Mit der bahnbrechenden Input-Hypothese von Prof. Stephen Krashen eine Fremdsprache wirklich erfolgreich lernen!

[00:00:02] Speaker A: Good morning, good afternoon, whatever. [00:00:04] Speaker B: Good morning. Good afternoon. For me, it's good evening, and today I am speaking with language professor and researcher Dr. Stephen Krashen. He's a well known linguist and second language acquisition expert and is one of the most listened to experts in this field. In contrast to many other linguists, he speaks several languages to different degrees. He created the input hypothesis, which I think is genius in the 70s that provided a new basis for language learning. Steven, I'm so happy that we could finally make this happen. [00:00:38] Speaker A: Oh, thanks very much. And now let me begin with the corrections to your introduction. [00:00:43] Speaker B: Yes. [00:00:44] Speaker A: It always has to be like that. I did not invent the input hypothesis. I get credit for it. People had it before I did. In the field of literacy, Kenneth Goodman, Frank Smith, we learned to read by reading by comprehension, understanding what's on the page. And in our field, james Asher knew about it before I did. Harris Winitz knew about it before I did. A guy named Leonard Newmark knew about it. Now, here is the mystical strange part. Both Leonard Newmark and Kenneth Goodman are nearly related to me. On my father's side, I went to my uncle and aunt's 50th wedding anniversary, boris Newmark and Anne Newmark. Okay. And there was Leonard. I said, Why are you at this party? He says, These are my aunt and uncle. I said, no, they're my aunt and uncle. So he's related to one side, and I was very dependent on his work. Also, Kenneth Goodman, a hero of literacy, is married to Yeta Goodman, who's a wonderful teacher and writer. She's done excellent work. And it turns out our families come from the same little village in Eastern Europe. And I understand her Yiddish very easily because it's similar to what I heard around me growing up. So we call each other cousin, and Goodmans and I are criticized always in the same sentence, which I'm very flattered with. Okay. So, yes, what these people did let me explain all this, get through all the gossip. They had the idea before I did. I didn't invent it. What I've done is give it a name and connect it to other hypotheses. I've been responsible for public relations because I think the idea was right. I did not discover that, though I wish I had. Okay, having said that so let's go. [00:02:38] Speaker B: Back a step, because obviously in the polyglot community, everybody knows the input hypothesis. But for the people watching this video, can you explain what this input hypothesis is? [00:02:52] Speaker A: Very simple. Maybe too simple. We acquire language when we understand it. If someone talks to you in another language and you have a pretty good idea of what they're saying, or you're reading a story, listening to, watching a good movie, having a conversation, you are acquiring whether you like it or not, it happens. It's a deep subconscious process. [00:03:19] Speaker B: It's so obvious and everybody that finds out about it and starts learning about with it. I mean, it's obvious that this works and that this is a good method for language acquisition. But why isn't it widespread? Why are we still learning in school and in language schools, even in private language schools with I'll learn some words, I'll learn the grammar, and then with this combination, I'll start speaking and understanding the language. Why is that still so common, even though it's obvious that you need input to learn a language? [00:03:55] Speaker A: Let me start by restating what you said. You said it very accurately, and that is exactly what it is, the theory most people believe in. You acquire language by consciously learning vocabulary, grammar. You practice them over and over again in output until they become automatic, and then someday you can use the language. I call this a delayed gratification hypothesis. Our research says it doesn't work, and it's painful. In fact, my estimate, based on research and a lot of observation, is about 95% of students in these classes hate it. Unfortunately, the 5% who like it become language teachers, so it's perpetuated. There are two reasons why it's done so well. One is, as I mentioned, some people are in love with grammar. They find grammar to be fascinating, aesthetically beautiful. I am one of those people. My degree is in linguistics, not in education, which meant I spent five years reading the complete works of Noam Chomsky, which for me, I know I'm a little different. I thought it was absolutely beautiful. I really believe that. And it's hard to recover from this. Thanks to years of medication and meditation, I've kind of calmed down a little. I now know that this is not the story in language acquisition. The other reason is that if I'm right, it's the end of the multitrillion dollar textbook publishing industry. It means everything on the market. Now. 99% of materials and books is wrong for first language and second language, for language arts, literature, all those things. So this is pretty serious. So I don't think the textbook publishing industry is going to go down without a fight. And I had no idea that was the consequence, but it's turned out that way. Two reasons people love grammar. People are making money. [00:06:00] Speaker B: Let's hope someday there will be a mind shift among everybody. [00:06:06] Speaker A: Well, I have some ideas, but we can get to that. [00:06:08] Speaker B: All right, so it's pretty obvious that you learn by input. But what does that mean exactly? How do I translate that? Let's say somebody is watching this video, listening to us, and they want to learn with this method. How would they go about what would they do tomorrow? Just start watching the TV? Or what should their routine start to become in order to learn the language? [00:06:37] Speaker A: Well, being a former college professor, I must stay with theory for just a little while longer. Then we go to practice. Okay? Oh, that's been so interesting. Struggling and having success and failure with all these languages, I can't tell you what good and interesting research it is. It's amazing. And let me intervene that too. The break came for me about 24 years ago, 23 years ago, when I was in Hungary teaching a class in English at Page University in Page. And I met the woman who was at the time, the world's greatest polyglot, lom Kato, 17 languages. And I'll just tell you about our last meeting and how it pushed me forward. We met three times. We talked and talked. It was wonderful. She was 86 at the time, working on Hebrew, her most recent language. And she took my hand when we said goodbye, and she said, Stephen, you're so young, so much time left, so many languages to acquire. Isn't that beautiful? Since that day, I have been doing languages every single day. This morning, I'm reading a Pedagogical reader in Spanish to see if it'll be good for my grandson. And I've been reading a comic book in French that's every day, all the time. Taking your advice from your institute, which means use all your free time in some way that's interesting, pleasurable, and it totals up. Well, the way to do it, you want input that's comprehensible and extremely interesting. The word we use is compelling. So interesting that you forget that it's in another language. So I assume that in your program there are lots of tapes of you talking in German and other languages about language acquisition, how to do it. I'm going to watch all of them because to me, it's very compelling. It's different for different people. What we're doing now in terms of Pedagogy and my inspiration is my colleague Beniko Mason in Japan. She's devised a system that I think does this. It's quite pure. That means it's compelling and comprehensible. The early stage, hearing stories. She does stories based on Grimm's fairy tales. She makes them comprehensible with the help of pictures and occasional translation. She gives me the credit because I used to do demos I still do, where I give a brief language lesson in German and I draw some pictures on the board, et cetera. She says that gave her the idea. But be that as it may, it really does work. People like it. They're absorbed. And from the studies that she has done, she's a combination researcher, hands on language teacher, which is wonderful. We have found that you pick up vocabulary, you acquire it this way faster than you would by formal instruction. So we don't say, Listen to the story, do vocabulary exercises. We say, Hear another story and another story and another story. And stories are wonderful. The last 1015 years, I've discovered audiobooks. Now in California. This fits with your suggestions perfectly. You drive all the time in California. If I want to see my adorable grandchildren and go to Gold's Gym in Venice, California, I'm in the car, which means audiobooks. It began with Harry Potter. I can't get them in other languages, but I've been doing it in English, and it's just absolutely exciting. I'm doing all kinds. In fact, the last one I did all the way through. I never would have dreamed doing this 20 years ago. Murder on the Orient Express, agatha Christie, which I had never listened to or read. It was fabulous. I can't wait to do more in English. Yeah, because that's what I can get it in. It's stories, stories, stories, stories. Kids love to hear stories. Everybody likes stories. People like to talk about movies. Eventually, Benico transitions them into reading. And this is Reading for Pleasure first, reading the stories that you've done in class. She has a stage where it's gradual and guided, where lots and lots and lots of very easy reading, which is the missing link. Oh, my. The languages I'm good at. I've had lots of easy reading in German, lots of Pedagogical books when I was in Austria. In French, I keep finding them, buying them, comic books. I can read authentic very nicely, but it's the easy stuff that really did it. Spanish, I'm always on the lookout for the easy ones. My problem with Mandarin and with Hebrew, there's nothing there that's easy. There's a big industry in Taiwan and China, chinese for foreigners, which is a great thing. It's amazing. Chinese is very possible. It just takes a little while longer because you don't have as many cognates. You can't find anything easy. The only three things I have in Chinese, in Mandarin that are easy, and I use the Romanization. It's called pinion. I'll do the characters. Later is a series of books by my former teacher, Hayun Lu, still in contact with her, which are really nice. A series of books by Terry Walsh, which are in Pinion. And a colleague of mine and I have done a couple of books, Linda Lee, and that's all there is, and I've read all of them a hundred times. So the most obvious thing that we want cheap, easy is not there easy stuff. What you do in classes. According to Benico, you do lots and lots of easy reading. First guided by the teacher. Try this. Eventually self selected, still from graded readers. Easy books. Eventually moving on to authentic reading in areas you are interested in, not assigned. For me, that means science fiction. Okay, I have a question about that. [00:13:00] Speaker B: If you start with you have a low level in the language, and you start reading in that language, and the sound system is not quite in your head yet, so you start reading and you start vocalizing in your head, but you're not vocalizing correctly because you don't have a feel for the language yet. Isn't that what's your take on that? Shouldn't we wait a little bit until we start reading? [00:13:23] Speaker A: Well, I think it's okay. Look at it this way. When I read in English, I always see words. And when I hear someone say them, I'm surprised at how they're pronounced. This is not the enemy. This is evidence that we acquire through reading. So if you're also listening, reading doesn't do it all. It will not give you accent, it will not give you full oral comprehension, but it makes a huge contribution. Yes, you need listening as well, no question. We don't stop the listening. Benico Mason never stops with stories. She does stories all the way through. But when you do both, it's amazingly powerful. Let me do one more anecdote the personal part. In 1982, I spent a semester at the University of Ottawa, which is right on the border of Quebec, and I worked with a French program. And the English students take French classes the French students take English classes to pass exams. And when I got there, my French had been mostly through reading and wasn't very good. When I passed the exam, I barely passed. I barely qualified to be considered competent. But when after I was there for a while, the first month, I got much better very quickly because I added some listening comprehension to the enormous amount of reading I had done. So it contributes, let it happen. But you're right do listening as well. [00:14:54] Speaker B: I guess the combination would be the best, right, to listen to what you read, and that would bring movies and series on the table. However, obviously there is the problem that that's usually very high advanced material. [00:15:08] Speaker A: So you would have you need easy stuff. What we want language institutes to do, like you, young man, is to provide a lot of that stuff. And as you've already done, you've guided I read your pamphlet this morning, guiding people to places they can find it. You know when it's right for you, when you understand it, and you don't have to know every word. What I like to hypothesize is you want the illusion of comprehension, where it's so interesting you don't even notice the little bits of noise that are always there. And eventually all that's late acquired, it will come later. [00:15:52] Speaker B: And what does that mean exactly? So let's say I'm reading, and how much do I really need to understand? Do I need to understand only what the whole thing is about? Do I need to understand what the sentence is about? Do I have to have a general understanding, let's say, in percentages, like, how comfortable should I feel with the material. [00:16:15] Speaker A: That I'm reading or listening to, as we say it's? Comte Rafan? It depends on the interest level. There are things that are so interesting, you don't even notice if it keeps you reading and you're following the story and you don't have any obvious difficulty. I look up words only because I'm curious, all right? Because I have this linguistic thing, this linguistic disease inside of me. But for normal people, you don't worry about that. You just keep reading, and gradually you pick it up. And that is a better way of getting vocabulary than stopping to look things up. A mutual acquaintance of ours, Steve Kaufman steve Kaufman, for those of you listening, is one of these amazing hyper polyglots. He's really good. He knows, let's see, 16 languages now, and he's done eight of them after age 62. That is amazing. Anyway, he says when he's reading, if he looks something up, a lot of the times he forgets what the word is by the time he's come back to the text, which is very gratifying, because that's normal. He says, just keep reading. If it happens too often, then it's too hard. When it becomes annoying, it's too hard. There's no formula. I know the research says 95%, 90% people also differ in tolerance for noise. It depends on your personality and the interest level of the text. Okay. I read some stuff where I know I'm only getting 85, 90% in some French science fiction. Some of it's awful, but a lot of it's wonderful. And I just keep reading because I can't wait to turn the page and see what happens next. Most of the time, my personality, I like to understand just about everything. Steve Kaufman says he does fine with 80%. It depends on you, and it depends on how fascinating the text is. I wouldn't worry about it. I would just find things that you can have a good time with that you're enjoying. [00:18:20] Speaker B: Okay, and what are the processes behind all of this? So I'm reading, and I'm not understanding bits and bits here, but because I understand the context, I start to get a feeling for these words. And the more I come up on them, the more I start to understand what they actually mean. And at some point I understand what the meaning is. Is that the process? [00:18:44] Speaker A: That's pretty much it. The studies, University of Illinois, they come to the conclusion that each time you see a word imprint or hear a word imprint that's unfamiliar, and it's a comprehensible context. You get a little bit it's gradual. You get maybe 5% of the meaning of the word. Gradually. You build it up over time when you keep seeing it. Now, if you insist on knowing every single word, that will never happen to you because you'll never see words unfamiliar. You'll always look them up. Try to find things that appear to be reasonably comprehensible and above all, pleasant and fascinating, where you want to know what's going to happen next, and you'll get vocabulary. [00:19:32] Speaker B: So it's even better to not look up words. [00:19:35] Speaker A: I don't know. Maybe a good way is don't feel compelled. Don't feel guilty if you don't know every word. Okay. There's some things that I read intensively. I want to know every single word. I will admit that in the manuscript you sent me, your little booklet, there were about three words I didn't know, and I really wanted to make sure I knew them. This is like it's pleasure reading, because I liked it. But it's also technical reading. So I looked them up. Of course, I've forgotten what they ask. Yeah, exactly. But I'll be reading more and it'll come back. Don't worry. The words will come back. Lom Kato says exactly the same thing. Don't fret. Don't worry about each word. Keep reading. It will come. A famous writer on literacy was an English teacher in school. This is an English first language story. And he found her ten year old child. She was reading Moby Dick. Can you imagine? And he said, that looks pretty challenging. Do you understand it all? And what she said was profound. I just skip the parts I don't understand. There it is. You find the right stuff. That's good for you. The juicy parts. [00:20:48] Speaker B: Very good. So, reading and listening. Anything else I should do around it? I guess at some point I need to start speaking. Right. What other activities do you recommend? [00:21:02] Speaker A: Well, you get a high grade for this. You asked exactly the right question. [00:21:06] Speaker B: Thank you. [00:21:08] Speaker A: There's nothing else. Speaking emerges as the result of listening and reading. Study after study says this. You don't speak in order to acquire language. You acquire language speaking. Sorry. And the mechanics of writing are the result, not the cause. Vocabulary is the result. Good writing style is the result. The only true cause is comprehensible input. So we always simply want more and more of that. This is a pure approach we are not in favor of. I've been influenced by my colleague Benico, who keeps sharing her experiences with her students. It's amazing. You don't want a neglectic system. You don't want a little of this and a little of that. The history of it. In the beginning, when my theory first my hypothesis first became well known, there was, of course, the usual opposition. But then people started catching on and they decided, we'll take a little of this and a little of that. And the philosophy is kind of Buddhist, that the truth must be somewhere in the middle, and we have to avoid extremes simply because it's common sense. What we have found is extreme view might be correct. Let me add a little bit about grammar, though, and talk about where it might be useful. I am not an enemy of grammar. I have never said, don't ever teach grammar. Grammar, go to jail. All right. There are several reasons for doing it, but most of all, before I get to them, there are constraints. What we have discovered is, if you want to learn and apply grammar to your speech, to your writing, it is tough. Number one, the rules are hard, and native speakers don't always have them, too. One of my favorites is in French, making the past participle. When it's a pronoun, agree with the direct object. La shows kejri. Okay? When I get that right, I slow down and I expect people to applaud because it's consciously monitored. It never comes naturally. Same thing with the Spanish subjunctive. Our studies show it can't be taught that it only comes from reading, not even from being in the country. Isn't that amazing? These things are always going to happen. It's not going to come, no matter how hard, by study. The rules are not only complicated, but linguists have not fully discovered them. So how are we supposed to do that? So, number one, the rules are sometimes very demanding. So monitoring using grammar is only going to work for the simple rules. Number two, in real conversation, you don't have time to dredge up all these rules. What we do, people like us I've gotten over this. You plan your sentence while the next person is talking, and then you come out with a perfect sentence, and it no longer makes sense in the conversation. So that's another problem. The rules are too hard. You don't have time to do it, and it's unnatural. It's very hard to think about grammar and communication at the same time. The point for using grammar are very, very difficult to satisfy. The only time they're completely satisfied is when we give people grammar tests. Then you have time. You know the rule. You can think about form, but there are a few places you can use grammar if the conditions are met. For example, when you're editing and you want to make sure things are right. And there's a late acquired rule you don't have, but you've learned it consciously. You can do it, but you can only do it with simple rules. There's a limit, but there's nothing wrong with it. There's another reason to study grammar, and for the 5% of crazy people like you and me who like grammar. [00:25:18] Speaker B: I don't like grammar. [00:25:20] Speaker A: Oh yeah, you did in school. But what about learning about interesting rules and linguistic theory? No. Oh my gosh. You're not one of them. The interview is canceled anyway. Well, I like it. So there. I still think Chomsky is one of the most important people in my life. Absolutely. [00:25:41] Speaker B: That's totally fine. [00:25:45] Speaker A: It's okay to offer grammar as an option for people who like it, who think it's interesting and a little here's something you can read about how this rule changed over time. Here's how they do it in different dialects. That's subject matter. It's not language acquisition. Unnecessary, but nothing wrong with it. Okay, so I would never say never teach grammar. It's evil. Say no. That's not the way language is acquired. If you want to do it on your own time, as we say in English, it's a free country. Or it used to be trump. That's something else. Go ahead and do it on your own, et cetera. So grammar is okay, but it's certainly not the main point. [00:26:27] Speaker B: Okay, so let me continue with language learning methods and strategies. I'd like to introduce a little bit of controversy in here. So I think the language learning camp splits into three main methods of learning. One is mostly through input or exclusively through input. Then there's one that is more through speaking, like start speaking from day one, start speaking as quickly as possible in practice. And then there's a third one, which is through translation or through decoding what you're reading. Obviously all three of them work, otherwise there wouldn't be polyglots that learned it through the other two methods. But what is your take on them? What is your take on them? [00:27:17] Speaker A: I think you'll get progress in all three because all three supply you with at least some comprehensible input, so you can't help it. But the first one, I think, is by far more efficient. The second one, the output approach called the communicative approach, based on the idea of what's called comprehensible output, is attractive to many people because people do enjoy speaking when they can. Some people do. Some people like to wait. That one has been problematic. I invite viewers to read my two page paper called Comprehensible Output question Mark okay, which is available for free Sdcration.com. Order yours now. Operators are standing by. Special offer. Anyway, I look through the research and I say, the research doesn't support it. The idea is you try to say something the other person doesn't understand, so you reframe, you try it again a different way, and suddenly they say, oh, now I understand. The other person says, Vasi fashteinish. That's how you get the difference between Haban and Zion. His auxiliaries. Well, number one, it doesn't happen very often. I've looked at the studies. Even where they manufacture instances of comprehensible output, it hardly ever happens. And in the real world it rarely happens. In the only experiment I have seen, the results are extremely disappointing. Whereas I say modestly, we have overwhelming results. We have results over the last 40 years and we keep winning. Comprehensive bull input is never lost. The common sense behind the output idea is that it's close to what people think is true that we acquire languages when we need them, called the need hypothesis. This is a dangerous hypothesis because then we put children in situations where they don't understand and they're forced to speak and interact and it's quite uncomfortable. An American humorist, Garrison Keeler, did this on a radio show. It was very funny. He said, it's a program from Minnesota. He says, we now have organized the Minnesota Language School, and we know that people acquire language when they need them. We've got this guy here, we're going to take him up in a helicopter. We're going to no parachute. They put a gun on his head. They say, we're going to push you out unless you start speaking. So of course, the guy says, oh, yes. Kanye gutojay. No, that's not how it works. Need only helps when it results in more comprehensible input. The third one bootskam idea of translation. Translation the good side of this where he's right is that there's nothing wrong with translation when it makes input more comprehensible. We always do this, and Lom Kato does this, recommends this too. If you're going into a situation where you know you're going to have a little bit of trouble, the language is slightly over your head, get some background knowledge in your first language. If I have to go hear a lecture, even in French or German, and all those languages, among my better ones, Spanish, if it's an author, I'll find out what he's written in English. I'll read that first. Then I'll go to the lecture or read his stuff, and it's much more comprehensible. Lomkato says when she travels, she listens to the news. Those are the days when we had something called Radio Gaga. She first listens to the news in a language she knows, then she listens to it in other languages. Or a lot of people do this. They read the first chapter in their own language, and then the rest of the book is comprehensible. So I think you can use the first language powerfully as a way of making second language input more comprehensible. There's nothing wrong with teachers occasionally translating something that's hard a word. You're not getting a phrase, and then going on. Beniko Mason does this all the time in her classes teaching English in Japan. She'll draw pictures, make it her main thing is pictures. But occasionally this is this word. So I think there's a place for translation. And BUCHAM and his colleagues are right in that it has been prematurely rejected. The idea of you must never use the first language ever is wrong. I think it depends on how you use it. Okay, those are the three. [00:32:07] Speaker B: So basically, that just means you were talking about 80%, 85%, 90%, how much comprehension you need to have for it to be comprehensible input. And that's a cheap way to lower that number and make it comprehensible. So it's still comprehensible at 50%, at 60%. Because, you know, the context of the. [00:32:31] Speaker A: Setting really helps get some background knowledge. There's no magic percentage. Of course it depends. But there is no shame in using the first language. That's the point. [00:32:43] Speaker B: So we're talking about language learning, methods, ideas, whatever, that surround language. Which other ideas that you think should be debunked are really bad ideas. Obviously, grammar, learning grammar and only vocabulary is a really bad idea. I think everybody in the language learning community agrees on that. But what other ideas are floating around there which you think should really have a stop put a stop to? [00:33:14] Speaker A: Well, yeah, I get these ideas from seeing all the ads for language teaching materials and methods, and one of them is early speaking, forced speaking, making people talk before they're ready, which is by far the most terrifying thing in all language classes. I just read this paper I did. Called down with forced speech. It's on the. Website. It all came from an experience I had, gosh, 40 years ago when my daughter was a little girl. She's all grown up now. She's a librarian. Is that wonderful or what? I just love it. Anyway, she was playing at a friend's house, another little girl, and I was supposed to go over, pick her up and bring the friend over because the mother was going off to her local Spanish class at Santa Monica Community College. Before the mom left, she went into the kitchen and took a pill. She said, I just had to take my pill first. Sorry. I said, what did you take? She said, Valium. That's like prozac. So, ever the researcher, I said, Why did you take Valium? Because Spanish class, it makes me so nervous. She said, Basically, it freaks me out. Okay, what is it about Spanish class? It's talking, being called on in class, having to give an oral report. Which leads to the amazing hypothesis that things that are good for language acquisition are pleasant. Things that are bad for language acquisition are unpleasant. Now, I'm not saying if it feels good, it's good for you. We do a lot of things in class that are a lot of fun and you get no comprehensible input. But if it's done right, it's going to feel good. In fact, my current hypothesis I have this friend, whenever he writes a paper and he sends it off, he has a stamp and it says, this does not represent my current position. Because by the time he gets it, he's changed his mind. But anyway, I think language acquisition, like lots of other kinds of learning, is absolutely ecstatic. That's why people like you and me are so addicted to language acquisition. When you get comprehensible input in another language, it feels good. You get what we call the din in the head. You hear the language in the voices of the people you interacted with. To me, that's related to infatuation. It's a new experience, something new, and it's involuntary mental rehearsal that happens when you're doing something new. So we can avoid these things. When students say they don't like it, it's a good sign that something is wrong. Another thing when people create materials, the latest fad in the United States is let's make sure we include all the high frequency vocabulary to make sure we seed it with the right vocabulary. Two comments. Number one, if it's high frequency, it's high frequency. That's going to come back, so don't worry. Number two, when you write stories or make presentations, you don't have to plan the vocabulary, you have to make it comprehensible. Here's the big hypothesis. I thought of this in 1976 when I was driving on the Autobahn in Los Angeles on the freeway, and it was so exciting. I got off the road and calmed down and had to write it down. Very simple. If you get lots of comprehensible input, all the new vocabulary and the new grammatical rules you are ready for are there in the input. The best people to write materials are experienced language teachers who know students and like them, who will write interesting stories from their intuitions about what people are going to understand and what they're interested in. We don't have to be super scientific. So in answer to your question, what are people doing that's wrong too early? Speaking in production and, of course, having to include certain things. There's another question I wish you had asked me. So if you don't, I'll ask myself, what about writing? Yeah. [00:37:39] Speaker B: No, I wasn't. Continue. [00:37:41] Speaker A: Yes. Okay. Slowly. Take another hour and a half. This is very what about writing? Well, the writing is really two things. It's writing style and writing content. Writing style comes from reading. It's the only place you can get it. The rules of written text, what we call text structure, are too complicated again, to be taught. Whatever. The other part of writing, though, is not just communication, but writing helps thinking. Writing makes you smarter. This is an amazing insight. It has nothing to do with language acquisition. The key to using writing, to making yourself smarter is revision. You write something down, you go over it again. Again. Each time you get it better. Ernest Hemingway said it the best, and this has been liberating for me. The first draft of anything is shit. That is beautiful because you don't expect it to be perfect. And you enjoy the revision process because each time you go over it, you see something new. You get smarter and smarter. There is a correlation in creativity between how much you produce and how eminent you are. People do a lot. They get better at it. The Beatles. Hundreds of songs. Darwin, 112 publications. Einstein, 248. This is part of the intellectual process. The point I'm making here, though, is that it's not part of language teaching. It's not part of foreign language teaching. If it comes in naturally, fine. The other question, of course, is testing and assessment. Do you want to talk about that? [00:39:30] Speaker B: No. [00:39:31] Speaker A: Okay, good. [00:39:34] Speaker B: I think it's not that relevant, unless you think we should. [00:39:38] Speaker A: Fine. [00:39:39] Speaker B: Okay, because I would like to summarize well, I mean, it's a really short hypothesis, but I would like to summarize it in practical terms before we move on to the next topic, which I know is a really important topic to you. And you correct me if I'm wrong, and you let me know if there's anything missing from what I'm saying. So basically, if we want to learn a language, let's put it in practical terms. I should start today or tomorrow by the latest to read and to listen a lot if possible. Those two in combination. And I should make sure that what I'm reading is comprehensible, so I understand more or less what it is about. I don't need to understand every word, and it's compelling. So it's interesting and I want to continue reading and listening to it because it interests me. And this way I get a good understanding of the language, and once I feel comfortable with that understanding, I can start speaking, which is not to practice the language, but it is to be able to communicate, because in the end, that's what most people are doing, why they're learning a language. That would be my short summary of what we talked about. What do you think about that? [00:40:56] Speaker A: Let me make some clarifications. When we say listening and reading in combination, that means to both. It doesn't mean the same time. It doesn't mean you should listen to a text and read it at the same time. I find that really boring. Some people. This is a method. If you want to do it, go ahead. There's nothing wrong with it, but you don't have to in terms of the text being comprehensible, what often happens. But it's really interesting, you have the illusion that it's totally comprehensible because you no longer notice the little bits of noise in it. And that's really wonderful when that happens. Okay. And going on to speaking, you're going to want to speak. It's going to come. And that varies among people. Some people like talking right away. Some people might be quiet for a year. You don't know. Doesn't seem to matter. If you're in an immersion situation where not all the input is comprehensible, where the studies agree can take a year or two before people start to talk. But that's okay. In a class, it'll come a lot faster because the input is more comprehensible or in your self study program. Okay, good. [00:42:06] Speaker B: And now we're coming to a heart topic of yours, which is against publishers. So elaborate. [00:42:15] Speaker A: Yes. I hope the publishers will find a way of making an honest living. Here's what happened to me. It happened ten years ago, and it totally changed my thinking. I was asked and I'm going to name names. I don't care. I was asked to contribute an article to an edited book called Input Matters. That's a nice ambiguous title. It's clever. And I was asked to do an article on input, which I did. I had a lot of fun writing it. It was a long paper because I was enjoying myself. I reviewed all the theory, all the research. I had a section on animal language. Does this satisfy the hypothesis? Pretty much. Not 100%, but it's close. And I had a long footnote on what we should expect when aliens land from Zeta Reticula and Alpha Centauri. How will we talk to people in unidentified flying objects when they land? And what does science fiction do with these things? Can the Star Trek translator actually work, et cetera. So I really had a good time with that paper. The book came out hardcover, $160, soft cover, a bargain at like, 70 or $80. I couldn't afford to buy extra copies for my cousins at authors discount. The book didn't sell very well. Not only that, the article is doomed to oblivion because no one can find a copy. The only people who can read these books are people who have access to local university libraries because they're the only ones who buy them. And I found out that's what happens. The publishers are only interested in selling them to university libraries. They make such an enormous profit from one volume that it's worth it. And the tragedy is, this is how they get junior scholars involved. Let's say you're a young professor at a university, and you're working on, let's say, error correction. Big topic, and you've got papers. So a publisher contacts you and say, we'd like you to do a volume on error correction. Big famous publisher. Get some colleagues to give you articles. You be the editor, and you want it. You need it to be promoted and get tenure. So you do it. It's very, very tempting. Then it comes out 100 and $5200. Nobody buys it. Nobody can read the papers, but you get promoted. Okay? And then I noticed my tax return. Keeping track. Everything is getting expensive. Journals used to be quite affordable, and that's important for me because I work in so many areas at once. I regularly keep up with about 2030 journals all the time. It's part of my work. Couldn't afford them anymore. I've stopped subscribing. I just don't have the money. Nobody does. The book comes out. Handbook of Second Language Acquisition. $150. US. Can't do it. So I then read about two different enterprises that got me interested. One was a British mathematician who is the winner of the Fields Medal, which is like the Nobel Prize. And about eight, nine years ago, algebraic geometry. He started a petition against one of the big publishers. I won't mention any names elseiver. Okay, well, by the way, the publisher I was angry at that published this book, Input Matters. They also published a book called Poverty and Education and charged $160. The irony was lost on them. I won't mention their name again. It was multilingual matters. Yeah. They deserve the criticism, I think. Anyway, so I noticed that things were everybody was getting expensive, and this was happening in math journals. And this guy wrote an article in a petition. He said, we do the work, we write the papers, we revise the papers. You guys charge. Not only do you charge, but you charge far too much. Nobody can afford it. He decided to boycott the journals. He says, I'm not publishing in the journals. I'm not reviewing your papers. I'm not subscribing. Everything will be in open access. That means free. Anybody can read it. I should point out there's a subset of journals that calls themselves open access, but they charge a lot of money. It's a vanity press. How to get your thing published. It's like 300, $400. I'm not talking about those. The ones I'm talking about are absolutely free. No question. He started a petition among mathematicians. It's extended. It's now been signed by 17,000 people, including me and my son and his wife, who are mathematicians. So they're the ones who told me about it. This has spread in the UK. The libraries have stopped ordering journals in many areas. The Linguistics Society of America is considering an open access policy. If you get a grant from the government, you cannot publish in any of these journals. That cost a lot of money. Everything should be open access. Harvard University has stopped ordering the math journals. They can't afford them. So times are changing. It's spreading throughout Europe. Linguistics and language education should be the first field to do it. The other inspiration is the Grateful Dead. You're old enough to remember the Grateful Dead, right? The rock group rung the just little bit, post Beatles, very popular group in the States. And when they were touring, a lot of young people would come to the concerts with their recorders and record the music, which is illegal, the sales of CDs and recordings. So the Grateful Dead decided to do something about it. They would begin the concert by saying, got recorders. Take them out now record us. Give it to your friends. We love it. They decided not to make money on recordings, but to make money on their concerts. Now, I haven't figured out how to make money, but I know I'm not going to make money on books and journals. They just don't sell that well. Okay, so this is the revolution, and it's starting out modestly. My contribution is I signed the petition, and it's okay for people like me because I'm retired. I'm not going to be promoted. I'm not reviewed. I have had tenure already, so it doesn't matter. So if there are snobby people on committees who want you to publish in the expensive journals, that doesn't bother me. And if more people like me do this, it will become more acceptable. And if the libraries continue not to subscribe or pay for them, the field will change. I think it's inevitable. So now I only publish in open access journals. I no longer subscribe to the Tsaw quarterly foreign language channels, applied linguistics. I couldn't afford it if I wanted to. Nobody can. Okay? And I hope other people catch on eventually. I think this will happen. This is an exciting time for the field. So I hope today that I'm not only giving you some useful information on language acquisition and making your life easier as an acquirer and as a teacher, I hope I can save you some money, because the scholars complain, the professors complain that teachers don't read anything. Of course they don't read anything. The articles are long, they're boring. They're written to be published, not to be read. They're hard for me to read, and they're super duper expensive. If I want to get a reprint of an article that's in a regular journal, it costs $40 US. The author doesn't get it. The journal gets it. This is obscene, in my opinion. So times are changing, and we hope to get our ideas across to the public by writing shorter, clearer and free articles in terms of length. The article that won the Nobel Prize for the double helix, crick and Watson. One page in the journal Nature, so you don't have to give a history of civilization advice to other scholars. And, oh, gosh, so simple, quick articles. That, I think, is the breakthrough. [00:51:08] Speaker B: So that's a good transition to where people can find out more about the hypothesis about what your work is. Because you have free articles on your website, right? [00:51:21] Speaker A: Yes. Let me say two, three things about this, how to get at this stuff. Not just mine, but everybody's. Yes. I have my own website, and you can find my articles. Please download them. You don't have to ask permission. You can use them for any reasonable purpose. Good for birthdays, bar mitzvahs, weddings, whatever. So do that. That's for my papers. And every so often. Sdcrashin.com D is my middle name. David Sdcrashin. Also, I use social media. I announce the new papers on Twitter. And I not only announce my new papers, I announce other people's new, interesting papers that you can get for free. I also do it on Facebook. Just go to my name on Facebook and you'll find it the easy way. Twitter s crashing Justin Bieber. That's my goal. I want to catch up to Justin Bieber. Please help me. It's good if we get all these people to do it and post their stuff on Twitter. You combine followers, we can get this information to 100,000 people, no problem at all. And that's what I think is the advantage of social media. So I use social media to announce publications and mostly to criticize Donald Trump. Those are the two things. [00:52:43] Speaker B: All right, so that's s crashing, you said, right? [00:52:46] Speaker A: Yeah. S crashing on Twitter. [00:52:50] Speaker B: Great. This was a pleasure. Is there anything you forgot to mention that needs to be out there? [00:52:58] Speaker A: Well, I'll remember it five minutes after we click off and I'll put it on Twitter. How's that? [00:53:05] Speaker B: Sounds good. [00:53:06] Speaker A: Website once again. Sdcrashen.com twitter SRA it was a great pleasure. [00:53:12] Speaker B: I'm really happy that we can make this finally work after a few technical hiccups. And let's see whether we can bring you to Europe with the polyglot gathering or anything, or maybe the conference once. [00:53:27] Speaker A: It'S there is something about polyglot gathering I want to mention. I had such a good time in Montreal with the polyglots. You sit around, go out to dinner. Kaufman was there. It was very nice. And I've noticed that the polyglots, the ones I met, are really interesting, easygoing, friendly people. It was unusually easy to interact with them. That's no accident. If you want to acquire language, it helps to be friendly. Then people talk to you. So it's a happy coincidence, but I found the group, and one thing about the group is they were very proud of each other. Like, oh, you got to hear this guy speak Ukrainian. Cool. Taking pleasure in people's accomplishments, which is quite different from academics, where you're nervous someone will reveal your inadequacies. So I found it to be a very nice, friendly group. No question. [00:54:26] Speaker B: I hope we all meet in person at one of the future ones. [00:54:30] Speaker A: Yeah, I hope so too. Very good. [00:54:32] Speaker B: All right, that's it. Thanks very much. I'm about to go to bed. It's quite late. [00:54:38] Speaker A: Very good. [00:54:40] Speaker B: And, yeah, you have a wonderful day. [00:54:44] Speaker A: Thanks for inviting me. It's a great pleasure. Great. Bye.