We hear so many people, so many times state, and believe what they are saying, that “I am not good at languages”.
If we think about this, the person has either written or spoken this statement in a clear and intelligible way – so they CAN actually USE language, which says that they CAN actually LEARN a language – because they did at least once with their own mother tongue.
To state that you just cannot learn a language is totally flawed and untrue.
So what are they really saying?
I’ll leave that to you to answer…
Have you ever wondered how you learnt your own language as a child?
Well, most of us don’t, as learning to communicate and thus learning our own native language is so hard-wired into our brains that it just seemed to be learnt by osmosis.
Pause for a moment, if you have ever tried to learn a second language, either at school or later in life – wasn’t that just so difficult?
Well most would answer yes, as they recall the times that they have tried and failed to learn French, German or Spanish etc.
Have you ever wondered why learning your own language was so pain-free, compared to another language you may or not have succeeded in learning?
Have you ever compared the principals that were used in the language learning process of learning your native -mother tongue and another language?
These are all questions that are so obvious that we seldom take the time to ask them, let alone pause for thought to consider them, and this is generally why second language learning is so difficult, and often, not always, an uphill task.
As I mentioned earlier – all humans are hard-wired to learn languages and to communicate – we have already a wealth of experience of learning our own mother tongue, so why, when we approach the learning of another language to we throw all to the wind and try other methods that frankly have little or no chance of working.
This is of course not applicable to people who grow up in a bilingual family setting where there may be two or more languages used and learnt as the norm for communication.
In this context people, usually kids, can drift in an out of two or more languages with ease.
One of the biggest hurdles to language learning is ourselves and that strange thing called adulthood.
Often adults, who have a plethora of learning experiences, lack the guile to put these experiences into action and succumb to any ‘miracle-cure’ touted by the marketplace.
So let’s look at the differences between adult and children as language learners:
Children:
- Imitate and mimic sounds that they hear and thus can actually hear the sounds that make for understanding.
- Take risks and actually dare to experiment
- Words, sounds, expressions are picked up with an open mind
- Listen for the sake of listening and don’t always need to make sense of things by comparing with their own language – meaning is extracted through context.
- Associate with what is actually going on in their minds and bodies, linking expressions and vocabulary with strong emotions “Beach” “dog” is associated with what they know or have experienced which makes for excellent memory retention.
- Use language without needing to peer into the mechanics of the structure of language – it is just like that!
- Play with the language – experiment, try-out and look for reactions and results
- Learn by instinct – making meaning through their common sense approach to play – there is no risk
Adults:
- Go straight for understanding before being fully able to understand the range of tones that make up the language.
- Feel stupid imitating sounds, without really feeling comfortable with mimic
- Words, sounds and expressions are often decoded into their native language – this is the benchmark – one size fits all.
- Often get frustrated when they block on speed of speech, unknown expressions etc.
- Vocabulary is very often a=b, i.e. iron in French is fer, but that is the metal, what about the iron for pressing clothes …
- Want to know how the language is constructed before really feeling comfortable about constructing sentences and often this is compared to their native language too which only confuses matters.
- Are often loathe to play with language, at an early stage at least. Language learning is a thoroughly serious affair.
- Learn lists of vocabulary that they have no hope of retaining nor of ever being able to use effectively.
- Learn lists of verbs that are isolates of the language and very difficult to integrate in a flowing conversation.
We can see that although adults hold the edge in as far as experience of learning goes, it doesn’t really do them a service in the long run, at least in the majority of cases.
Very few adults will listen for the sake of listening, although many will say that they listen in their cars – until they get so frustrated with not understanding that they abandon this by the wayside.
In order to improve listening skills there needs to be a concerted non-effort to actually be able to hear the sounds that make up the language.
I say non-effort as it needs to be something that is undertaken almost constantly in order that listening becomes part of our everyday lives.
There is no way that listening for a couple hours on the weekend will make you a truly effective language learner – it needs to be mixed into a cocktail of concentrated and non-concentrated listening, much the way that we listen in our own native language.
Take the example of someone who listens to the news whilst preparing dinner, the person always has an ‘ear to the ground’ but their concentration is diffused.
However, when a news item of interest to them is reported, they stop, momentarily what they are doing to listen more carefully.
If you can train your ear to do that in another language you are well on your way to success, but another key is the frequency that you are listening to the second language (L2).
If this is done in fits-and-starts, such as on weekend, you will get something out of it, but far less than you would if you listened, even for as little as 30 minutes a day.
You need to juggle between your “prime” and “down” time concentration and actually start stretching your concentration in the L2.
Start playing with the language, enjoy it, have fun and provoke as many communication events as possible to be able to use the language in authentic contexts.
At the advent of the CDROM and Elearning for language learning it was proclaimed from the rooftops that “the teacher is dead – long live the teacher”.
This, of course is utter rot, although I am not suggesting that you need a teacher to learn a language – far from it!
Language learning is a facilitated process that entails communication, learning strategies, autonomy and interdependance or social learning.
Elearning or CDROMs will never surprise you, there will be little or no variety as you rewind back to the beginning – people, on the other hand, in real situations will surprise you as they employ different speech patterns, sounds, accents, expressions etc. These are just tools that are mixed in the cocktail to facilitate language learning – not one, nor another will replace the other.
So if you, against your better reasoning, become seduced by the latest language learning solution of “Learn french in 40 lessons”, just remember three things :
- There are no short-cuts to learning a language
- The way you learnt your own language. –
You are an expert at language learning, as long as you use your common sense and memory of past experiences.
Communication is hearing what isn’t said.
As Peter Drucker once said, “The most important thing in communication is hearing what isn’t said.”
Furthermore, one of the pre-suppositions of NLP states that ‘you cannot, not communicate – everything you say and most of what you do will communicate something, so the idea of radio silence, can have the effect of turning the sound right up.
People often, mistakingly, imagine, that by doing nothing, they can avoid personal responsibility in communication, but, I am sorry to say, this just isn’t true, non-action is not an option, as it will be interpreted in some way by the listener(s).
We communicate all the time, even when we are not speaking, whether we are aware of it or not – and by any number of methods and mechanisms, from our dress sense to what actually leaves our lips as the spoken word.
It is not just what we say, but how we say it, where we say it and what we do, which carries a whole lot more weight than the words alone.
There are the non-verbal cues, such as hand gestures, facial gestures, eye-contact, or lack of, and posture to name but a few.
Would you buy a car from someone who didn’t look you in the eye? Nah, thought not.
Para-linguistic cues, such as inflection, accent, tone, intonation, rhythm, sounds and register.
These are the things that we can see and hear, but they don’t stop there.
We communicate by both action and inaction – sometimes a more powerful message is conveyed by doing nothing, than when we are actually doing something.
But hey! The person has done nothing – oh, yeah! BUT, they have, in some way, communicated some pretty strong messages – You cannot, not communicate.
In language, it is quite striking how pauses (intentional and well-placed, pauses) can speak so much louder than the words around them, good communicators use this effectively when speaking in public.
Posture is another strong way of getting a message across – people often like to play around as ‘the-part-time-psycholgist’ interpreting body language of others and extracting, sometimes, dubious conclusions – folded arms, does not necessarily mean defensiveness nor a desire not to open up. It could well be just comfortable, however, a slouching speaker can be looked at in a very different light.
However, put these, non-verbal cues together with verbal or paralinguistic clues, and you may be on to something.
Communication is all about responsibility, and taking responsibility for the message creating the intended response with the listener – if communicators are not willing to take responsibility for this, then their communication ‘results’ will suffer – if what they say is not clearly understood, then whose fault is this then?
Communication is a game of perceptions often devoid of reality – the importance is what is perceived by the listeners – not what is said, but what is understood and remembered. It is not a binary process – there are lots of variables that need to be taken into account, by the communicator – it is not my audience / listener’s fault if they get the wrong end of the stick – the responsibility stays firmly with me!
And, whatever I do, I will be communicating in a constant stream – I cannot, not communicate!
So just remember, when you are trying to persuade people of your super-mega ideas to change their lives, don’t slouch, avoid eye-contact nor speak with a driveling, monotonous voice – you are in fact going to convince them of something – but it won’t be to ‘buy’ your ideas, you nor your ‘product’.
If your intention does not match the response that is created in your listeners, things will happen – and when they fall stony-silent when you ask them if they have any questions, they are communicating a very strong message to you – most of it can be resumed by a resounding “Nah, not interested, sorry … Next!”
Communication and trust are the two principle ingredients for successful relationships, however, “The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.” George Bernard Shaw
10 extremely pointless inventions
10 Weird Inventions You Need To See To Believe – some of these inventions have to be seen to be believed, and even then they are just weird.
Then again, some of the things that we find around our homes and offices started out as a weird invention at some point – think of the Post-its you use everyday, bluetack or even saccharin were invented by accident and the inventors were probably thought of as slightly strange to say the least.
What’s your view of these inventions?
You may also be surprised to learn that Coca Cola, cornflakes and velco were invented by accident.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5X4Mb1BZlr4
Top 10 Most Intelligent People of The World
Top 10 Most Intelligent People of The World are not surprisingly closely linked to the fields of mathematics and physics. So who are the Top 10 Most Intelligent People of The World?
There are a lot of intelligent people all around the world and we can only be amazed at the levels of their IQs.
Let’s take a look at the people with the highest IQ ever recorded – The 10 most intelligent people of the world.
The 10 most intelligent people of the world
What do the Olympic medal tables say about your nation’s sporting priorities?
Ben Oakley, The Open University et Simon Shibli, Sheffield Hallam University
Each time the Olympic and Paralympic Games come around, a small minority of nations tend to do well. On average, only 25% of competing nations at the Olympics will win a gold medal – and they’re pretty much the same ones year in, year out.
Intrigued, we dug into data spanning back to 1948 – derived from our colleagues at Gracenote Sport – to unravel how different countries approach sport, and how that affects their chances of Olympic success.
Looking back over the last 20 years, we found that the top 20 nations have consistently won more than 70% of the medals at each games. Despite the fact that some progress has been made over the last five games, the figure below demonstrates that this trend has persisted throughout modern Olympic history.
It follows that if some nations consistently perform very well, others repeatedly do not. One group which appears to perform relatively poorly is Muslim nations – which we define as those nations where around 50% of the population is Muslim. We found 53 nations that meet this definition, which collectively account for 18% of the world’s population.
Econometric models have consistently shown that bigger populations and greater wealth are closely linked with medal success. But based on these trends, Muslim nations perform well below what we might expect. For instance, Muslim nations only won 61 (6.3%) of the medals awarded at London 2012. By comparison, the top-ranked nation at the games (the US) racked up 104 (10.8%) of the medals, with only 4.5% of the world’s population.
There are several reasons which could explain this relatively poor performance. For one thing, the Olympics largely features typically European sports, such as swimming, rowing and cycling. All of these require significant facilities and investment to develop medal winners. This doesn’t play to the strengths of many Muslim nations, which tend to be more successful in combat sports and weightlifting – events where there are comparatively fewer medals up for grabs.
The gender balance
All things being equal, you would expect nations to win medals in proportion to the medals available for each gender (47% women, 53% men). The fact that women won just 15 (25%) of the Muslim nations’ 61 medals at London 2012 indicates that Muslim nations under-perform in women’s events particularly.
When we considered the top ten nations in London 2012, we noticed that Korea and Italy also under-performed in women’s events, and over-relied on men for their overall success. By contrast, in recent years China has actively targeted success in women’s events. This has proved to be a highly successful strategy: 57% of the nation’s medals in 2012 were won by women, which led to second place in the medal table.
Other nations with strong contributions made by women include the US – where college sport provides a fruitful pathway to develop young talent – and Australia, which has targeted elite sport success for men and women since the 1980s, when it set up the Australian Institute of Sport. Meanwhile, with their successful equestrian programmes, Germany and Great Britain won nearly 10% of their medals in mixed or open events at London 2012.
Positive approaches to women’s sport will only become more significant, as the International Olympic Committee works towards its goal to achieve gender equity in the 2020s.
Paralympic power
As you might expect, there is a strong correlation between the nations which dominate the Olympics, and those which succeed at the Paralympics. But a few nations buck the trend: some perform better in the Paralympics than the Olympics, and others significantly worse.
To illustrate this point, the figure below shows the index scores of Paralympic success compared with Olympic success for London 2012. An index score simply enables us to make a like for like comparison between the two events. For example, the US won 6% of medals in the Paralympic Games and 12% in the Olympic Games. So, the US has an index score of 50 ([6% / 12%] x 100 = 50), which means that it achieved only half the success in the Paralympic Games, relative to the Olympic Games.
The higher the index, the greater the nation’s Paralympic success, relative to its performance in the Olympics. We did this calculation for all nations which won at least 15 Paralympic medals.
North African nations Algeria and Tunisia – which also happen to be Muslim nations – excelled at the Paralympics relative to the Olympics. Of the traditional Olympic powers, better performances were also seen by Ukraine, Australia, China, Canada and Spain – three of which have been recent hosts (Sydney in 2000, Beijing in 2008 and Barcelona in 1992).
By contrast, the US and Japan performed relatively poorly at the Paralympics, suggesting that elite disabled athletes may not be receiving the levels of support which are provided to elite able-bodied athletes.
Fuller explanations for these variations are complex, but social attitudes towards disability must play a part. For instance, British parliamentarian and multi-Paralympic medallist Tanni Grey-Thompson cited the role of television coverage as a key factor in the US’s modest Paralympic performance.
Bizarrely, in a country where you have Title IX about women’s entitlement to sport at university and they have had scholarship programmes for disabled athletes for 40 years … the public do not get to see it [on television].
As the Olympics and Paralympics play out in Rio throughout August and September, we’ll probably see the same old suspects dominating the medal tables. But dig beneath the surface, and you’ll find that the results can tell us a thing or two about each nation’s sporting priorities: especially when it comes to the success of their elite women and disabled athletes.
Ben Oakley, Head of Childhood, Youth and Sport, The Open University et Simon Shibli, Professor of Sport Management, Sheffield Hallam University
La version originale de cet article a été publiée sur The Conversation.
