- This topic has 9 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 9 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
A few weeks ago someone from Learn Mandarin Now contacted us and asked which tools we recommended for learning Mandarin. Turns out they asked the same question to 50+ other bloggers who write about China and Mandarin and compiled this infographic with the data they collected. A link to their original post is below the infographic, it has links to all the resources mentioned below.
Just out of curiosity, did any of the replies included – study and if possible study hard?
The question was “What tools or methods would you recommend to others learning Chinese?” Telling people starting to learn Chinese that they’ll have to study is kind of like telling Olympic sprinters that they’ll have to run.
I did not mean it badly – on the other hand I have a natural mistrust into special tools and methods which can help you with learning the foreign language.
We have a saying that for learning a foreign language you need a ‘heavy bottom’ – meaning you need to spend if possible one hour a day regularly studying for really long time. Simultaneously then trying to use what you learned as much as possible.
Several years later, depending on your talent and difficulty of learning language for you, you shall see the positive result. No shortcuts existing.
May be I was confused by the fact that all these recommended tools and methods with one exception only were about computer/phone related things.
One would almost say that the people 50 years ago could not learn a foreign language efficiently 🙂
I did not mean it badly – on the other hand I have a natural mistrust into special tools and methods which can help you with learning the foreign language. We have a saying that for learning a foreign language you need a ‘heavy bottom’ – meaning you need to spend if possible one hour a day regularly studying for really long time.
It seems strange to me to have a mistrust of tools and methods. Those are the ways that you learn a language. Time is just a currency that you invest into those tools and methods which produce the outcome of language ability.
May be I was confused by the fact that all these recommended tools and methods with one exception only were about computer/phone related things. One would almost say that the people 50 years ago could not learn a foreign language efficiently
Technology is popular when it comes to learning languages because it’s more flexible and efficient compared to traditional learning methods. You can study anywhere with an iPhone, you can add words to a vocabulary list from anywhere with Pleco, and you can review vocabulary lists with greater efficiency by using algorithms like SRS (Anki). I think it’s true that 50 years ago people could not learn languages nearly as efficient as they can today. The number of polyglots in the world today is probably 10,000x as many as 50 years ago due to technology and globalization.
I was happy to see them mention the New Practical Chinese Reader series of books which I mentioned. I used those a lot when I started learning Chinese, before smartphones were common. But even a single online resource for learning Chinese like Memrise blows away any book you can find for learning Chinese now, in my opinion.
I’m confused about the implied mutual exclusivity of sitting on your bottom and studying hard and using technologically based resources.
Are you recommending only using books? At one point, even printed books were considered cutting edge technology. If we don’t use new technology to make processes easier and more efficient, then what’s the point?
Neato on infographic!
In my opinion there is a big difference in learning Chinese based on textbook/classroom learning to day-to-day interaction to personalized lessons. I think it depends on your level, commitment level, purpose of learning (Do you only need basic day-to-day spoken language skills? professional language both writing & spoken? be able to write? Etc,.)
Based on my 5 years of learning Chinese now, my needs have changed as with my methods. I have to agree technology doesn’t hurt when it comes to efficiency & 24/7 access you have where as a textbook based learning is so limited in not just time but rigidity in structure and often times being far fetched from average person’s day to day experience living/ working in China.
I’m confused about the implied mutual exclusivity of sitting on your bottom and studying hard and using technologically based resources. Are you recommending only using books? At one point, even printed books were considered cutting edge technology. If we don’t use new technology to make processes easier and more efficient, then what’s the point?
Thank you! I had an awful discussion over at r/ChineseLanguage re: “Are Flashcards A Waste of Time”, where the most upovted response was someone who claimed they are indeed a waste of time and you ought to be reading a novel instead… as if one precludes the other.
Reading a novel while creating flashcards in Pleco or by hand is probably the best way to read that novel, but (s)he wouldn’t budge, saying that flashcards have this and that disadvantage, like: they only teach you vocabulary, out of context, without teaching various usages. Fuck. All. That. Noise.
Flashcards – electronic or written – are literally what you make of them. Where you find your vocabulary? Up to you. What information you test yourself on? Up to you. What kind of context, collocations, and grammar/sentence structures you include in your flashcard decks? Up to you. And this goes for just about every study method.
Yes, time is a limited resource, but this idea that “You shouldn’t do that because you should be doing this instead” is totally myopic and misleading to new learners. Everyone has to find out what works for them.
Anyways, back on the topic of this particular infographic: this is information compiled by someone who approached authorities on the topic of studying Chinese, so it is taken for granted that their advice is better than the average learner’s. That said, however, it’s a relatively small sample size, includes amateurs and self-learners such as ourselves, and there is not consensus on any one method. So, take it with a grain of salt and keep an open mind. Like Hyobin, my methods and needs have changed over time, as I assume any learner’s would. The best thing you can do is understand as well as you can the world of language study and try the methods that compel you.
Charlie, squirrel suit,
I must admit I missed the point.
I was apparently blinded by many institutions approach:
‘If you choose my method/tool/system so there is no hard work needed – you will manage Chinese/Arabic/Russian etc. in 30 days time!’
Apparently that was not the aim of your post and your remarks are absolutely correct!
Mobile technologies indeed contribute to increased learning efficiency and I am also using them from time to time.
However as I am not young anymore so I more prefer to use the textbook and interact with the people.
But in any case thanks for correcting me.
Charlie, squirrel suit, I must admit I missed the point. I was apparently blinded by many institutions approach: ‘If you choose my method/tool/system so there is no hard work needed – you will manage Chinese/Arabic/Russian etc. in 30 days time!’ Apparently that was not the aim of your post and your remarks are absolutely correct! Mobile technologies indeed contribute to increased learning efficiency and I am also using them from time to time. However as I am not young anymore so I more prefer to use the textbook and interact with the people. But in any case thanks for correcting me.
Interacting with people in the language that you’re studying is vital to understand it’s really spoken and not just how it appears in a book. I find that a lot of people who learn Chinese in universities out of China speak weird book Chinese that sounds different from people how people actually speak in China. But as for which tools are actually most valuable to Chinese learners, I think the infographic above is a very good breakdown.
- The forum ‘General Discussion’ is closed to new topics and replies.