[B-Greek] Point of Antithesis in Language Teaching Methodologies
vunzndi at vfemail.net
vunzndi at vfemail.net
Fri May 9 20:35:48 EDT 2008
Quoting Randall Buth <randallbuth at gmail.com>:
> We may be quite close once accomodation is made for terminology.
> See below **
Yes it would appear so.
> On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 2:56 AM, <vunzndi at vfemail.net> wrote:
>> Dear Ruth,
>> let me please say first of all that I agree entirely that an approach which
>> the student does not internalise a language in anyway whatsoever will not
>> work. but rather it also needs to be noted that non grammar-translation
>> methods do not always work. By halfway houses I was refering to those
>> methodologies thet students internalise but do not have total fluency as a
>> primary aim.
> In a sense, our summer SXOLH may be one of these halfway houses.
> Efficient for vocab and internalizing, but with grammar description
> (mostly Greek, though) providing for an analytical side and
> allowing a student to see structure that they haven't internalized.
I hope this goes well.
>> Studies of adults who move from one language community to another show that
>> whilst these adults can function to a degree in a second language, however
>> without specific language study there are some points of a language that are
>> not usually grasped.
> This is especially true for international expats who need to work in a new
> country and often use English in international settings. There is also the
> 'plateau' phenomenon where language learners adapt to a particular level
> of competance and just freeze forever. Extensive free reading often
> releases a person to make continual forward progress. A class framework
> can add both supervison and structure to that progress.
Actually I was think of a study of Italian workers in the UK, the
example you give of expates who freeze at a certain level is one I am
very aware of. If one is living in a langauge community there are many
ways to make progress, talking. listening, films, songs, etc , not
just reading. A concious effort needs to be made to break though a
BTW for the past decade or so most of the time I do not speak English
even though it is my native tongue, and try to avoid language freeze:-)
>> The basic unit for communication in the sentance, however non-native users
>> of a language often translate at the level of words. There are many cases
>> where the changes a not a matter changing words but of different structure.
>> A simple example would be, "Hello, Mr Green!" in say Chinese the word order
>> changes to that of "Mr Green, hello!".
>> Learning a language has levels - if a persons understanding is at level one
>> then then can understand a level one expression by either what they know or
>> extending vocabulary, and a level two expression may be comprenedable with
>> guidance, however a level three expression is beyond the person. Many
>> language learners try to improve by increasing vocabulary, though some
>> vocabulary increase maybe needed it is guided exposure to language of the
>> next level up that is essential. Other language learners are at level one
>> and wonder why they do not progress by exposure to level 3 language.
>> In fact by this model there are more than 3 levels to Koine Greek ( I would
>> say 4 or 5) - the key to a good course is how to enable people to progress
>> from one level to the next. Whilst grammar tramslation without
>> internalisation can not efficiently achieve this - if the aim of a
>> individual is to be able to read the New Testament , a programme of
>> carefully selected material should enable a person to reach this goal in
>> much less time than the 10 thousand plus hours required to master a
>> language. Furthermore paying attention to translation issues is essential if
>> the aim of the individual is to in many cases express the conclusions of his
>> findings in some language than Greek to others.
> Yes, I would think 4-6 levels would be a practical way to assess overall
> progress for Koine. I think 10000 hours is excessive, though. Foreign
> students at Hebrew U go thru a 6-level training that accumulates
> approximately 46 "credits" of modern Hebrew, which is required, but is
> not credited to their degree programs ! smile !, and may be passed/
> skipped by proficiency exams. If one calculates 15 class hours+15
> outside study+20 play/extra usage per credit, then a student will have
> typically invested 2500 hours into language acquisition during
> their first 12-24 months of a program. They probably come out at a
> Hebrew equivalent to an English TOEFL level of 550 and above. I am
> not sure since, I don't work with English testing either here or at US
> institutions where I've seen that figure. In any case, they are expected
> to be able to take classes, lectures, tests, and write papers in
> Hebrew. The first semester after achieving the level can be an
> excilerating, challenging experience as the student translates their
> rating on paper to reality. The above is why I tend to use the figure
> 3000 hours. 10000 is better, of course. The nice thing about 3000 is
> that the student is already at such a high level that they simply keep
> using the lanuage and will pass 10000 hours at some point if anyone
> were counting.
Here we a talking about degrees of fluency - 3000 hours means that
John and Mark are very readable, but Paul's writings and to a certain
extent Luke/acts still pose a challenge in many places. Those same
Hebrew students after three or four years of using Hebrew will be at
the 10000 hour plus mark and can tell you there is a big difference.
However is one's aim is to be able to read the New Testament fluently
a carefully structure programme should in theory be able to reach
these two levels of understanding in significantly less time. Whilst
the graduates of such a programme would not be Koine scholars, the
would be meaning ful readers of the New Testament which is the aim of
many people. For New Testament fluency considering the time most have
available to study then one would hope that close to these levels
could be reached in about 1000 and 3000 hours as opposed to 3000 and
10000 hours respectively.
As you say 4-6 levels for Koine. Identifying these levels, and
producing materials, courses and tests to go with these would be one
way to greatky enhance Koine learning. As mentioned earlier a person
needs to be well ground in one level before going onto the next.
Little wonder completing one or two years on Koine leaves someone
struggling to read many New Testament passages - the person is a say
level 3 but the text is a level 5. What is needed is a way to get to
level 4. As you mention 3-6 weeks of intensive Koine may take one up a
level. Such graded materials are available for many languages, but
seem to be lacking for Koine - I would be interested to know what
>> In conclusion yes - grammar translation without internalisation is not
>> really up to scratch, but also internalisation without grammar transaltion
>> also does not meet the true needs.
> I read your last sentence in different directions. If it means using
> communicative teaching techniques and including enhanced grammatical
> input, and extensive reading, assisted or not. then oui, absolument. I
> would certainly expect students to take and pass traditional exams,
> even to score higher for the same time input.
Yes this is my main piont.
> If it means assuming that grammar-translation is an engine that will
> achieve whatever internalization is necessary for the desired reading
> skills or that it might do so with minor adjustments, then we are talking
> two different approaches and not taking advantage of how humans are
> wired for rapid language acquisition. The nice thing about
> some approaches is that learning can be at a 200% faster rate and
> be fun. I would recommend reading some of the case studies in the
> first 50 pages of James Asher's Learning A Language Through
> Actions, 6th edition, 2004. The studies include classes and students
> tested for grammar and reading after the first year against equivalent
> control groups.
Different people learn in different ways - there are some poeple who
do internalise even during a grammar-translation approach. The nails
where put in the grammar-translation method for modern language
teaching many years ago. There are different challenges for
teaching/learning a second language where the student is in the target
language community and teaching learning a foreign language where the
student is living in his mother tongue language community.If ones aim
is Koine fleuncy then the same solutions will work, the question for
many then is what is the way to New Testament fluency when there is
not the time to achieve Koine fluency.
>> John Knightley
>> Quoting Randall Buth <randallbuth at gmail.com>:
>> > John Knightley egrapse
>> > <What does this have to say about learning Koine Greek - it says
>> > firstly that if ones primary aim is to be able to read the New
>> > Testament in Greek and where desired translate a phrase or sentance
>> > into ones native tongue then a methodology based upon reading and
>> > translation, with attention of the principles of translation and good
>> > dictionaries, will sooner or later work if one puts in enough hours.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > shalom John,
>> > Thank you for the input on the broader points. I've extracted one
>> > item that reflects a common assumption that I think needs more
>> > discussion within a 'point of antithesis' discussion.
>> > It seems logical that if a primary goal is reading, that the most
>> > direct and efficient way to the goal would be to just read.
>> > But is it? Are humans wired that way?
>> > This reading goal and framework is often thought of within second
>> > language acquisition studies as a historical mistake that the
>> > Coleman (?) commission made in the 1920's in US education
>> > policy. With "wonderful" 'monolingual' results to use John
>> > Schwandt's term. [last sentence was friendly but ironic ]
>> > Today, second language acquisition and full literature
>> > programs do not treat the 'reading only' programs as
>> > 'supplying the goods'. Graduate students who do 'German for
>> > Reading' courses do not think in the language and cannot do
>> > a close, literary reading of a text in that language. The 'for
>> > reading' courses are for people who are NOT interested in that
>> > language, for people who do not intend to spend their lives
>> > perusing that literature. Literature departments do not
>> > recommend that their own students do such courses.
>> > I think that it is important for discussions about KOINH to come
>> > up with programs that can compare to full literature programs.
>> > For people who may be teaching or would like to comfortably
>> > read the literature from WITHIN the language. The halfway
>> > houses where people don't internalize the language already
>> > exist. But because of the way that they are structured,
>> > they become Hotel Californias. "Such a lovely place."
>> > What about people who want a full language program? They
>> > want to internalize KOINH.
>> > Some of the seminary students will be among them.
>> > Certainly next generations teachers. Surely there are many
>> > out there that want out of Hotel California.
>> > ERRWSQE
>> > Randall
> Randall Buth, PhD
> randallbuth at gmail.com
> Biblical Language Center
> Learn Easier - Progress Further - Remember for Life
This message sent through Virus Free Email
More information about the B-Greek