ta12121 Wrote:What attracts me to the language is how it sounds

That's one of the reasons I also like Japanese. And probably why I don't like Chinese as much.
Take this song for example,
the language is so astonishingly beautiful ( It takes a minute until words come):

Whenever I hear Chinese, it sounds as if I'm in a humour show lol .
Maybe it's due to the fact that I've heard Chinese only when I was in China for 3 weeks...and it was about 5 years ago.
Korean sounds very nice though.

Chinese is so outlandish that it might also be interesting...

jettyke Wrote:

ta12121 Wrote:What attracts me to the language is how it sounds

That's one of the reasons I also like Japanese. And probably why I don't like Chinese as much.
Take this song for example,
the language is so astonishingly beautiful ( It takes a minute until words come):

Whenever I hear Chinese, it sounds as if I'm in a humour show lol .
Maybe it's due to the fact that I've heard Chinese only when I was in China for 3 weeks...and it was about 5 years ago.
Korean sounds very nice though.

Chinese is so outlandish that it might also be interesting...

hmm. When I was first learning Japanese, it sounded pretty rough me to. But once you start to understand it, it doesn't sound like a bunch of rubbish noises. Then once I got a control of understanding it within the language. It sounds beautiful.

I assume the same applies to mandarin,Cantonese and other Chinese languages. I will eventually learn mandarin, but first Japanese is a priority.

Tzadeck Wrote:● Method does not account for language learning success. Different teaching methods, or different materials, don't have a tendancy to promote different results. (It's a bit more complicated this this--having a structured method matters, but which structured method you use doesn't seem to matter so much)

I feel like without Anki I would never get anywhere with the language. Anki makes my studying so... regular and efficient. I remember having a textbook before and just struggling because I wasn't sure how to review it properly by myself. Anki + sentences took quick work of that. =)

Structure and planning wise, I can agree, it didn't matter if I used UBJG or Yookoso or Genki. But I feel like Anki made sure that I wouldn't forget anything.

I think knowledge of resources and willingness to use them has a major effect. Almost all of the learners of English that I know who have hit the higher levels have studied for a long time and have tried a lot of different things aside from classes. Also, the ones that make progress outside of the 20 year time frame, which a lot of learners who don't put the work in outside of class get caught in, are quite often open and willing to try new things (it does help if you have a lot of opportunity to use the language in it's spoken form as well.)

This is a general observation and I have met people who have just done classes and have succeeded in a reasonable time frame.

mafried Wrote:My own experience backs all of that up, except for the girls part. The successful adult 2nd language learners I've known have mostly been male, but that might be selection bias.

I'm curious, what's the name of the book? I know it'll be hard to track down, but I'd like to find a copy. I have long been skeptical of 2nd language acquisition theory since most of what I've read about the prevailing theories is contrary to my own experience (and, I would argue, common sense in many cases). But this linguist seems to have his head screwed on straight.. I would love to read about it in more detail.

The book is just called "Linguistics and Language Learning"--I think it was made for use by the Research Institue for Japanese Language Education in Chiyoda, Tokyo. It's also used in the JET program for people who take the Japanese Linguistics and Pedagogy course (which very few people do, since you need to be about JLPT 2 level to take the course).

As for the gender difference, the studies don't have anything to do with how many girls or boys are successfully learning second languages. Rather, if you have boys and girls doing the same process to learn the language (e.g., boys and girls taking a class together), the girls do better.

grimalone Wrote:

Tzadeck Wrote:● Method does not account for language learning success. Different teaching methods, or different materials, don't have a tendancy to promote different results. (It's a bit more complicated this this--having a structured method matters, but which structured method you use doesn't seem to matter so much)

Could you detail this a little bit more please? What does "structured method" mean here? I often see people learning more easily simply by changing the way they learn, sometimes by giving up on methods that did work for me. Maybe it is due to external factors, like being more motivated by the method, but in this case you can't say that the method/material used doesn't really matter...
I'm curious now!

Well, most studies are about classroom learning, and compare how well learners do with different teaching methors and teacher materials. So, for example, some schools primarily use a language lab and the activities that such labs allow. However, it doesn't seem that there's a difference in learning between students who use a language lab and those who don't. This is similar with different textbooks, or different methods of teaching. (There might be differences in learning among things that haven't been tested. For example, whether SRS works better than regular flashcards. But, different teaching methods, facilities, and textbooks don't seem to yield different results. Keep in mind, though, that it's comparing real classes. Probably most schools are trying to use the best teaching methods and the best textbooks, and those are what are being compared. So, for example, Genki isn't gonna be better or worse than Minna no Nihongo in the long run in a classroom setting. However, there are probably some really crappy textbooks which would hurt your learning--but they woldn't have been included in the study becasue probably the schools ruled out using them.)

As for structure, there are a few things that seem to be important, such as
1) A record of what has been learned/taught so far (textbooks naturally provide this by order. If you're up to chapter three, you know you learned chapters 1 and 2. With SRS this could be added cards, or whatever).
2) A scheme of vocabulary and structure. Meaning, the order in which vocabulary and structure are introduced should be considered (For example, how Heisig arranges the kanji to make them easier to learn by primitives. An alternative could have been most common kanji used by adults.)
3) Associations should be used to establish a link between things and their names, or structures and their use (vocab items with pictures, associations by slides, video, posters, etc.)
4) Support for the student (in most cases, from a teacher)

mafried Wrote:If they were only willing to push themselves, research and structure their own studies, and be introspective about their progress, methods and study habits, they would succeed. But often they don't understand that is what they need to do, it is these skills which they lack, and for that reason they fail.

Well said. This is more precise than my soliloquy reflection, and is pretty much how I feel. I think the meta-cognition is the important part. That's what I meant by saying these kinds of things are misunderstood; learning is a highly introspective process, and more than anything, you have to learn about yourself to succeed. Unfortunately, many people I know don't know better than to use the whip instead of the carrot. Suffice to say, I don't believe in this approach. I'm not sure you can counter this by advice, since it ultimately comes down to knowing yourself, which is something only they can do.

Replying before reading other answers (sorry...):

For me, the best way to improve a language is the "pressure factor".

I am a native French speaker and English was my second foreign language (German was my first foreign language).

When I first came to Japan (Tokyo) for work (non teaching related) more than 15 years ago (pre-internet age, if people remember how it was...), my English was so-so (Cambridge First Certificate level). It improved greatly because I HAD to use it -- what I call the "pressure factor" (my English being much better than my very beginner Japanese). I was watching cable TV in English and often seeing the same program more than once. It helped me improved my listening comprehension a lot. Talking daily to my work colleagues in English helped me improve my speaking abilities. Most of the books and magazines I was reading were in English. A big thing, when I think how much trouble I had had reading the requested books for the Cambridge exam...)

My spoken Japanese improved greatly when I started working at a hotel with no other foreign staff.

It has improved even more since I moved to the countryside two years ago to live with my aging inlaws. Of course, they only speak Japanese. As do most of the people living around, their doctors, etc. Talk about a crash course in kaigo (elderly people care) vocabulary...

Marrying a local did not help much, since we mainly speak English together (with more Japanese these days). Somehow, we started with English and it is difficult to completely switch to Japanese.