When you start investigating methods of how to teach languages, you will soon find out that, there are these two opposite methods, these two opposite methods that are always in conflict with one an other, which are those methods?, well there’s the method that wants to teach almost the entire language as if it was a really theoretical science with a bunch of rules and with a bunch of grammatical equations like physics or like chemistry. We will call this the Conservative method, and there’s this other method way more liberal, that say’s the hell with rules, the hell with grammar, just listen to the language, you will eventually know how to speak it, you will eventually know how to read it and all the grammar that it has, you'll learn naturally because that’s the way that you learned you mother language. Let’s call this the Liberal Method.
And, you know, these methods are right and wrong at the same time, what these two methods don’t realize is that they’re both complementary to each other. Learning the language just with a bunch of rules, with a lot of vocabulary without context, you know, learning it as a really strict science, is not effective, if you just learn the language theoretically you will fail at the moment that you start a conversation, because you don’t really know how people actually speak, you don’t know their common day expressions you don’t know the rhythm of a conversation , and besides of that, the Conservative Method is a truly boring method you will never learn to completely speak a language if you learn it as a science, you can apply this method in the really advance stages of your learning, but do not start with learning every single grammatical rule, there are important rules that you should know right from the beginning, but do not focus in the more advance rules at the beginning of your learning, focus on the simple ones.
And there’s this other method that says, screw grammar, you don’t need it, you don’t need it at the early stages just listen to the language, you will eventually know how to speak it, you will eventually know how to read it and all the grammar that it has, you'll learn naturally because that’s the way that you learned your mother language.
Yeah is not as simple as that, you need grammar, simple grammar, the simplest grammar ever, but you need grammar, once that you’re familiar with the really really basic grammar you can procede to the 4 stages which are: Listen, Speak, Read, Write.
Now the great objection that this method has against grammar is the following: You don’t need grammar, because when you were a little baby you naturally learn how to speak your mother language without grammar or without rules, just listen and speak, and that’s how you will learn any other language.
You know that is actually true, except for the final part, “and that’s how you will learn any other language” mmm not exactly, you learned you mother language that way, because you were in the adequate environment to learn it. Every person that you were in contact with, spoke that language, you were listening to that language all the time, you we’re in contact with that language 24/7, and that language was the only way to truly communicate with other people.
Now that I’ve said that, the Liberal Method might actually work if you, for example I’m learning French right now, and the Liberal Method might work for me if I go to France or to Belgium and I stay there for maybe 6 months or a year. I’m sure that if I do that, the Liberal Method will work, I’m going to be in contact with French all the time, I’ll be listening to francophone people all the time and I’ll eventually know how to speak it fluently, I’ll eventually know how to read it, and how to write it. But my point is that you need to be in an environment where you will be in contact with that language all the time. And if you don’t have this environment you will not learn a language by this method, or maybe you will but it’ll take you decades or even more.
But there is something that it’s absolutely correct about this method, this method strongly encourages you to listen to the language. And that’s the most important thing that you have to do when you’re learning a new language, listen to that language. You need to listen to that language a lot. Because a the end of the day, a language is an spoken way of communication, you can also write it, of course, but what is the most common way of communication that you use in your daily life, spoken communication, you speak with people, that’s the most common way to communicate, and what do you need to speak with people? Know how to speak their language , and how will you learn how to speak, their language?, you listen to that language!
So with that little rant that I just made, you’re probably wandering: okay, but, what’s your point? , which one of these methods is the correct method?
I think that the correct method is the combination of these two methods, why do I think that? Because that was the way that I learned English, with these two methods combine.
You see I listen to a lot of English, because all of the English speaking media that was around my country: all the video games, all the music, all the films, all the TV, and I learn English grammar in school and that’s it. The grammar that I learn in school was grammar that I could’ve easily learned in just one year. It was simple grammar, but that simple grammar made me understand a lot of English. So your question is why do I need grammar? Because if you study the common grammar of the language, you’ll learn that language so much faster, you will understand it so much faster, you will save years of learning with the Liberal Method if you just stop for a second, and you know, check out the common grammar of that language, and if you apply this two methods together you will learn a language in a fast and effective way.
And for that reason, I created a Language Learning page on this blog, where I'm going to put useful stuff for learning languages and also, try to develop my own teaching/learning method.
Thanks for reading :)
And, you know, these methods are right and wrong at the same time, what these two methods don’t realize is that they’re both complementary to each other. Learning the language just with a bunch of rules, with a lot of vocabulary without context, you know, learning it as a really strict science, is not effective, if you just learn the language theoretically you will fail at the moment that you start a conversation, because you don’t really know how people actually speak, you don’t know their common day expressions you don’t know the rhythm of a conversation , and besides of that, the Conservative Method is a truly boring method you will never learn to completely speak a language if you learn it as a science, you can apply this method in the really advance stages of your learning, but do not start with learning every single grammatical rule, there are important rules that you should know right from the beginning, but do not focus in the more advance rules at the beginning of your learning, focus on the simple ones.
And there’s this other method that says, screw grammar, you don’t need it, you don’t need it at the early stages just listen to the language, you will eventually know how to speak it, you will eventually know how to read it and all the grammar that it has, you'll learn naturally because that’s the way that you learned your mother language.
Yeah is not as simple as that, you need grammar, simple grammar, the simplest grammar ever, but you need grammar, once that you’re familiar with the really really basic grammar you can procede to the 4 stages which are: Listen, Speak, Read, Write.
Now the great objection that this method has against grammar is the following: You don’t need grammar, because when you were a little baby you naturally learn how to speak your mother language without grammar or without rules, just listen and speak, and that’s how you will learn any other language.
You know that is actually true, except for the final part, “and that’s how you will learn any other language” mmm not exactly, you learned you mother language that way, because you were in the adequate environment to learn it. Every person that you were in contact with, spoke that language, you were listening to that language all the time, you we’re in contact with that language 24/7, and that language was the only way to truly communicate with other people.
Now that I’ve said that, the Liberal Method might actually work if you, for example I’m learning French right now, and the Liberal Method might work for me if I go to France or to Belgium and I stay there for maybe 6 months or a year. I’m sure that if I do that, the Liberal Method will work, I’m going to be in contact with French all the time, I’ll be listening to francophone people all the time and I’ll eventually know how to speak it fluently, I’ll eventually know how to read it, and how to write it. But my point is that you need to be in an environment where you will be in contact with that language all the time. And if you don’t have this environment you will not learn a language by this method, or maybe you will but it’ll take you decades or even more.
But there is something that it’s absolutely correct about this method, this method strongly encourages you to listen to the language. And that’s the most important thing that you have to do when you’re learning a new language, listen to that language. You need to listen to that language a lot. Because a the end of the day, a language is an spoken way of communication, you can also write it, of course, but what is the most common way of communication that you use in your daily life, spoken communication, you speak with people, that’s the most common way to communicate, and what do you need to speak with people? Know how to speak their language , and how will you learn how to speak, their language?, you listen to that language!
So with that little rant that I just made, you’re probably wandering: okay, but, what’s your point? , which one of these methods is the correct method?
I think that the correct method is the combination of these two methods, why do I think that? Because that was the way that I learned English, with these two methods combine.
You see I listen to a lot of English, because all of the English speaking media that was around my country: all the video games, all the music, all the films, all the TV, and I learn English grammar in school and that’s it. The grammar that I learn in school was grammar that I could’ve easily learned in just one year. It was simple grammar, but that simple grammar made me understand a lot of English. So your question is why do I need grammar? Because if you study the common grammar of the language, you’ll learn that language so much faster, you will understand it so much faster, you will save years of learning with the Liberal Method if you just stop for a second, and you know, check out the common grammar of that language, and if you apply this two methods together you will learn a language in a fast and effective way.
And for that reason, I created a Language Learning page on this blog, where I'm going to put useful stuff for learning languages and also, try to develop my own teaching/learning method.
Thanks for reading :)
