. That is, assuming life itself doesn't dictate their path go elsewhere.

In its simplest form, Japanese is like that new toy you buy for your kid. He'll play with for a little while, but sooner or later it'll end up in the deep recesses of his toybox, never to be brought out again.

I am curious to see what sort of unbiased, scientific method your lecturer uses to gather information and/or support for his claims or hypothesis' on this this more representative study. Please keep me updated.

I can't even find where nukemarine quoted this from, lol.

Nukemarine Wrote:Just realize it is an internet discussion and take everything with a dash of salt, 2 shots of Tequila, 1 shot of vermouth, and shaved ice. Top with an orange slice.

Party hard much...lol

Nukemarine Wrote:Liosama, you're going to have to link to where anyone posted about Khatzumoto's skills being "crap". Like Musigny and Tobberoth, I also asked some Japanese people to listen to him and read what he wrote. General comments are he is funny, writes natural and sounds like he's been in Japan and learning Japanese a LONG time (and by long, I mean 10 plus years). I think only Tobberoth mentioned that his girlfriend said Khatzumoto used simple grammar.

It wasn't just on this forum I heard from other Japanese learners/speakers. In any case, I would have more respect for the guy if he was a little more modest.

Nukemarine Wrote:Then you offer the ad hominim (sp?) fallacy saying that foreigners learning Japanese also don't get good.

This was purely for the sake of argument and was an attempt to counter the op's audacity in creating this thread.


To kazelee: Sure, once my teacher is done with the research/data (it is a ~3-4 year length research project, I myself am a subject of it) I will happily submit the results (if allowed etc)

About 45,000 foreigners pass JLPT1 every year. And I'm sure a large number of Japanese score 900+ on TOEIC every year. That there are a lot more students at the bottom than at the top is self-evident, in any field.

snallygaster Wrote:About 45,000 foreigners pass JLPT1 every year. And I'm sure a large number of Japanese score 900+ on TOEIC every year. That there are a lot more students at the bottom than at the top is self-evident, in any field.

45,000 seems like a huge number. Where did you read this?

liosama Wrote:This was purely for the sake of argument and was an attempt to counter the op's audacity in creating this thread.

The OP was asking questions based on observations. If you consider the OP audacious you'd have to consider your lecturer most the same. Whether in a lab or on a forum few if any experiments can be 100% empirical when humans are involved.

bodhisamaya Wrote:

snallygaster Wrote:About 45,000 foreigners pass JLPT1 every year. And I'm sure a large number of Japanese score 900+ on TOEIC every year. That there are a lot more students at the bottom than at the top is self-evident, in any field.

45,000 seems like a huge number. Where did you read this?

http://www.jlpt.jp/e/about/result.html

I thought this was a large number as well, but apparently out of 155,000 examinees for 2007's JLPT1 (43,000 in Japan; 111,000 overseas), 44k managed to get certified. These numbers are slightly reduced from 2006.

Edit: Had my applicants/examinees #s mixed up briefly. ;p

kazelee Wrote:

liosama Wrote:This was purely for the sake of argument and was an attempt to counter the op's audacity in creating this thread.

The OP was asking questions based on observations. If you consider the OP audacious you'd have to consider your lecturer most the same. Whether in a lab or on a forum few if any experiments can be 100% empirical when humans are involved.

My teacher is an Associate Professor in Applied Linguistics. Every year she goes through thousands upon thousands of students of Japanese. She has researched through through many different methods of teaching Japanese at an undergraduate level. Her research interests are in language adaption and language learning.

http://languages.arts.unsw.edu.au/staff/...st=Thomson

Tell me that her research topic is an audacious one now.

liosama Wrote:

kazelee Wrote:

liosama Wrote:This was purely for the sake of argument and was an attempt to counter the op's audacity in creating this thread.

The OP was asking questions based on observations. If you consider the OP audacious you'd have to consider your lecturer most the same. Whether in a lab or on a forum few if any experiments can be 100% empirical when humans are involved.

My teacher is an Associate Professor in Applied Linguistics. Every year she goes through thousands upon thousands of students of Japanese. She has researched through through many different methods of teaching Japanese at an undergraduate level. Her research interests are in language adaption and language learning.

http://languages.arts.unsw.edu.au/staff/...st=Thomson

Tell me that her research topic is an audacious one now.

Audacious was the word you used, remember? Given that the points in questions are similar and both are seeking information, regardless of the scale, is it rational for you to call one audacious and not the other?

But scale and experience is the very point i'm trying to emphasize here.

Anyway I can't be bothered going further than my previous post, I'll just agree to disagree.

musigny Wrote:

Tobberoth Wrote:I'm arguing the myths as they were quoted, if they have reasons which make me change my mind about them on their site, obviously the actual myths were not properly written and that would be a completely different discussion.

I think most researchers would argue that a thesis needing supporting evidence does not "obviously" make it poorly written. On the contrary such statements do not prove an argument unto themselves by design, evidence does. "Drinking red wine lowers the risk of heart disease" needs to be argued with evidence. Yet it is not an invalid or poorly written statement because it is not self-evident. I would argue the most valuable and intriguing arguments, if well-supported, are the ones that are contrary to conventional belief because they cause a paradigm shift to the truth from a previously collectively believed falsehood, like from the "earth is flat" to the "earth is round".

I differ with you on the rest of what you said and certainly am offended again by your tone but I believe that is possibly your intent or it is cultural. Is your tone and language common and inoffensive in your country? Not in mine or Japan. I'm not British or American but having spent some time in the UK I wouldn't advise such a tone in friendly pub discussions with the locals.

If you write a thesis like "Drinking red wine lowers the risk of heart disease", you have to prove exactly that. You can't prove "Drinking red wine while eating only vegetables lowers the risk of heart disease". They aren't proving their anti-myths in their arguments, they justify their opinion which is why on most of my points towards their myths, I didn't deny it, I added conditions. I am reading their arguments behind their myths now and it isn't changing anything: They worded the myths badly in some cases and are in my opinion directly wrong in some others.

In myth 1, they are saying that going to Japan isn't the best way to learn Japanese. Why? Because learning at home is safer and cheaper. Is it cheaper? Yes, for most people. Is it safer? No, the same mistakes you make in Japan you can make at home. Is it better than staying at home because the exposure is automatically huge, broad and natural? Yes. Thus, their myth shouldn't have been worded so simply. They should have worded it something like: "Living in Japan will automatically make you great at Japanese". Then I would have agreed with them 100%.

As for myth 3, I simply disagree with their whole argument, reading the full text sure didn't change that. They think the mistakes get stuck in your brain which is not so. Saying some mistakes in your first year of Japanese won't make any difference 2-3 years down the line, it's way more harmless than they are claiming.

Myth 5: They are doing the problem I just brought up, taking English as an example (which makes sense, they learned English). Also, they never give a timeframe either, so I'd say me saying 5 years+ makes sense. The guy in the example began to study English pronunciation when he was 15 so he has been working at it more than 5 years.

Myth 7: Again, their full text more or less agrees with me, it's just badly worded. It's saying that if you have extremely bad pronunciation, you won't be understood. Well, duh. That doesn't mean you have to have perfect pronunciation just because you want to learn Japanese as a hobby. For some people, who speak well enough to get around and want just that, getting around, the "myth" is true.

So yeah, reading their actual arguments didn't make any differences towards my first post towards them, so I don't really see where you're going with this "If people actually read their texts, the discussion would be on a higher level".

In fact, their site annoys me in that it takes the look of being educated by having "facts" written all over it even though they have NO references ANYWHERE. From an Academic standpoint, the whole site is baloney. "This is a common opinion. Here's OUR opinion, labeled "facts". What do you mean empirical evidence, we have our own experiences!"

You yourself are saying more people should do their research and not base their ideas on their personal experiences. Well, enter antimoon. Them trying to sell pronunciation training software is just the dot over the i.

As for you being offended, I don't see what I've done to make you so. There's not a single ad hominem in any of my posts, direct nor indirect. I'm stating my opinions clearly without hiding them in flowery phrases since I'm not Japanese. If you're offended, you're going to have to point out examples of what offends you since I can't change my tone which I consider most neutral. Neutral to the point of bluntness? Yes maybe, I have a tendency to be a bit blunt. Some people like that, some people do not. If you do not and still wish to continue the discussion, I can't say much more than "ignore it". I don't mean any harm, I'm just doing my best in being clear with my opinions.

liosama Wrote:But scale and experience is the very point i'm trying to emphasize here.

Anyway I can't be bothered going further than my previous post, I'll just agree to disagree.

If that were your point, why add "the op's audacity in creating this thread"? Is accomplishment enough a reason to look down on another individual?

Also what are we disagreeing about? I'm just asking you questions.

Tobberoth Wrote:In myth 1, they are saying that going to Japan isn't the best way to learn Japanese. Why? Because learning at home is safer and cheaper. Is it cheaper? Yes, for most people. Is it safer? No, the same mistakes you make in Japan you can make at home. Is it better than staying at home because the exposure is automatically huge, broad and natural? Yes. Thus, their myth shouldn't have been worded so simply. They should have worded it something like: "Living in Japan will automatically make you great at Japanese".

Interesting...

Tobberoth Wrote:Then I would have agreed with them 100%.

Less put the myth under a little more scrutiny then shall we?

"The best way to learn a foreign language is to go to a foreign country"

The use of the word learn vs master presents numerous arguments in itself. So let's focus on something smaller. If you look you'll notice the word "best." Given that you'll find a large number of individuals who have had success both abroad and in a foreign country while study a foreign language, can any one method be called best? Is there even any data to support what method is best? Without knowing the best method would it not make sense to call this sentence a myth?

Quote:As for myth 3, I simply disagree with their whole argument, reading the full text sure didn't change that. They think the mistakes get stuck in your brain which is not so. Saying some mistakes in your first year of Japanese won't make any difference 2-3 years down the line, it's way more harmless than they are claiming.

In studying music you'll often here the phrase practice makes permanent.

Rather than axing questions, I'll just present you with an individual who can attest to mistakes being ingrained... me. I intentionally spelled ax the way I pronounce it. Regardless of how deliberately I attempt to use ask, axe always find its way into my sentences. Just axe alysk how annoying a simple mistake can become. I could probably sit down for a couple hours each day and practice saying ask ad infinitum, but would I have to if the correct pronunciation were introduced to me before I began to use it? Damn, I axed another question.

Quote:Myth 5: They are doing the problem I just brought up, taking English as an example (which makes sense, they learned English). Also, they never give a timeframe either, so I'd say me saying 5 years+ makes sense. The guy in the example began to study English pronunciation when he was 15 so he has been working at it more than 5 years.

"You are a foreigner, therefore you will always have a foreign accent"

This one is rather specific isn't it? *Always* Time toward achievement aside, this sentence holds true as a myth given the use of this word, does it not?

Quote:Myth 7: Again, their full text more or less agrees with me, it's just badly worded. It's saying that if you have extremely bad pronunciation, you won't be understood. Well, duh. That doesn't mean you have to have perfect pronunciation just because you want to learn Japanese as a hobby. For some people, who speak well enough to get around and want just that, getting around, the "myth" is true.

Jay voe dry dess orngess. Nanny keh tabby thai duh su. Chow nun Bob emmy the.

Narf legef. Aferaldk. Bob Saget?

The first line is bad pronunciation. To trained foreign ears it can be deciphered. It's possible to get around in areas where people are used to hearing this sort of language rape (can you tell I have bias). The second line says to hell with pronunciation. It is a language all its own. I've been up for far too long to bring this to some rational albeit wild conclusion, but it's possible to infer where I'm going with this, lol.

kazelee Wrote:

Tobberoth Wrote:Then I would have agreed with them 100%.

Less put the myth under a little more scrutiny then shall we?

"The best way to learn a foreign language is to go to a foreign country"

The use of the word learn vs master presents numerous arguments in itself. So let's focus on something smaller. If you look you'll notice the word "best." Given that you'll find a large number of individuals who have had success both abroad and in a foreign country while study a foreign language, can any one method be called best? Is there even any data to support what method is best? Without knowing the best method would it not make sense to call this sentence a myth?

Well yes, but it wouldn't be saying anything. I mean they have a full text argument, they want to tell us something about studying in Japan, not about "best" being a bad word to use in discussions about learning. I see your point but it's not really worth bringing up.

kazelee Wrote:In studying music you'll often here the phrase practice makes permanent.

Rather than axing questions, I'll just present you with an individual who can attest to mistakes being ingrained... me. I intentionally spelled ax the way I pronounce it. Regardless of how deliberately I attempt to use ask, axe always find its way into my sentences. Just axe alysk how annoying a simple mistake can become. I could probably sit down for a couple hours each day and practice saying ask ad infinitum, but would I have to if the correct pronunciation were introduced to me before I began to use it? Damn, I axed another question.

I guess we can't do much more than agree to disagree here, you have your experience, I have mine. I'd like to ax you this however: If you take the top 5 people in pretty much anything. Sports, music, art... ask them if they made mistakes when they were starting out. Do you think they did? Did they become the top 5 people still? Mistakes are NOT such a big deal, everyone makes them. It doesn't ruin you.

kazelee Wrote:"You are a foreigner, therefore you will always have a foreign accent"

This one is rather specific isn't it? *Always* Time toward achievement aside, this sentence holds true as a myth given the use of this word, does it not?

Maybe so, in a literal sense, which is why I said "but it takes ages", not "it will never happen".

kazelee Wrote:Jay voe dry dess orngess. Nanny keh tabby thai duh su. Chow nun Bob emmy the.

Narf legef. Aferaldk. Bob Saget?

The first line is bad pronunciation. To trained foreign ears it can be deciphered. It's possible to get around in areas where people are used to hearing this sort of language rape (can you tell I have bias). The second line says to hell with pronunciation. It is a language all its own. I've been up for far too long to bring this to some rational albeit wild conclusion, but it's possible to infer where I'm going with this, lol.

I really don't see where you're going with this. Many of the foreigners I lived with in Japan had pretty bad pronunciation but were still understood perfectly no matter where they went. Sure, it wouldn't be enough to get a job maybe but my whole point is that people have different goals, you can't just generalize saying "everyone needs to learn perfect pronunciation". There are people who didn't study pronunciation actively yet are good enough for their own goals.