Language learning with Netflix(languagelearningwithnetflix.com)
languagelearningwithnetflix.com
Language learning with Netflix
https://languagelearningwithnetflix.com/
163 comments
"Avoid speaking"
This is 100% a myth. The Defense Language Institute comprehensively disproved this in the mid-1970's.
I know this because it's discussed on the first day of classes at DLI as for why you need to learn to speak the language not just hear and read it. Because my job title was voice intercept operator.
Pre-1976 the Defense Language Institute did not score or rate students speaking ability because only reading and listening were considered mission critical skills.
Post-1976 it was considered a mission critical skill because it had such a dramatic effect on students final listening and reading abilities during the culminating Defense Language Proficiency Test (DLPT). Subsequently an Oral Proficiency Interview (OPI) was developed and is considered an integral part of the DLPT.
Note: This was all direct, primary research done at the Defense Language Institute with thousands of participants annually, so it was direct cause and effect experiment.
It's hard to find the specific research results summarizing this, but here's one example from that time period. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1975-10458-001
I know this because it's discussed on the first day of classes at DLI as for why you need to learn to speak the language not just hear and read it. Because my job title was voice intercept operator.
Pre-1976 the Defense Language Institute did not score or rate students speaking ability because only reading and listening were considered mission critical skills.
Post-1976 it was considered a mission critical skill because it had such a dramatic effect on students final listening and reading abilities during the culminating Defense Language Proficiency Test (DLPT). Subsequently an Oral Proficiency Interview (OPI) was developed and is considered an integral part of the DLPT.
Note: This was all direct, primary research done at the Defense Language Institute with thousands of participants annually, so it was direct cause and effect experiment.
It's hard to find the specific research results summarizing this, but here's one example from that time period. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1975-10458-001
The DLI has a different set of motivations: bring as many analysts to a working level of proficiency within a fixed time period, and has a lot of other things that confound this analysis: it's totally ok for the DLI to wash out some percentage of trainees in each flight, they can pre-screen candidates into whatever language they think is a best fit depending on candidates latent aptitudes, etc.
There is a universe where both pieces of advice can be right; surely you can imagine "don't worry about speaking" advice might be reasonable for someone who is learning casually, has no hard time frame to learn, wants to learn in dribbles and maximally passively, for whom a partial fluency might be a reasonable endpoint, and the greatest risk is burnout from negative reinforcement of failure.
There is a universe where both pieces of advice can be right; surely you can imagine "don't worry about speaking" advice might be reasonable for someone who is learning casually, has no hard time frame to learn, wants to learn in dribbles and maximally passively, for whom a partial fluency might be a reasonable endpoint, and the greatest risk is burnout from negative reinforcement of failure.
"Don't speak" is a myth and by not speaking you are hindering your own learning. Dr. Krashen's advice was taken out of context. It was not meant as general advice not to speak.
If you personally don't care and don't wish to speak that's fine, but don't try to promote that as advice on how to get the most out of studying a language.
If you personally don't care and don't wish to speak that's fine, but don't try to promote that as advice on how to get the most out of studying a language.
There's a lot of wishful thinking around language learning. The idea that some part of it will "just happen" naturally is very appealing. The unfortunate reality is that you meed lots of practice at everything: speaking, listening, reading and writing. You won't improve significantly at any one of those skills without many hundreds of hours of practice.
Massive amounts of listening and reading is practice :)
Yes. It will make you better at listening and reading, but not at speaking.
[deleted]
Yes, like speaking will not make you better at comprehension, although comprehension is required to have any meaningful conversation. Speaking needs to be practiced, but input and understanding comes first.
I'm pretty sure the originally poster did not mean to never speak at all. But just not to worry about it for a while.
I'm pretty sure the originally poster did not mean to never speak at all. But just not to worry about it for a while.
I don’t see any reason to delay practicing simple phrases like “Hello”, “How are you?”, etc., or practicing the pronunciation of the vocab that you’re learning. It takes years to be able to reliably comprehend naturalistic conversation. You can’t realistically delay speaking until that point.
You definitely can, but whether it's necessary to delay simple things like that, I'm not sure.
It's pretty simple to speak things that you've acquired (of course it'll be slow and awkward at first, but that's natural), I just don't think there's much point in trying to speak things you haven't already acquired.
It's pretty simple to speak things that you've acquired (of course it'll be slow and awkward at first, but that's natural), I just don't think there's much point in trying to speak things you haven't already acquired.
I interpreted the GGP to mean something like: think about how you learn your first language -- you spend a ton of time listening before trying to speak. Don't focus on speaking so soon. I don't think that is so much "wishful thinking" as an interesting strategy to consider.
I'd do it for spanish, but I can't find star trek with (latam) spanish audio.
I'd do it for spanish, but I can't find star trek with (latam) spanish audio.
I don't think so. Babies are constantly making sounds and trying to speak even when they have a very poor grasp on the language.
I personally learn much more from fumbling around with a language, and letting fluent speakers correct me, than I do from listening to it - though both are helpful. I recently had the opportunity to watch a lot of Spanish TV with a couple native Spanish speakers and I learned a ton from it. Through the commercial breaks I'd be repeating phrases from the show and asking them about it - or telling them my theories about what was going on in the show to see if I was understanding it.
I personally learn much more from fumbling around with a language, and letting fluent speakers correct me, than I do from listening to it - though both are helpful. I recently had the opportunity to watch a lot of Spanish TV with a couple native Spanish speakers and I learned a ton from it. Through the commercial breaks I'd be repeating phrases from the show and asking them about it - or telling them my theories about what was going on in the show to see if I was understanding it.
There is little in common between language acquisition in kids and adults. And I have been reading the literature, and you have one research group that says it is the same, another saying it is different.
Find me one kid (maybe there is one, but you get the idea) who is growing up in a household in which the local language is spoken and does not sound native when they speak.
>There's a lot of wishful thinking around language learning. The idea that some part of it will "just happen" naturally is very appealing. The unfortunate reality is that you meed lots of practice at everything
Not really. In actual life tons of people have learned to speak a second language naturally without any deliberate practice, books, etc, just by immigrating to another place and picking it up making acquantainces, working (e.g. menial jobs), and so on.
Not really. In actual life tons of people have learned to speak a second language naturally without any deliberate practice, books, etc, just by immigrating to another place and picking it up making acquantainces, working (e.g. menial jobs), and so on.
Those are all different claims than the original post was making though.
I was surprised to see that suggestion as well: every language course I've ever seen focuses on memorizing a (relatively) natural dialog and reciting it word for word from memory as its primary means of targeting fluency. I don't know about the research OP cites, but I've found that, for me, memorizing the dialogues as the courses suggest have been by far the most helpful way to advance in language acquisition. I will admit, though, that of the foreign languages I do speak, I speak them better than I understand them... so maybe there is something to this.
Not according to the research I've done ¯\_(ツ)_/¯, or my own experiences.
EDIT: As I linked below, here is Krashen on the subject - http://www.sdkrashen.com/content/articles/down_with_forced_s...
EDIT: As I linked below, here is Krashen on the subject - http://www.sdkrashen.com/content/articles/down_with_forced_s...
Right but as has been pointed out elsewhere, the linked article does not say to avoid speaking. Instead it says to avoid a strong focus on forced speech in a classroom, which likely means the sorts of repetition exercises that many of us remember from adolescence. That is very different from not trying to use the language productively at all.
Right. Making students repeat and memorize sentences that are beyond their current ability is detrimental.
Think of it this way. If I gave you a paragraph in Turkish (or insert language X) to memorize and recite that's very different than giving you some greetings and responses to memorize and recite.
For the first there is no mental model for where the paragraph fits in or how it's constructed. In the second almost everyone has some experience learning greetings in a couple of languages just by exposure to pop culture, so even if you don't understand the specifics of how those phrases work you have some confidence in how to employ them and you'll generally feel somewhat confident in being able to break them down later if you need to because greetings done in short and simple language.
Think of it this way. If I gave you a paragraph in Turkish (or insert language X) to memorize and recite that's very different than giving you some greetings and responses to memorize and recite.
For the first there is no mental model for where the paragraph fits in or how it's constructed. In the second almost everyone has some experience learning greetings in a couple of languages just by exposure to pop culture, so even if you don't understand the specifics of how those phrases work you have some confidence in how to employ them and you'll generally feel somewhat confident in being able to break them down later if you need to because greetings done in short and simple language.
A lot of people have already commented on the part of not speaking being virtually useless at the beginning. I tend to agree with the criticisms listed there, but I submit another reason: muscle memory.
Practicing making the sounds of the target language as soon as possible with the correction of a native speaker, in my opinion, is absolutely essential. For many languages, there are unique sounds that are just close enough to one’s primary language, that our muscle memory causes us to make the familiar, incorrect sound instead of the proper one. Because it’s more a matter of physical exercise alongside the rewiring of our brains to recognise said phonemes, the more time spent working on it, the better on the path to fluency.
Having said all that, everyone’s language acquisition ability and language goals will be different, so I can see where this piece of advice does not have universal application.
Practicing making the sounds of the target language as soon as possible with the correction of a native speaker, in my opinion, is absolutely essential. For many languages, there are unique sounds that are just close enough to one’s primary language, that our muscle memory causes us to make the familiar, incorrect sound instead of the proper one. Because it’s more a matter of physical exercise alongside the rewiring of our brains to recognise said phonemes, the more time spent working on it, the better on the path to fluency.
Having said all that, everyone’s language acquisition ability and language goals will be different, so I can see where this piece of advice does not have universal application.
Transover is a good tool for surgical translation:
- https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/transover-ff/
- https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/transover/aggiicla...
- https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/transover-ff/
- https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/transover/aggiicla...
I couldn’t disagree more with “avoid speaking”. Being forced into conversations is my main method for learning another language, even with a small vocabulary it’s how I retain most of what I learn… by practicing it.
I do agree with the “Don’t translate” though. That never works.
I'm curious, do you know of any research (or even just anecdotes) showing that speaking practice is bad? I've heard the claim before but never seen any evidence for it.
In my own experience, it feels like speaking helps improve my speaking a lot. Sure it doesn't help me pick up new phrases or grammar at all, but the first time I say something always comes out horrible, before getting progressively better as I say it more. And there's the skill of utilizing a limited vocabulary to communicate complex ideas. That's another thing that I feel has gotten better as I exercise it through speech.
In my own experience, it feels like speaking helps improve my speaking a lot. Sure it doesn't help me pick up new phrases or grammar at all, but the first time I say something always comes out horrible, before getting progressively better as I say it more. And there's the skill of utilizing a limited vocabulary to communicate complex ideas. That's another thing that I feel has gotten better as I exercise it through speech.
I'll try to dig up the original study I found months ago, talking about correlation between speaking practice and language acquisition in Japanese students learning English. When controlling for method of study, the researchers noted that students who tended to speak more ended up doing _worse_ on final exams. This could potentially be explained by the tendency for early speakers to way over-focus on correctness, which slows the whole process.
In the meantime, this book by Krashen may be of interest! He touches on some of the same ideas, roughly. Notably, around page 100 or so, he starts to define what he would consider his ideal learning environment: http://www.sdkrashen.com/content/books/sl_acquisition_and_le...
In the meantime, this book by Krashen may be of interest! He touches on some of the same ideas, roughly. Notably, around page 100 or so, he starts to define what he would consider his ideal learning environment: http://www.sdkrashen.com/content/books/sl_acquisition_and_le...
> the researchers noted that students who tended to speak more ended up doing _worse_ on final exams
Surely those exams focus on literary analysis or advanced grammar structures.
Who is the better speaker of a language? The person who can carry simple (daily life topics) conversations fluently or the person who knows pedantic language constructs but can only utter them with significant delays and only speak in chunks of a few sentences?
Knowing a language and being able to speak it are different things. I agree you have to know it (understand grammar and vocabulary) before it makes sense to practice speaking it. Until you are forced to quickly think on your feet in another language your speaking ability won't progress much.
Surely those exams focus on literary analysis or advanced grammar structures.
Who is the better speaker of a language? The person who can carry simple (daily life topics) conversations fluently or the person who knows pedantic language constructs but can only utter them with significant delays and only speak in chunks of a few sentences?
Knowing a language and being able to speak it are different things. I agree you have to know it (understand grammar and vocabulary) before it makes sense to practice speaking it. Until you are forced to quickly think on your feet in another language your speaking ability won't progress much.
> students who tended to speak more ended up doing _worse_ on final exams.
It is possible that this simply tells us that the final exam was only or primarily a written one. I know it is not directly comparable but my children learnt Norwegian starting at age 3 1/2 (after they already spoke English) without any formal instruction at all, just by speaking with other children and the staff at the kindergarten.
It is possible that this simply tells us that the final exam was only or primarily a written one. I know it is not directly comparable but my children learnt Norwegian starting at age 3 1/2 (after they already spoke English) without any formal instruction at all, just by speaking with other children and the staff at the kindergarten.
Living in Japan, I can verify that there are two major types of English students here.
Group one learns to speak casually, and often.
Group two can be handed a Shakespeare text and answer any question about it.
Group one will have a completely natural and fluent conversation with any English speaker. They can write casually and be completely understood.
Group two will be able to identify grammatical mistakes on a test. Many are incapable of even rudimentary conversation. These people did well on college exams and are responsible for the horrible, worse-than-machine translations you see on signs and government reports in this country.
Group one learns to speak casually, and often.
Group two can be handed a Shakespeare text and answer any question about it.
Group one will have a completely natural and fluent conversation with any English speaker. They can write casually and be completely understood.
Group two will be able to identify grammatical mistakes on a test. Many are incapable of even rudimentary conversation. These people did well on college exams and are responsible for the horrible, worse-than-machine translations you see on signs and government reports in this country.
I have a Japanese friend in a third group. He learned English to a fairly high level almost entirely by reading English on the internet and watching English shows/movies. He's very fluent at speaking as well, but according to his account, his speaking fluency took a lot of practice (obviously), but didn't come until after he could already almost fully understand and enjoy those things.
I'm also in Japan. While I don't have any formal English school experience, my experience with casually meeting people pretty closely matches this.
Though, I've actually met some group one folks who can't write very well, despite being extremely proficient in conversation!
Though, I've actually met some group one folks who can't write very well, despite being extremely proficient in conversation!
Sure, don't translate, but the input also has to be comprehensible. So there is always a challenge of not seeing the translation but still understanding. If you never look something up, there are some words you will never know. There is a balance, and that balance is hard to find.
True, a lot of it depends on personal preference, too. I think the idea is to not worry about understanding 100%. Even just 70% could be fine! Or just the gist or emotion of the text could be enough.
This is wildly misleading advice. Using materials with comprehension below 80% is a massive waste of time.
Will you learn something? Yes probably, but will it be time and effort efficient? Not even slightly!
At 80-95% it can be productive if you're putting forth a lot of effort, but comprehensible input assumes comprehension above 95% for passive learning of materials.
To demonstrate what different (reading in this case) comprehension levels will get you take a look at this[1].
[1] https://www.sinosplice.com/life/archives/2016/08/25/what-80-...
Will you learn something? Yes probably, but will it be time and effort efficient? Not even slightly!
At 80-95% it can be productive if you're putting forth a lot of effort, but comprehensible input assumes comprehension above 95% for passive learning of materials.
To demonstrate what different (reading in this case) comprehension levels will get you take a look at this[1].
[1] https://www.sinosplice.com/life/archives/2016/08/25/what-80-...
Agreed, but this is only a problem is you are biting more than you can chew. You can either learn the unfamiliar words to increase the comprehension rate, or find a material that is more suitable to your comprehension level. Comprehensible input is for reinforcing and contextualizing the previously learned words.
Thanks for the tips.
One thing I've noticed helps me learning language has been working hard to imagine the physical thing as opposed to the english equivalent word. That is imagining a shiny red apple when learning "manzana" instead of the word "apple". Always wondered if theres anything to back this sort of approach up or its just different learning styles.
One thing I've noticed helps me learning language has been working hard to imagine the physical thing as opposed to the english equivalent word. That is imagining a shiny red apple when learning "manzana" instead of the word "apple". Always wondered if theres anything to back this sort of approach up or its just different learning styles.
Oh totally, I've wondered the exact same thing. I started messing around with that on leerly, and there are a couple articles with a feature called Storybook, where images appear as the user is speaking, to help build the association between the foreign word/sound with an image, rather than the associated word in your target language.
I have no idea if it's effective, I just think it'd be cool to see how it helps with learning grammar. I def want to experiment more with it, but it takes a fair amount of time to add images to all the articles.
I have no idea if it's effective, I just think it'd be cool to see how it helps with learning grammar. I def want to experiment more with it, but it takes a fair amount of time to add images to all the articles.
> The most important thing is just experiencing the language. You need hundreds and hundreds of hours listening to the language to really start to acquire it. Comprehension is inevitable, just optimize for time spent listening/reading
Listening with or without subtitles? I've been trying to figure out if watching content in another language with English subtitles actually helps me at all...
Listening with or without subtitles? I've been trying to figure out if watching content in another language with English subtitles actually helps me at all...
Nope, no subtitles in your mother language. Only your target language. It's okay if you don't understand a lot, what matters is exposing yourself to the sounds and sights of the language, and the general message of what is being conveyed ("I don't know exactly what they just said, but they seemed pissed and they said 'mierda' a lot, so maybe that means something bad").
Ideally, you'll want to focus on material where you can understand the majority of what is being said, through subtitles or just listening. If you find you can't do that, try watching something that would be easier to understand.
Ideally, you'll want to focus on material where you can understand the majority of what is being said, through subtitles or just listening. If you find you can't do that, try watching something that would be easier to understand.
> - Avoid speaking. This has shown to actually hinder the process of acquiring a language. Speaking is the natural result of having learned a language. You'll notice when you're ready to start speaking a little because you'll occasionally have thoughts in your target language. Until then, speaking practice is virtually useless.
This has to be the most counterproductive advice I've ever heard. You need to start speaking as soon as possible. There's no other trick to learning a language than forcing yourself to speak.
For some it's easier because they're less socially anxious. For others it will be more difficult. I was in the latter camp learning Danish. You have to make friends with your fear or you will forever be stuck in what many language learners refer to as a "quiet period". I was for a decade (!!!) If you don't start speaking you will forever have only an intellectual understanding of the language.
So speak. Please speak. Early and often. Babies sound things out early because they're trying to get a hold of it, the vocal contortions required.
This has to be the most counterproductive advice I've ever heard. You need to start speaking as soon as possible. There's no other trick to learning a language than forcing yourself to speak.
For some it's easier because they're less socially anxious. For others it will be more difficult. I was in the latter camp learning Danish. You have to make friends with your fear or you will forever be stuck in what many language learners refer to as a "quiet period". I was for a decade (!!!) If you don't start speaking you will forever have only an intellectual understanding of the language.
So speak. Please speak. Early and often. Babies sound things out early because they're trying to get a hold of it, the vocal contortions required.
Now a result I can believe in this vein would be: "that attempting to lean heavily on sentence construction and grammar exercises to induce speaking could have a negative effect on language acquisition" and that's what I believe Stephen Krashen is actually advocating against.
But that's a very specific claim as opposed to "avoid speaking".
But that's a very specific claim as opposed to "avoid speaking".
You haven't really shown how speaking improves your understanding or comprehension of a language.
Of course you need to speak to get good at speaking, I don't think that's what the original poster meant. But rather that you should focus on comprehension initially,because there's not really much point to speaking to someone if you don't know what you want to say and cannot understand the response.
Of course you need to speak to get good at speaking, I don't think that's what the original poster meant. But rather that you should focus on comprehension initially,because there's not really much point to speaking to someone if you don't know what you want to say and cannot understand the response.
Language comprehension is a two way street. If someone thinks comprehension is a passive activity, then they're likely not fully comprehending. Comprehension requires active engagement.
When you're learning another language, there'll be countless times where you're like "ohhhh, I understand this." Then the moment you open your mouth, you'll get pretty directly told, "No, you completely misunderstood." You'll also encounter people who immediately correct your mistakes when speaking, whether they're grammatical or misusages of words.
As an example that people here might better grasp, learning a language without speaking is like learning a programming language without writing your own code. You might generally recognize the syntax and usage of various functions, but you won't truly grasp it and understand its nuances until you sit down, write, and accept that you'll make mistakes and identify them.
When you're learning another language, there'll be countless times where you're like "ohhhh, I understand this." Then the moment you open your mouth, you'll get pretty directly told, "No, you completely misunderstood." You'll also encounter people who immediately correct your mistakes when speaking, whether they're grammatical or misusages of words.
As an example that people here might better grasp, learning a language without speaking is like learning a programming language without writing your own code. You might generally recognize the syntax and usage of various functions, but you won't truly grasp it and understand its nuances until you sit down, write, and accept that you'll make mistakes and identify them.
>Comprehension requires active engagement.
I agree, but active engagement does not require speaking or writing. Listening and reading are not necessarily passive. You don't need to know how to write fluently to be able to read fluently and comprehend something, and I don't need to say something to be able to understand it. Can mute people not understand spoken word as well as people who can speak?
>As an example that people here might better grasp, learning a language without speaking is like learning a programming language without writing your own code.
>You might generally recognize the syntax and usage of various functions, but you won't truly grasp it and understand its nuances until you sit down, write, and accept that you'll make mistakes and identify them.
You'd need someone to correct your mistakes for this to work. And that can help, sure, but you can definitely internalize the correct usage of phrases, etc, from reading and listening to it being done correctly as well. Doing something incorrectly (which you will most likely do without a highly developed model of how the language works in practice) will not help on it's own.
I agree, but active engagement does not require speaking or writing. Listening and reading are not necessarily passive. You don't need to know how to write fluently to be able to read fluently and comprehend something, and I don't need to say something to be able to understand it. Can mute people not understand spoken word as well as people who can speak?
>As an example that people here might better grasp, learning a language without speaking is like learning a programming language without writing your own code.
>You might generally recognize the syntax and usage of various functions, but you won't truly grasp it and understand its nuances until you sit down, write, and accept that you'll make mistakes and identify them.
You'd need someone to correct your mistakes for this to work. And that can help, sure, but you can definitely internalize the correct usage of phrases, etc, from reading and listening to it being done correctly as well. Doing something incorrectly (which you will most likely do without a highly developed model of how the language works in practice) will not help on it's own.
People who are mute still communicate. They're not merely listeners.
If you're not practicing output, you're not truly comprehending. Output, whether it be speech, writing, or signing, is how you get and demonstrate confirmation that you comprehend.
If you're not practicing output, you're not truly comprehending. Output, whether it be speech, writing, or signing, is how you get and demonstrate confirmation that you comprehend.
If you were speaking your native language to someone who understands it, but spoke back to you in their native language that you are learning, you can get the same confirmation. I've done this before and it can work quite well. So I'm not really convinced it's necessary for comprehension. It's necessary for being able to speak of course, I don't disagree with that.
This also implies you cannot understand a language without people who can speak it to you. You can learn to read books without reading them out to someone who tells you what they mean.
Honestly, this doesn't even really make sense considering my own experience of going from not comprehending stuff like shows and podcasts to being able to almost completely understand everything being said a lot of times, without any real practice speaking to people. Unless you want to claim that I'm not actually understanding anything at all :).
This also implies you cannot understand a language without people who can speak it to you. You can learn to read books without reading them out to someone who tells you what they mean.
Honestly, this doesn't even really make sense considering my own experience of going from not comprehending stuff like shows and podcasts to being able to almost completely understand everything being said a lot of times, without any real practice speaking to people. Unless you want to claim that I'm not actually understanding anything at all :).
Hey, if it works for you, that's great! It's not necessarily what the research I've done says, but I'm glad you found a strategy that works for you.
EDIT: You may appreciate this - http://www.sdkrashen.com/content/articles/down_with_forced_s...
EDIT: You may appreciate this - http://www.sdkrashen.com/content/articles/down_with_forced_s...
The title even disagrees with your statement. And this research is entirely focused on student anxiety. "Forced output" is what the claim is against.
Even more specifically these studies are focused on beginning students (i.e. 1st term students), so it is even less applicable once you have some level of experience with the language.
There is even a section on "How to promote speaking fluency". He is 100% not advocating to avoid speaking, but it talking about how speaking is a lagging indicator of proficiency.
Speaking requires the integration of language skills, so it will always lag behind other language skills. That does not mean it should be avoided.
The Defense Language Institute (DLI) even formally recognizes in its graduation requirements. The standard is 2 Listening/2 Reading/1+ Speaking indicating that speaking skills will generally lag behind reading and listening skills by 1/2 a level.
Even more specifically these studies are focused on beginning students (i.e. 1st term students), so it is even less applicable once you have some level of experience with the language.
There is even a section on "How to promote speaking fluency". He is 100% not advocating to avoid speaking, but it talking about how speaking is a lagging indicator of proficiency.
Speaking requires the integration of language skills, so it will always lag behind other language skills. That does not mean it should be avoided.
The Defense Language Institute (DLI) even formally recognizes in its graduation requirements. The standard is 2 Listening/2 Reading/1+ Speaking indicating that speaking skills will generally lag behind reading and listening skills by 1/2 a level.
I started having thoughts in my target language after I started speaking. Until then it was just words on paper or on a screen.
wait until you dream...
I disagree with nearly all of your advice and tips. And I'd be very surprised if they reflected actual scientific findings in linguistics.
The least objectionable is the "don't translate" tip but even there I think you've gotten it wrong - translating isn't the issue - avoiding the trap of getting bogged down in trying to translate _precisely_ or being a perfectionist. But you definitely have to maintain some understanding of the context in order to get any value from subsequent exposure.
I fully disagree that you can acquire language just by osmosis - that it's enough to just listen to a language for hundreds of hours. Do you really think that if I isolated myself with hundreds of hours of say Mandarin audio recordings, TV shows and newspapers and novels and spent 40 hours a week listening to the recordings or staring at written text, that in a few months I would acquire the language? I mean if this actually worked, learning second languages wouldn't even be seen as a challenge or task.
It takes thousands of hours of active "work" with a second language to acquire it (although the data is patchy), not hundreds of hours of passive "experiencing".
And avoiding speaking is terrible advice. It's been shown to provide a huge boost to language acquisition. I know people who can read and comprehend the spoken form of a second language at a reasonably high level (C2) but can barely speak it. Speaking will not just "happen" if you don't actively practice it.
If you honestly did manage to acquire fluent Spanish purely by just passively "experiencing" the language, then I'm guessing your first language is closely related one - one of the romance languages.
The least objectionable is the "don't translate" tip but even there I think you've gotten it wrong - translating isn't the issue - avoiding the trap of getting bogged down in trying to translate _precisely_ or being a perfectionist. But you definitely have to maintain some understanding of the context in order to get any value from subsequent exposure.
I fully disagree that you can acquire language just by osmosis - that it's enough to just listen to a language for hundreds of hours. Do you really think that if I isolated myself with hundreds of hours of say Mandarin audio recordings, TV shows and newspapers and novels and spent 40 hours a week listening to the recordings or staring at written text, that in a few months I would acquire the language? I mean if this actually worked, learning second languages wouldn't even be seen as a challenge or task.
It takes thousands of hours of active "work" with a second language to acquire it (although the data is patchy), not hundreds of hours of passive "experiencing".
And avoiding speaking is terrible advice. It's been shown to provide a huge boost to language acquisition. I know people who can read and comprehend the spoken form of a second language at a reasonably high level (C2) but can barely speak it. Speaking will not just "happen" if you don't actively practice it.
If you honestly did manage to acquire fluent Spanish purely by just passively "experiencing" the language, then I'm guessing your first language is closely related one - one of the romance languages.
> Do you really think that if I isolated myself with hundreds of hours of say Mandarin audio recordings, TV shows and newspapers and novels and spent 40 hours a week listening to the recordings or staring at written text, that in a few months I would acquire the language?
Yes, it does work, according to various accounts I've seen, although 40 hours for a few months might not quite be enough (the usual figure is around 18 months of full-time immersion, and more is obviously better), and this is actually quite challenging to do for long periods of time (esp. without distracting yourself with your native language excessively) and that's why it can be a challenge.
>not hundreds of hours of passive "experiencing".
It's on the hour of thousands, not hundreds. There are people, especially in the refold community, who have reached fluency in languages very different from their native, with mostly input (active output is part of the equation, but it can be done later, after your comprehension is very high).
>Speaking will not just "happen" if you don't actively practice it.
Yes, you do need to practice speaking to get good at speaking. But from aforementioned accounts, this process can be quite fast after a high level of comprehension has been gained.
I can confirm that for myself, over the past half year or so, increasing the amount of input I get every day has greatly accelerated my japanese learning process, versus the previous year, where I got far fewer hours in (1, maybe 2 hours a day at most, versus my current 4+ hours every day), although I'm not fluent yet.
In just that time I went from barely being able to read, and only being able to understand simple beginner podcasts to being able to fully understand easier shows (stuff for adults is still mostly out of my reach), and understand most of all the podcasts I listen to, (as long as I'm actually focused on the audio, if I'm passively listening I don't understand as much). My reading hasn't improved as much, as I spend probably 80% of the time listening/watching shows versus reading, but I can read basic manga easily now, and I'm working on reading through some essays now, novels still seems massively difficult, but we'll see in another couple months.
I've found that many hours of audio input each day have greatly improved my ability to keep up with native-speed speaking, although for increasing my comprehension, intensive study (making sure I understand each line in a show, or careful reading) is more effective per unit of time. I have no doubt you could acquire the same results as intensive study with enough exposure to the language though, as I've seen it happen with myself before I tried adding intensive study, it would just take more time.
Most people wouldn't call 4 hours a day massive though, so I can probably still increase my rate of improvement if I find more time to use.
Yes, it does work, according to various accounts I've seen, although 40 hours for a few months might not quite be enough (the usual figure is around 18 months of full-time immersion, and more is obviously better), and this is actually quite challenging to do for long periods of time (esp. without distracting yourself with your native language excessively) and that's why it can be a challenge.
>not hundreds of hours of passive "experiencing".
It's on the hour of thousands, not hundreds. There are people, especially in the refold community, who have reached fluency in languages very different from their native, with mostly input (active output is part of the equation, but it can be done later, after your comprehension is very high).
>Speaking will not just "happen" if you don't actively practice it.
Yes, you do need to practice speaking to get good at speaking. But from aforementioned accounts, this process can be quite fast after a high level of comprehension has been gained.
I can confirm that for myself, over the past half year or so, increasing the amount of input I get every day has greatly accelerated my japanese learning process, versus the previous year, where I got far fewer hours in (1, maybe 2 hours a day at most, versus my current 4+ hours every day), although I'm not fluent yet.
In just that time I went from barely being able to read, and only being able to understand simple beginner podcasts to being able to fully understand easier shows (stuff for adults is still mostly out of my reach), and understand most of all the podcasts I listen to, (as long as I'm actually focused on the audio, if I'm passively listening I don't understand as much). My reading hasn't improved as much, as I spend probably 80% of the time listening/watching shows versus reading, but I can read basic manga easily now, and I'm working on reading through some essays now, novels still seems massively difficult, but we'll see in another couple months.
I've found that many hours of audio input each day have greatly improved my ability to keep up with native-speed speaking, although for increasing my comprehension, intensive study (making sure I understand each line in a show, or careful reading) is more effective per unit of time. I have no doubt you could acquire the same results as intensive study with enough exposure to the language though, as I've seen it happen with myself before I tried adding intensive study, it would just take more time.
Most people wouldn't call 4 hours a day massive though, so I can probably still increase my rate of improvement if I find more time to use.
> Yes, it does work, according to various accounts I've seen, although 40 hours for a few months might not quite be enough (the usual figure is around 18 months of full-time immersion, and more is obviously better)
Could you provide a reference to these studies or accounts?
The original claim was a second language can be acquire by hundreds of hours of passive "experiencing". Your claim of 18 months full time is more like 6,000 hours if by full-time you mean all-day. This is more than an order of magnitude more than the original claim and 2 to 5 times more than then numbers I've seen in studies on how many hours it takes to achieve C1 level in a second language using regular teaching/learning techniques. There is significant variance depending on the the relationship between the learner's first language and the L2.
So even if it worked (and I'm dubious - learning anything requires some effort/active practice) spending 7,000 hours of passive "experiencing" would be a hugely inefficient way to learn a language.
Could you provide a reference to these studies or accounts?
The original claim was a second language can be acquire by hundreds of hours of passive "experiencing". Your claim of 18 months full time is more like 6,000 hours if by full-time you mean all-day. This is more than an order of magnitude more than the original claim and 2 to 5 times more than then numbers I've seen in studies on how many hours it takes to achieve C1 level in a second language using regular teaching/learning techniques. There is significant variance depending on the the relationship between the learner's first language and the L2.
So even if it worked (and I'm dubious - learning anything requires some effort/active practice) spending 7,000 hours of passive "experiencing" would be a hugely inefficient way to learn a language.
Perhaps we are having some miscommunication here. I don't know if the original poster was making a precise statement when they said "hundreds and hundreds of hours" anyway.
>Could you provide a reference to these studies or accounts? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxYZvMByRjU&list=PLT9cfjU1yk...
I haven't watched any of these videos in a while so I don't remember which ones are good, and it's a lot to go through, sorry about that. But there are some accounts here of people who have followed "mostly-input" style methods. I don't think any of them are 100% passive input though, and I'm not sure anybody argued that is the best way to do it.
I also seem to remember a study I found recently on whether uncomprehensible input works for language acquisition with very interesting results, but I cannot find it right now.
>spending 7,000 hours of passive "experiencing" would be a hugely inefficient way to learn a language
The efficiency really depends on if it's something you want to do or not, but I don't know if anybody is doing a full 12 hours a day (maybe some super hardcore people). I believe it's closer to 6, maybe 8 hours if you're very serious about it and have the time.
>learning anything requires some effort/active practice
Yes, you need to actually try to understand what you're listening to at least part of the time, maybe most of the time, which means you need to be actually interested in the content, otherwise you will get bored quickly. But passive listening while you are doing other things definitely helps in combination with active study.
I'm not sure if we're using "passive" in the same way though. Actively focusing on, and trying to understand what you are listening to isn't what I'd call passive.
>Could you provide a reference to these studies or accounts? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxYZvMByRjU&list=PLT9cfjU1yk...
I haven't watched any of these videos in a while so I don't remember which ones are good, and it's a lot to go through, sorry about that. But there are some accounts here of people who have followed "mostly-input" style methods. I don't think any of them are 100% passive input though, and I'm not sure anybody argued that is the best way to do it.
I also seem to remember a study I found recently on whether uncomprehensible input works for language acquisition with very interesting results, but I cannot find it right now.
>spending 7,000 hours of passive "experiencing" would be a hugely inefficient way to learn a language
The efficiency really depends on if it's something you want to do or not, but I don't know if anybody is doing a full 12 hours a day (maybe some super hardcore people). I believe it's closer to 6, maybe 8 hours if you're very serious about it and have the time.
>learning anything requires some effort/active practice
Yes, you need to actually try to understand what you're listening to at least part of the time, maybe most of the time, which means you need to be actually interested in the content, otherwise you will get bored quickly. But passive listening while you are doing other things definitely helps in combination with active study.
I'm not sure if we're using "passive" in the same way though. Actively focusing on, and trying to understand what you are listening to isn't what I'd call passive.
Taking 4 hours out of my day is pretty massive. Between sleep, work, kid and basic household chores I wouldn't have 4 hours a day ever.
Yes, it also feels like a lot to me, but it has become much easier to do as my comprehension has gone up. But most of that is not actually taking time out of my day. I go on walks every day, listening to podcasts at the same time. While I do chores, browse the internet, or drive somewhere, I do the same thing. This usually adds up to at least 2 hours a day. On top of that I make sure to do some reading, then try to watch a show or two in japanese on top of that.
I suppose this last year has been quite good for immersion style learning, since there wasn't much else to do except stay inside.
Of course, those with less responsibilities can spend much more time doing this, and most of the success stories where people get truly excellent results in short amounts of time are from high school or college students. I don't mind if it takes a bit more time for me :).
I suppose this last year has been quite good for immersion style learning, since there wasn't much else to do except stay inside.
Of course, those with less responsibilities can spend much more time doing this, and most of the success stories where people get truly excellent results in short amounts of time are from high school or college students. I don't mind if it takes a bit more time for me :).
Paying member here -- I've used it to slowly, sentence by sentence, watch a full season of a Taiwanese workplace drama over the past few months.
One of the best parts of LLwN as a way to study is the passive encouragement: you can click on a word to mark it as "known", and then it always shows up green in future subtitles.
Pretty soon, entire multi-line subtitles start showing up all green. And for me at least, that provides a huge confidence boost that helps me keep going.
Instead of seeing each new subtitle as a challenge ("<Deep breath> here we go..."), you think, "It's all green! I already know everything here! I just have to read it!" And that's made a huge difference in how it feels to study.
I wish Kindle had a similar feature for books.
One of the best parts of LLwN as a way to study is the passive encouragement: you can click on a word to mark it as "known", and then it always shows up green in future subtitles.
Pretty soon, entire multi-line subtitles start showing up all green. And for me at least, that provides a huge confidence boost that helps me keep going.
Instead of seeing each new subtitle as a challenge ("<Deep breath> here we go..."), you think, "It's all green! I already know everything here! I just have to read it!" And that's made a huge difference in how it feels to study.
I wish Kindle had a similar feature for books.
If you want a similar experience with text, I can recommend Learning with Texts (LWT) if you want a self-hosted experience and you are okay putting in some work to setting things up. Basically you feed it some text and it lets you click on words and define their meaning as well as how well you know the word, from 1-5 + "Known" status.
There is also LingQ which is a paid and proprietary service, but it has a ton of content as well as no real setup required. It has an already populated pop-up dictionary and many texts to pick from. LWT was inspired from LingQ if I remember correctly.
I've used both and can recommend both depending on what experience you are after, I switched to LWT however to save some money and gain some control. I also happen to prefer the experience using LWT. If you're interested in LingQ, be warned LingQ has a pretty scummy subscription cancellation sequence, requiring you to click through 5+ screens of offers and "are you sure?" pages, as well as them threatening with deleting your account data. My data seems intact after the cancellation though.
https://learning-with-texts.sourceforge.io/
https://www.lingq.com/en/
There is also LingQ which is a paid and proprietary service, but it has a ton of content as well as no real setup required. It has an already populated pop-up dictionary and many texts to pick from. LWT was inspired from LingQ if I remember correctly.
I've used both and can recommend both depending on what experience you are after, I switched to LWT however to save some money and gain some control. I also happen to prefer the experience using LWT. If you're interested in LingQ, be warned LingQ has a pretty scummy subscription cancellation sequence, requiring you to click through 5+ screens of offers and "are you sure?" pages, as well as them threatening with deleting your account data. My data seems intact after the cancellation though.
https://learning-with-texts.sourceforge.io/
https://www.lingq.com/en/
What's the name of the Taiwanese workplace drama?
For people learning Mandarin I provide some information including word lists for a lot of shows on Netflix here:
http://www.jiong3.com/gradedwatching/
For people learning Mandarin I provide some information including word lists for a lot of shows on Netflix here:
http://www.jiong3.com/gradedwatching/
This is amazing! Thank you for putting it together.
The show is called Office Girls. Friend in my Mandarin class recommended it as being fairly simple once you get past some office-related vocabulary. “Rich kid has to pose as poor kid and work his way up from the ground floor of dads business” story.
The show is called Office Girls. Friend in my Mandarin class recommended it as being fairly simple once you get past some office-related vocabulary. “Rich kid has to pose as poor kid and work his way up from the ground floor of dads business” story.
Thanks! I've actually watched that one a while ago but it's not available on Netflix in my region so couldn't get the subtitles to add it to the list. The version on youtube only has hardsubs, unfortunately.
I'm working on a language app and thinking about focusing on Mandarin. I would love your feedback on the lesson format:
https://chatlesson.com
https://chatlesson.com
Fantastic! Thank you for sharing. Do you actually practice them? Or what's your approach to using them? I add vocabulary to Pleco faster than the space repetition shows them so it doesn't seem like an effective way to use them.
Also searches don't seem to access stored vocab first so it doesn't actually make searching that much faster either.
Also searches don't seem to access stored vocab first so it doesn't actually make searching that much faster either.
It depends. Sometimes I really learn all the words before watching, sometimes I just watch something without any preparation.
Adding too many words to Pleco SRS over a short time doesn't work well, you will get overwhelmed with reviews quickly. So if I decide to study the words for a tv show I take some time between the episodes to prepare for the next ones, depending on how many words I have to learn it could be days or weeks.
Which searches are you referring to?
Adding too many words to Pleco SRS over a short time doesn't work well, you will get overwhelmed with reviews quickly. So if I decide to study the words for a tv show I take some time between the episodes to prepare for the next ones, depending on how many words I have to learn it could be days or weeks.
Which searches are you referring to?
Great.
1. Where can I get the movies?
Many chinese movies are incredibly boring. This one is an exception and I did not see it on the list
2. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7180392/
1. Where can I get the movies?
Many chinese movies are incredibly boring. This one is an exception and I did not see it on the list
2. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7180392/
Oh wow - this is awesome!
This is great!
That's interesting. I have been using this plugin for years, but only for passive learning - just to watch things on Netflix with dual subtitles (and to unlock subs in more languages than the Netflix UI would allow). Will take another look at the other functionalities.
This is a tangent, but has any noticed just how terrible Netflix subtitles can be? Occasionally, when watching with family members, I will enable Swedish subtitles for English movies and sometimes it's as if they have worked on a different material than what the actors on screen are saying. It's bizarre to see this low quality effort in movie after movie, show after show.
Yes! The subtitles can be completely different than the dubbing in some cases which makes it difficult for me to watch with both.
Also, they sometime use a bit odd translations. I saw a Belgian show and they translated smoking a cigarette into smoking a fag. Which I guess is technically correct (based on the cambridge dictionary), just an odd choice for general EU viewership
Also, they sometime use a bit odd translations. I saw a Belgian show and they translated smoking a cigarette into smoking a fag. Which I guess is technically correct (based on the cambridge dictionary), just an odd choice for general EU viewership
Yes! The subtitles can be completely different than the dubbing in some cases which makes it difficult for me to watch with both.
I suspect in many cases the subbing is done translating off the original script, while the dubbing is done using a completely different translation designed to flow better when spoken.
I suspect in many cases the subbing is done translating off the original script, while the dubbing is done using a completely different translation designed to flow better when spoken.
Dub-oriented translations are also designed to "look natural" when coupled with the actor's lip movements.
To make matters worse, sometimes shows are re-dubbed [0], but may retain the subtitles that were accurate to the previous dub.
[0]: For instance, Neon Genesis Evangelion was released on the Italian Netflix with a brand-new dub, which caused quite a commotion: https://comicbook.com/anime/news/neon-genesis-evangelion-net...
To make matters worse, sometimes shows are re-dubbed [0], but may retain the subtitles that were accurate to the previous dub.
[0]: For instance, Neon Genesis Evangelion was released on the Italian Netflix with a brand-new dub, which caused quite a commotion: https://comicbook.com/anime/news/neon-genesis-evangelion-net...
This seems to be the case. Watching the Spanish dubbed version of Community on Hulu, the dubs have the study group taking an English class, while the subs have them in a Spanish class as in the original.
Side note: in the dubbed version, it's hilarious when they switch to speaking bad English where they would have switched to bad Spanish in the original.
Side note: in the dubbed version, it's hilarious when they switch to speaking bad English where they would have switched to bad Spanish in the original.
> Yes! The subtitles can be completely different than the dubbing in some cases which makes it difficult for me to watch with both.
Yeah I've tried Czech dubbing with Czech subtitles, but have a lot of trouble following it for this reason. I'm sure once I get better at Czech it'll make more sense, but for the moment it seems like I need to stick with Czech audio and English subtitles or vice versa. Otherwise it's just too confusing.
Yeah I've tried Czech dubbing with Czech subtitles, but have a lot of trouble following it for this reason. I'm sure once I get better at Czech it'll make more sense, but for the moment it seems like I need to stick with Czech audio and English subtitles or vice versa. Otherwise it's just too confusing.
If you can access the videos on česká televize (presumably you're based here if you are learning Czech) I've found them to be quite useful as they generally provide an option to turn on subtitles that match the audio. Like this kids show I used to watch with my teacher in our lessons: https://decko.ceskatelevize.cz/chaloupka-na-vrsku :D
Thank you very much! I do watch things on česká televize, but I will definitely check out that kids show!
And no not based there, but I do have a VPN so it's all good. Thanks again!
And no not based there, but I do have a VPN so it's all good. Thanks again!
I also liked “Anča a Pepik” - a show about two mice who solve mysteries :-D Hodně štěstí!
That's amazing that you're studying Czech. It's a very difficult language, so kudos.
I don't know if I'd call it "amazing", but yes it is pretty difficult for me. :)
I'm generally pretty good at languages, but all languages I speak and have experience in are either Germanic or Romance. Learning Czech is cool because it is a little related (it is an Indo-European language and you can definitely see that if you pay attention), but different enough that it is really pretty difficult. I'm having a lot of fun with it. Hopefully I'll be able to spend a longer period of time there so I can be more immersed in it.
I'm generally pretty good at languages, but all languages I speak and have experience in are either Germanic or Romance. Learning Czech is cool because it is a little related (it is an Indo-European language and you can definitely see that if you pay attention), but different enough that it is really pretty difficult. I'm having a lot of fun with it. Hopefully I'll be able to spend a longer period of time there so I can be more immersed in it.
Basically, only English has a tradition where in closed captions, the spoken word matches the text. In many other languages, even for original content, even for subtitles that are a hearing aid, the text often won’t match. For example in French.
I guess the desire is to shorten the text to make it easier to read in time, but it’s kind of ironic that it’s called „subtitles for the ones with bad hearing“. Non-matching subtitles are not a hearing aid, but a hearing replacement.
I guess the desire is to shorten the text to make it easier to read in time, but it’s kind of ironic that it’s called „subtitles for the ones with bad hearing“. Non-matching subtitles are not a hearing aid, but a hearing replacement.
I've only ever seen this when something was dubbed, not when the original content language matches the subtitle language. Do you have any examples?
In Frech, Dubbed content is what one often used for learning, because it’s content one already knows (for example I always wanted to use star trek shows for learning frech cuz i know them in and out, but can’t find a dub with matching subs).
Then again, on Netflix even some of the original language content has shortened subtitles.
I have never found Asterix (the animated movies) with proper closed captioning.
Then again, on Netflix even some of the original language content has shortened subtitles.
I have never found Asterix (the animated movies) with proper closed captioning.
The LLwN catalogue of good subbed French content does list an Astrix movie, perhaps that one does have good subs?
https://languagelearningwithnetflix.com/catalogue.html#langu...
https://languagelearningwithnetflix.com/catalogue.html#langu...
I can’t believe that - subtitles don’t match the spoken word outside of English? Isn’t that extremely jarring if it’s the same language?
I think it is because the speed which subtitles need to be shown at if it would be word for word. It would be too fast for many viewers. Usually (I am talking from a Swedish context), they are a 60-75% summary of what is being said.
Super common in French, and was a big hurdle in learning the language through movies/ TV.
I don’t want to put English subtitles, but sometimes I have trouble with accents. My best guess why would be that they are translated independently and at different times by different people. Some shows almost every single line is different.
I don’t want to put English subtitles, but sometimes I have trouble with accents. My best guess why would be that they are translated independently and at different times by different people. Some shows almost every single line is different.
Yes
They traditionally had trained translators, a friend worked for them. He's since been let go, with no warning about quality being an issue, leaving me to believe they have replaced him with machines or cheaper workers. I also watch with subtitles and notice the decline.
I was under the impression that most of the English -> English subtitles are just machine generated. So often the subtitles will be homophonic to what was actually said, a mistake that a human would not have made. And then what's worse is you get [Speaking German] or whatever, so I have to pause, disable the subtitles and rewind, just to be able to see the original subtitle that was included for the vitally important to the plot translation of the foreign language.
I've tried watching dubbed+subbed shows, with both set to my target language, and the two rarely ever match for any given line of dialogue. Netflix has thankfully expanded their language capabilities recently to make it easier to watch shows in an arbitrary language (used to have to change the entire interface into the target language), but I wish there were a CC option for all choices of audio.
This is because the subtiters and dubbers usually work independently and face different constraints.
The key is to find content that was originally produced in the language you want to learn so that the subtitles will match.
The key is to find content that was originally produced in the language you want to learn so that the subtitles will match.
I don't think this is specific to Netflix, Swedish subtitles are routinely awful and badly translated across a variety of media.
For non-major-languages subtitles, they use (mostly) machine translation. For major languages, they use people.
Which is weird because it seems like the perfect use of crowd sourced knowledge. You could probably get translations just by offering free subscriptions. I think you'd see a bit of national pride help fuel it too: I'd love to see regional variations/dialects. (For instance, Quebec French). You could even have crowd verification like what Google Translate and Duolingo do.
Wouldn't it be a mess? 'Reddit translates Netflix'? I see what your saying about 'crowd verification', but how do you filter out 'upvoted for lolz'?
There are things you could do of course, I just don't think it's trivial.
There are things you could do of course, I just don't think it's trivial.
Businesses to operate at scale generally require more reliable pipelines. And who is going to check the crowd-sourced translations then? What about a TikTok-like trolling exercise like the one who was done for Trump's rally?
I've definitely noticed some pretty bad mistranslations in Netflix subtitles but not worse than general movie subtitles.
I feel Netflix's subtitle quality is slightly better than average for Japanese.
As an active learner of the Turkish language this tool is really held back by using Netflix' own subtitles. First of all if you go to their website and u look for Turkish content, it only lists shows created for the Turkish market, yet there's so much more content available with Turkish dubs and subs like Ninjago, Pokemon, Paw Patrol that likely have easier vocabulary, cause it's target at kids. And yet again the subs sometimes hardly match the dubs, which therefore doesn't help with hearing comprehension at all. If anyone can suggest good alternatives to practice hearing comprehension at different levels (even payed ones) I would really appreciate it.
[deleted]
> Immersion doesn't mean you have to pack your bags and move to Europe.
Joke's on you, I've lived in Europe my whole life.
Joke's on you, I've lived in Europe my whole life.
Good news, now you no longer have to!
Too bad my target language isn't spoken in Europe (or my home country)
The video shows subtitles in two languages for each spoken sentence. Does this use ASR or the official multilingual subtitles? I found that even monolingually, subtitles can sometimes divert from what is actually spoken on screen. I assume that if just the existing subtitles are used, they are not exact translations from one another either?
Also, longer dialogs are often split into two screens - this should be an additional synchronization challenge between the two languages, right?
Also, longer dialogs are often split into two screens - this should be an additional synchronization challenge between the two languages, right?
Afaik it uses the built in subtitles. You can also turn off the second language.
I met a young woman in Chile who had an amazingly clear accent when speaking English. She learned English from watching American TV and listening to American music. It was way better than any English I heard from teenagers learning it in school.
Learning English by watching Friends was so common, AFAIK all over the world, that it achieved cliché status, 10-20 years ago. May not be the case anymore.
It would be really cool if this worked with Firefox. Anyone know of a compatibility layer which would allow this to work?
Is there a similar application but for movies/tv shows stored locally?
I use PotPlayer, which can show two subtitles at once; also, when you click on a word, it can search it in the search engine of your choice (e.g. a dictionary). You can also add multiple search engines (as well as "Copy to clipboard" command) accessible when you right click a word instead of left clicking. You can also assign a shortcut (e.g. Ctrl+C) to copy the whole subtitle visible on the screen, to paste in Google Translate etc. I use all of those features, and it significantly helped in my English learning in my teens (and later other languages).
Previously I used KMPlayer by the same developer, which supported not just two but three simultaneous subtitles (which I sometimes used, as strange as it may sound); but I switched to PotPlayer when he sold the program and it started to be bundled with ads.
Both programs are only available on Windows, and lack of something as featureful and customizable as PotPlayer was one of the reasons my brief flirtation with Linux at the start of this year wasn't that satisfactory. But if all you want is multiple subtitles, I found SMPlayer on Linux that did the job; but the features of PotPlayer/KMPlayer is simply unmatched (beyond just language learning).
Previously I used KMPlayer by the same developer, which supported not just two but three simultaneous subtitles (which I sometimes used, as strange as it may sound); but I switched to PotPlayer when he sold the program and it started to be bundled with ads.
Both programs are only available on Windows, and lack of something as featureful and customizable as PotPlayer was one of the reasons my brief flirtation with Linux at the start of this year wasn't that satisfactory. But if all you want is multiple subtitles, I found SMPlayer on Linux that did the job; but the features of PotPlayer/KMPlayer is simply unmatched (beyond just language learning).
https://animebook.github.io/
never mind the 'anime' in the name, it's just a web video player that supports nearly every format and has good subtitle integration.
you'll need a hover/popup dictionary (for example, for Japanese Yomichan is popular) to go with it
never mind the 'anime' in the name, it's just a web video player that supports nearly every format and has good subtitle integration.
you'll need a hover/popup dictionary (for example, for Japanese Yomichan is popular) to go with it
[deleted]
I don't use netflix because of the ethical issues associated with drm and nonfree software.
I've been learning japanese for nearly a year using yomichan[0] mpv, mpvacious[1], and anki[2].
There is a fair bit of setup involved: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbg6ztWecbU&t=0
[0] https://foosoft.net/projects/yomichan/
[1] https://github.com/Ajatt-Tools/mpvacious
[2] https://apps.ankiweb.net/
I've been learning japanese for nearly a year using yomichan[0] mpv, mpvacious[1], and anki[2].
There is a fair bit of setup involved: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbg6ztWecbU&t=0
[0] https://foosoft.net/projects/yomichan/
[1] https://github.com/Ajatt-Tools/mpvacious
[2] https://apps.ankiweb.net/
You could try my app: https://video.fluentcards.com
Haven't tested it in a while.
Haven't tested it in a while.
Oh hey it's that fluentcards video HTML! Bit of a blast from the past. Kudos again!
A VLC plugin or somesuch would be nice
That's what I think to myself every time those language learning extensions/apps come up. Sadly the VLC code is not very well documented and the extension guide on the wiki is pretty bare as well.
I'm guessing one would have to extend the freetype text renderer but that's a tall order.
There's MPV plugins, but they require a lot of setup. Some good web based alternatives were suggested in other replies to the parent.
I used Fleex (https://fleex.tv) when I was a teenager. It worked really well. You can use it with Netflix and local files by fetching subtitles from Opensubtitles, which is pretty smart
I am learning Mandarin and found this super useful when watching shows. The ability to slow down and replay sentences quickly, as well as show Pinying is great!
Just the other day I watched a Taiwanese movie called "Classmates minus", which was quite good.
Just the other day I watched a Taiwanese movie called "Classmates minus", which was quite good.
I'm working on a language app and thinking about pivoting to focus on Mandarin. I would love your feedback on the lesson format:
https://chatlesson.com
https://chatlesson.com
It might come as a surprise to some but subtitles on Netflix are covered by a license agreement. Some are available in countries and not in others. So this raises some interesting questions on the legality of it all.
As far as I'm aware it only provides subtitles that are available for your market on Netflix. (I.E it uses netflix's subtitles... it doesn't provide it's own.)
I tried using this for a few days. I found it incredibly frustrating, partially because the subtitles in Finnish were so dumbed down from the actual English-language dialogue.
I used this tool and loved it. It works best when the original content is in your content language so the audio matches the subtitles.
LLwN provides a nice catalog to find such content which can be very useful even if you don't use the browser extension (such as watching on platforms that don't have Chrome.)
https://languagelearningwithnetflix.com/catalogue.html
LLwN provides a nice catalog to find such content which can be very useful even if you don't use the browser extension (such as watching on platforms that don't have Chrome.)
https://languagelearningwithnetflix.com/catalogue.html
Excellent, Is there something similar which pops up a dictionary on screen when a word from the subtitle is clicked?
A user on my problem validation platform was asking for such a solution[1].
[1] https://needgap.com/problems/201-show-meaning-of-words-in-a-...
A user on my problem validation platform was asking for such a solution[1].
[1] https://needgap.com/problems/201-show-meaning-of-words-in-a-...
Tools like this are great because they give you access to in-context example sentences.
Textbooks often start with grammar and layer sentences on top. I prefer taking a real conversation and breaking it down. If I can see myself saying that sentence, then its guaranteed to be useful.
My project tries to achieve this with a chatbot-style lesson format:
chatlesson.com
Textbooks often start with grammar and layer sentences on top. I prefer taking a real conversation and breaking it down. If I can see myself saying that sentence, then its guaranteed to be useful.
My project tries to achieve this with a chatbot-style lesson format:
chatlesson.com
I wonder if this is legal, ie transforming creative works to be language learning tools, and inserting themselves into Netflix like this, and also using the Netflix name in their own name.
Not saying it shouldn't be legal, I'm just wondering whether they could get sued by Netflix or the copyright holders and lose.
Not saying it shouldn't be legal, I'm just wondering whether they could get sued by Netflix or the copyright holders and lose.
Trying to predict what a court would find fair use is incredibly difficult in the US, and it's hard to have much better accuracy than a coin flip if the answer is less than completely obvious. In practice, it seems that fair use is pretty much decided on a gut reaction first and then the analysis is motivated to arrive at that gut reaction.
A good example of that effect is Thomas's fair use analysis in Google v Oracle a few months ago, which can be summed up as "Google made buttloads of money from Android, Oracle saw not a dime, how can that be fair?" This kind of analysis I think tends to be the more the common one in courts. However, only one other justice agreed with that analysis; Breyer had 5 other justices sign onto his fair use analysis instead, which argues (in part) that transformativeness is more important than commerciality as a factor.
It remains to be seen how lower courts will apply Google v Oracle to fair use cases; if they will see it as something limited to software and ignore it for everything else. Indeed, I'm not certain that you'd see the same strong majority for a similar fair use ruling if it involved more traditional copyrighted content such as movies.
That said, I'm not sure that this is even distributing Netflix content in a way that violates copyright in the first place, which nullifies any need for fair use analysis period.
A good example of that effect is Thomas's fair use analysis in Google v Oracle a few months ago, which can be summed up as "Google made buttloads of money from Android, Oracle saw not a dime, how can that be fair?" This kind of analysis I think tends to be the more the common one in courts. However, only one other justice agreed with that analysis; Breyer had 5 other justices sign onto his fair use analysis instead, which argues (in part) that transformativeness is more important than commerciality as a factor.
It remains to be seen how lower courts will apply Google v Oracle to fair use cases; if they will see it as something limited to software and ignore it for everything else. Indeed, I'm not certain that you'd see the same strong majority for a similar fair use ruling if it involved more traditional copyrighted content such as movies.
That said, I'm not sure that this is even distributing Netflix content in a way that violates copyright in the first place, which nullifies any need for fair use analysis period.
I'm working on something similar, so I may be biased but I'd say no. It's something that transforms and integrates with the content in your browser to facilitate learning. I think fair use applies because 1. it's for educational purposes 2. it does not diminish or compete with the value of the original copyright owner since the content is not copied to some separate site, and subscriptions/ads still apply (unless of course they also start a language learning business)
The name "Netflix" though seems troublesome, I agree.
The name "Netflix" though seems troublesome, I agree.
For-profit education does not get a free pass in fair use.
> transforms and integrates with the content in your browser
"Integrates with" and "browser" are irrelevant technical details.
I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not sure, but for example Grand Theft Auto's publisher shut down efforts in the computer vision industry to use their game as a training data generation engine for self-driving car research. That's why I'm also wondering how the law deals with using things you have a license for in different ways, for different purposes than originally intended.
> transforms and integrates with the content in your browser
"Integrates with" and "browser" are irrelevant technical details.
I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not sure, but for example Grand Theft Auto's publisher shut down efforts in the computer vision industry to use their game as a training data generation engine for self-driving car research. That's why I'm also wondering how the law deals with using things you have a license for in different ways, for different purposes than originally intended.
By that logic any Chrome extension that modifies the contents of a copyrighted web page is illegal. Holding up an automatic translation device to translate what is being said on the TV would be illegal etc. There are nuances of course, but I don't think it's a problem here.
> That's why I'm also wondering how the law deals with using things you have a license for in different ways, for different purposes than originally intended.
I really don't know much about law, just trying to apply my common sense here. I think the difference in this case is that there is a single customer that _uses_ the extension to modify their experience, not a large corporation using a product (game engine and content) for unlicensed purposes. I could see why Rockstar would potentially want to keep the right to license the engine for these simulation purposes in the future, in which case they'd have to block this kind of use of the game directly.
> That's why I'm also wondering how the law deals with using things you have a license for in different ways, for different purposes than originally intended.
I really don't know much about law, just trying to apply my common sense here. I think the difference in this case is that there is a single customer that _uses_ the extension to modify their experience, not a large corporation using a product (game engine and content) for unlicensed purposes. I could see why Rockstar would potentially want to keep the right to license the engine for these simulation purposes in the future, in which case they'd have to block this kind of use of the game directly.
> Grand Theft Auto's publisher shut down efforts in the computer vision industry to use their game as a training data generation engine for self-driving car research.
Did they? The GTA5 dataset is still up https://download.visinf.tu-darmstadt.de/data/from_games/ and widely used. I've never heard about any legal issues with it.
Did they? The GTA5 dataset is still up https://download.visinf.tu-darmstadt.de/data/from_games/ and widely used. I've never heard about any legal issues with it.
Yes. I know many people still use it and if you're just a small university lab, Take-Two probably won't come after you. They still don't allow it, and researchers literally don't care (to the extent of not even knowing that there may be something to care about), us CS folks don't like to think about legal matters.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/aarontilley/2017/10/04/grand-th...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/aarontilley/2017/10/04/grand-th...
It appears that some people were distributing modified copies of the game or selling access to it as a driving simulator. In that case I agree that it's copyright infringement, in the same way that distributing modified copies of Photoshop or selling access to it as a cloud service would infringe on Adobe's copyright.
But that's different from using the game to generate data and only sharing that data (or using Photoshop to draw a picture) since there cannot be copyright infringement without copying.
Since LLwN requires the users themselves to obtain access to the content they want to study, there's no copying happening beyond what the user has the license to do, and hence no copyright infringement.
But that's different from using the game to generate data and only sharing that data (or using Photoshop to draw a picture) since there cannot be copyright infringement without copying.
Since LLwN requires the users themselves to obtain access to the content they want to study, there's no copying happening beyond what the user has the license to do, and hence no copyright infringement.
Add subtitles and translation to ads and you're safe. Now that I think about it this may unironically be a decent selling point.
What a shame there is only one available Romanian title, since that's the language I'm learning.
Are you allowed to use a private company's name like this? Not trying to be annoying, just curious.
Usually most companies are okay if you have titles or names like “X for Netflix”. Some even explicitly state that they prefer that. It’s also a rule on the Apple App Stores that you can’t have a name like “Netflix X” to avoid confusion.
Use a private company's name like saying "a printer cartridge for HP laser" or "Toughshell TM case for iPhone 9"? I'd reckon it's quite hard to sell anything specific if the law prevented you from mentioning the thing your product fits or works with
Contrast "Language Learning by Netflix"
Contrast "Language Learning by Netflix"
I love this extension. I also love YouTube version of this extension but it's not flawless as like Netflix version because of it relies on machine translation with randomly devided sentence by auto transcribe. Also some videos are never transcribed for unknown reason.
It says: "connection failure" for me. Anybody else having issues accessing the site?
There's a related thread for this also --> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27432408
Fastly is down, impacting lot of sites
Fastly is down, impacting lot of sites
Strange, I've been getting these for lots of different sites this morning, I wonder if this is a cloudflare issue
Getting multiple 503 errors to different sites.
now, you can access i guess, since fastly is back
Getting a 503 now.
The Varnish error is almost identical to that of the Guardian (newspaper) website in the UK—wondering if they're both using CloudFlare and that it's CloudFlare that is having the issue?
Edit: Perhaps related to this ongoing Fastly outage (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27432408), https://fastly.com returns the same kind of Varnish error and Github currently has no assets being served in their web UI.
Edit: Perhaps related to this ongoing Fastly outage (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27432408), https://fastly.com returns the same kind of Varnish error and Github currently has no assets being served in their web UI.
Met too
Every time I see a language learning tool posted, I look to see if they have Armenian, a language I have been trying to learn for almost a decade. This one fails the test, but so have all the others.
Apparently they are also hosted using fastly which is down.
HN discussion here: https://fastly.com/
HN discussion here: https://fastly.com/
What is the difference to https://www.viki.com/ ?
suggestion: sometimes it is better to be challenged and not to translate everything. I wish there was a way to only translate some of the world with some dictionary of words you don't want to translate.(you already know them)
I built something based on that principle. It picks a couple nouns from the subtitles and translates that. Its blanks everything else out. You can still follow the story while passively learning the nouns.
https://github.com/sutble/netflixlingo
https://github.com/sutble/netflixlingo
I'm working on a side project that does exactly that: translate everything except some words.
When I will have something ready I will add a comment in this thread
When I will have something ready I will add a comment in this thread
You can check out my project as well, which does something similar.
https://github.com/sutble/netflixlingo
https://github.com/sutble/netflixlingo
Unless you're about to finish it today, you should probably post it as a "Show HN", otherwise almost nobody is going to see it.
I really like this idea of leaving gaps every since I came across the videos by ItsNachoTime / DeliberateSpanish. Here is an example: https://youtu.be/7kbACgcnG8M?t=83
The idea is basically: Once the fill-in-the-blank text appears, stop the video, try to recall the previous sentence (letting the template help you) and repeat it until you can articulate it fluently – that way, you will improve your vocab but also train your hears, pronunciation and intonation.
The idea is basically: Once the fill-in-the-blank text appears, stop the video, try to recall the previous sentence (letting the template help you) and repeat it until you can articulate it fluently – that way, you will improve your vocab but also train your hears, pronunciation and intonation.
I should try this out. It's gotta be better than the quiz-by-quiz no-context vocab lessons that Duolingo does.
I'm working on a chatbot-style lesson format that gives more context:
https://chatlesson.com
https://chatlesson.com
- Don't translate! If you do, do so very sparingly. It sounds counter-intuitive, but stopping to translate often will just slow you down. That's because...
- The most important thing is just experiencing the language. You need hundreds and hundreds of hours listening to the language to really start to acquire it. Comprehension is inevitable, just optimize for time spent listening/reading.
- Avoid speaking. This has shown to actually hinder the process of acquiring a language. Speaking is the natural result of having learned a language. You'll notice when you're ready to start speaking a little because you'll occasionally have thoughts in your target language. Until then, speaking practice is virtually useless.
Maybe these will help you, as they've definitely helped me learn Spanish. Buena suerte :)
Note: These tips are also only for people who want to learn a language to fluency. If you just want to learn enough to order at a restaurant, that's a different ballgame.