2
3
4
INTRODUCTION
More people go to more different foreign countries than ever before, and
there has never before been such a widespread practical need to know
foreign languages. For those whose mother tongue is not English, that is
obviously the most generally useful language to learn. And the greater
the number of people who know English, the more useful English
becomes. It is invaluable to travellers of all kinds, and to those who want
to send letters or faxes, telephone or radio messages, across the world.
However, knowing English alone would not be nearly enough even if
almost everybody in the world knew how to speak it. It is widely
recognized that in the world of business it is an immense advantage to be
able to write or talk to customers and partners in their own language. But
the need to know foreign languages other than English extends far
beyond those engaged in trade and industry. Journalists can only do their
job half effectively if they do not understand the language of the country
where they are working. Nobody, in fact, whether tourist, expatriate
worker, diplomat, or anybody else, can come to more than a superficial
appreciation of a people's attitudes and pleasures, sorrows and
aspirations, if he or she cannot understand its speech and its newspapers.
A country's culture is almost completely hidden to anyone who cannot
follow the words the population uses to express it. To learn new
languages is to open up new worlds.
Learning foreign languages, though, can be far more than just useful for
practical purposes. If approached as an adventure rather than a chore, it is
one of the most fascinating, rewarding and exciting activities a human
being can engage in. It is no exaggeration to say that, for many people,
finding out about languages is a joy, a passion. Indulging curiosity and
satisfying curiosity are essential parts of this joy. The Finnish writer
Veikko Koskenniemi once wrote that 'Curiosity is the knocker on the door
to wisdom.' But curiosity about languages can not only bring wisdom,
and understanding; it can also bring people together, not just in the
obvious practical everyday sense, but as an interest shared by enthusiasts.
Learning languages is perhaps the most 'outgoing' hobby in the world.*
In many ways the times have never been better for studying foreign
languages than they are today. Communications between countries are
easier than they have ever been. It is easier than ever before to hear
foreign languages and to obtain written material in them. There are also
probably more people than ever before who have the opportunity and the
time to study them. For the increasing number of people who are
unwillingly unemployed there are few better - and more affordable 5
ways of getting a sense of purpose and an interest in life. And in the
ageing populations of the rich countries there are ever more pensioners
with the leisure to discover an enjoyment that maybe most of them have
never suspected.
The difficulties of learning foreign languages have been both harmfully
underestimated and harmfully exaggerated. Learning a foreign language
needs time and dedication. On the other hand, contrary to what many
believe, most people can probably learn languages well if they go about it
in the right way and if they really want to. Enthusiasm can enable people
to learn lots of things they might think they were incapable of learning,
and one of the main aims of this book is to help overcome any inferiority
complex some readers might have about their linguistic abilities.
The message we want to give is one of encouragement and optimism.
Self-confidence is not only something that in itself gives happiness and
satisfaction; it also makes people much more efficient language learners.
That in turn gives a sense of worth and achievement. It is never too late to
start learning languages. Nobody is too old. It is never too early, either.
Nobody is too young, so long as their endeavour springs from a
spontaneous ambition and is not imposed in any way. The right age to
start learning foreign languages is the age you feel an urge to do so.
At the same time, however, we have to emphasise that millions of
people go about learning languages in the wrong way. They waste a great
deal of time and emotional energy in misguided effort. They accept too
easily the latest fashions in learning methods prescribed by the 'experts',
and believe too readily in the inducements of what has become a vast
world-wide language-teaching industry. An alliance of publishers,
language-business entrepreneurs and academics makes large amounts of
money for a small number of people. Those who pay are innocent
students of all ages.
With the help of this book we hope you will be able to learn foreign
languages rationally and effectively. It is the product of the many years
we have spent both teaching and learning them ourselves.
Those who have never tried to learn a foreign language may perhaps be
stimulated to take up a pursuit that they are probably far more fitted to
engage in than most of them believe.
Then there are those who have tried language learning before, but are
dissatisfied with their methods or their progress. We should like to help
them to learn all the languages they want to learn, and even pass
examinations in them, without spending a lot of money and without
being dependent on other people or on institutions. Relying on oneself is
not only the surest way to learn; it also gives the greatest satisfaction. Yet
6
to be successful as well as independent, most language learners need
some guidance. There are basic principles which are universal, and it is
often a failure to apply these that leads to disappointment and frustration.
This book tries to make these principles clear.
We hope, too, that language teachers will find food for thought in these
pages, and that some of our advice will be of interest to them.
This is a practical book. It explains what to learn, and how to learn it, as
well as how much time and work you are likely to have to put into your
studies. And, as important as anything, it explains the nature of languages
and how to think about them. We believe it will be useful to both those
who are native English-speakers and those who are not. It contains a lot
of information and advice that we think is important for people studying
English as a foreign language, including those who want to pass
examinations in it; but the book is written just as much for everybody, of
any nationality, who wants to study any language.
Learning languages, then, involves both effort and joy. So we wish you,
as the Italians say, 'Buon lavoro!' - 'May your work be good!' However, if
you want to avoid time-consuming toil, you could instead adopt the
following strategy that EVG found in an old book of black magic:
Catch a young swallow. Roast her in honey. Eat her up. Then you will
understand all languages.
Wer fremde Sprachen nicht kennt, weiss nichts von seiner eigenen (Goethe)
He who does nor know foreign languages knows nothing of his own
On apprend a tout âge
One is never too old to learn
A.G. E.V.G.
*One of the fruits of this common enthusiasm is the society founded by
EVG, Amici Linguarum (Friends of Languages), which has members
all over the world. No rules! No subscription fees!
7
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We owe a great debt to AG's one-time colleague Ivor Pemberton, who has
expressed his friendship by going through the entire text of the book and
subjecting every detail of it to the most thorough scrutiny. He has also
made many valuable comments on the content. The defects in the writing
that remain are where we have failed to take his advice.
We express our thanks below to the many other individuals who have
helped us in different ways in the writing of this book.
A.G. E.V.G.
I should like to make a special mention of the kindness of Jeanne
McCarten and Michael McCarthy, always ready at a moment's notice to
respond to my many requests for information, advice, and practical aid.
David Bond and I, during the years we worked together and the many
years since, have never stopped discussing and exchanging letters on the
subject of languages and how to learn them. Without the enthusiasm and
friendly enquiring spirit he always brings to these debates, the will,
confidence and energy needed for my task would have been so much less.
I also want to express my gratitude for the help that I have been given
by Derek and Rosemarie Baines (UK/Germany), Michael Bulkley (UK),
Lucia Duff (Italy/UK), Caroline Edge (UK), Roy Fleetwood (UK), Hugh
Gethin (UK), Sylva Gethin (Sweden/ UK), Yukiko Isono (Japan/UK),
Paul and Rachel O'Higgins (Ireland/UK), Maria Pemberton (Italy/UK),
Diane Reeve (UK), Mario Rinvolucri (UK), and Marion Shirt (UK).
I especially thank Masoud Yazdani, our publisher, for his constant
encouragement.
Lastly, and above all, I say 'thank you' to my wife, Mieko SuzukiGethin. Without her patience, and her support, both moral and practical, I
should never have been able to complete my part in this work.
A.G.
Sonja Gunnemark. Among our friends Sonja has always been known as
'the gentle genius', admired for her mastery in many fields and loved for
her generosity and loyalty. Her artistic mind and unfailing common sense
have made up for my own shortcomings, and throughout our married life
she has always taken time to advise me and help me find the right word
or phrase - in Swedish and English and other languages.
Stig G. Gunnemark. My brother Stig, founder and director of the
publishing enterprise Geolingua, became legendary because of his
honesty, wisdom and helpfulness. His death in 1994 was an irreplaceable
loss. All those who were lucky enough to come in contact with him in
some way will agree that Shakespeare's famous words also apply to Stig:
8
'Hi.s life was gentle; and the elements so mixed in him that Nature might
stand up and say to all the world, This was a man!'
In addition to my wife Sonja and my brother Stig, I am especially
indebted to the following friends, all members of Amici Linguarum:
Hans Alberg (Sweden), Leonard R.N. Ashley (USA), Roland J.-L. Breton
(France), Eugene Czerniawski (Russia), Johannes Hedberg (Sweden), Ola
J. Holten (Norway/ Sweden), Arvo Juutilainen (Finland), Donald Kenrick
(UK), Mary Ritchie Key (USA), Gustav Korlen (Sweden), Mari-Anne
Lindblom (Sweden), Pent Nurmekund (Estonia), Pierre L. Sales (USA),
Hans Joachim Storig (Germany), and Robert J. Throckmorton (USA).
In the next century people will say 'There were giants in the earth in
those days' (Genesis 6:4).
I should also like to express my gratitude to Tsuyoshi Amemiya
(Japan), Lasse Back (Sweden), Gerald Baker (USA), Joseph Biddulph (UKWales), Robert L. Birch (USA), Daniel Bjorkman (Sweden), John R.
Butcher (UK), Eugene S.L. Chan (Hong Kong), Vyacheslav Chirikba
(Abkhazia/Holland), Jul Christophory (Luxemburg), Marcel Cortiade
(France/Poland), Gunnar and Margot Danielsson (Sweden), Bo and Ulla
af Ekenstam (Sweden), Annmarie and Olle Fallgren (Sweden), Thomas J.
Gasque (USA), Ingvar Gullberg (Sweden), Kerstin Gunnemark (Sweden),
Nils E. Hansegard (Sweden), Einar Haugen (USA), Magnus Helin
(Sweden), Georg Holmblad (Sweden), Gunnar Jarring (Sweden), AnjaRiitta Ketokoski (Finland), Sverre Klouman (Norway), Ago Kunnap
(Estonia), Johan Lagerfelt (Sweden), Alfred F. Majewicz (Poland), Antoni
Llull Marti (Spain), Georges Massieye (France), Carl Masthay (USA), Joan
McConnell (USA), Anders W. Molleryd (Sweden), Jean-Claude Muller
(Luxemburg), Valeriu Munteanu (Romania), Bo Nensen (Sweden),
Bernard Nezmah (Slovenia), Anna J. Partington (UK), Lilia Pereira da
Silva (Brazil), Sten-Ake Petersson (Sweden), Pavel V. Petrov (Russia),
Josep Pons Sabata (Spain), Franco Rossi (Italy), Christopher K. Starr
(Trinidad), Dmitri Spivak (Russia), Eva Sternberg (Sweden), Dennis
Tengbring (Sweden), V. Lynn Tyler (USA), Ulle Udam (Estonia), Valev
Uibopuu (Sweden), Tor Ulving (Sweden), H.J. (George) Weber
(Switzerland), Nico Weber (Germany), Claes and Doris Wennerberg
(Sweden), Stig Wickstrom (Sweden), Edith Woolfson (USA), David
Wright (Sweden), Jan Ahman (Sweden), Olle Ohman (Sweden), Ragnar
Ostlund (Sweden).
E.V.G.
9
PART I
THE ART OF LEARNING LANGUAGES
Amorey Gethin (AG) and Erik V. Gunnemark (EVG)
10
1
BASICS 1. WHO CAN AND WHO SHOULD LEARN
LANGUAGES
§1 A 'talent for languages' is not so rare as you may
think
What does one need to be good at foreign languages? A phrase one hears
a lot is 'a talent for languages'. What special thing is that? We should start
by considering that we have all shown a talent for at any rate one
language - our own. So if some people have difficulty learning a foreign
language, it must mean that something is getting in the way of the natural
talent they were born with. When this happens it is perfectly reasonable
to talk about one person having less linguistic ability than another.
But we should be quite clear about what that means in reality. What it
does not mean is that a person is necessarily stuck with that lesser ability
for all time. AG's experience shows that is a false idea. He says: 'At school
I was certainly not particularly good at languages, that is, languages as
school subjects, even if I was not particularly bad either. Then when I was
sixteen and still at school it happened that I became interested in Spain
and suddenly felt I must know the language too. I describe in greater
detail in §53 the effect this had on my attitude to foreign languages
generally. But the important thing here is that it did change my attitude
and approach to languages, and I discovered I had much more linguistic
'ability' than I - and anyone else - had suspected. I would never have had
my comparative success with foreign languages if I had permanently
accepted the view of my 'linguistic nature' that my teachers and I myself
had had.'
So people who do not think they are good at languages may suddenly
find they are good at them after all. This may happen in a variety of ways.
It may happen because people change their general attitude to foreign
languages. Or maybe they change their practical methods. These changes
may be conscious or unconscious. Or again a person's circumstances may
change and she finds herself able to do things she could not do before.
Nothing ventured, nothing gained
§2 National differences
However, there are some clear facts as regards differing 'abilities' in
learning languages, and we should accept them and consider what they
may signify. One clear fact is that the people of some nationalities are on
11
average better at foreign languages than people of some other
nationalities.
There is a widespread belief that if people of a certain nationality are
generally not good at a particular language it is because the foreign
language is so different from their own; and, conversely, that if they are
good at, say, English, it is because their own language is close to English.
The facts do not bear this view out. For example, Hungarian belongs to
the Uralic family of languages, and Turkish to the Altaic family; the two
families are sometimes classified together as belonging to one combined
Ural-Altaic family. In any case, both languages are quite different from
those of the Indo-European family to which most European languages
belong. Yet Hungarian-speakers tend to learn other European languages
well, often outstandingly well, while Turkish-speakers unfortunately
often have great difficulty with European languages. There are also
noticeable differences in average linguistic ability between speakers of the
different Latin languages. And Persian-speakers do not as a rule learn
English any more efficiently than Arabic-speakers, although Persian is an
Indo-European language, like English, and Arabic is not.
Naturally it is easier (see §§218-225 and 256-258) to learn a language that
is close to one's own than to learn one with a very different vocabulary
and grammar. But people who are good at learning one foreign language
will almost always be good at learning others, even if those other
languages are further from their own; and if they are bad at a 'distant'
language they are unlikely to be good at one that is much closer to their
own. People will of course mostly be able to get by in a language that is
very close to their own, while they may not be able - apparently - to cope
at all with a language that is not so close. But this in no way means that
their linguistic abilities vary according to what language they are trying to
learn.
Again, many people think that those who speak a language spoken by
only a small fraction of the population of the world will be good at
foreign languages 'because they have to be', while if one speaks one of the
world's major languages one tends not to bother enough about foreign
languages. But it is not difficult to think of cases where this 'rule' does not
apply, and anyway it surely makes little or no practical difference to a
person whether her language is spoken by fifty million others or five
million - in either case it is very much a minority language. Once more,
though - and this is the crucial point - even if it is true to some extent that
speakers of some minor languages tend to be better at foreign languages,
it does not mean that they have greater inborn ability. There are quite
different causes.
12
§3 Lack of talent is not inborn; cultural influences are
strong
Indeed, the fact that there are national differences suggests it is very
unlikely that difficulties in learning foreign languages are inborn. It seems
almost certain that the most important influences on the average ability of
a country's citizens to learn them are cultural and educational.
It is very difficult, probably impossible, to discover the mental
processes involved in learning foreign languages, in the sense, that is, of
establishing some set of 'natural laws', some universal process. This is
because everybody is subject to cultural and social influences and their
minds work in certain ways determined by those influences. The
influences will be different in different communities; and even within the
same community different individuals will be subject to different
influences.
Some of these cultural influences are very subtle and very difficult to
put one's finger on.1 In our present state of understanding it is almost
impossible to do anything about the harmful influences in the sense of
direct, specific cures. This, though, does not mean that we cannot do
anything to resist them. If we learn foreign languages according to good
principles, the unfavourable cultural influences will have little or no effect
on us.2
§4 Think rationally about learning languages
Probably the most important thing to recognize here is that when people
study foreign languages, what they actually do and what they ought to do
are more often than not two quite different things. So it is unlikely to be
very helpful to examine closely what people do do instead of thinking
about what the rational thing to do is. There are a number of basic but
simple truths about languages, and the best way to learn them, which can
be worked out if one thinks about a few equally basic and simple facts.
Practically everybody knows those facts already, or they can be easily
found out or learnt with a little experience.3
We need to apply rational thought to practical realities, and individuals
should use their rationality in accord with their own particular nature.
But there we would say: Be on your guard. Don't jump to conclusions
about your 'linguistic nature'. Don't accept what traditional or expert
views about language learning seem to say about that nature. Don't
assume that it really is as it seems to be at the moment. Put rationality
before what you think your nature is. If you do, you may get a pleasant
surprise and find your nature is other than you thought, and that you can
13
do things you never suspected you could do.
§5 Resist bad influences on your talent, and rely on
yourself
Unfortunately, where language learning is concerned, most of the world's
education systems put the emphasis almost entirely on teaching, when it
ought to be on learning. When teaching is emphasized, students tend not
to be told about the ways of thinking that will help them automatically
avoid the unfavourable influences. Indeed, the emphasis on teaching may
often actually encourage bad learning habits.
Take control of your language learning yourself! Don't wait for and rely
on teachers, the latest fashion in teaching techniques, or the 'new
scientific' system of learning. None of them will do you any good if you
don't rely on yourself, and if you rely on yourself you don't need them.
Accept the whole responsibility as your own. It is to you it really belongs,
and the more you accept it the more you will succeed.
If you feel at the moment that you are not good at languages, you
should certainly not give up and accept the situation. You may find that
by changing your approach, changing your methods, and relying on
yourself, you can become a really good linguist. One of the main purposes
of this book is to help you do this.4
Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera
Heaven helps those who help themselves
§6 A very few people may have permanent difficulties
However, it would be quite wrong of us to finish this part of the
discussion without admitting that there are probably some individuals
(and this has nothing to do with intelligence) who may never be able to
learn languages easily. There are certainly far fewer of them than most
people think. But there will be people who may fully accept the advice in
this book, for instance, and be as willing and eager to follow it as
anybody, yet who just cannot put it into practice successfully. Nobody
knows anything about how the brain works in this respect, let alone what
causes the individual differences. All we can say at the moment is that for
some mysterious reason some people never get onto the right
'wavelength'. That is sad and very frustrating for them. But there are
many things in life far more important than being good at languages,
§7 A good memory is not necessary
There is a widespread belief that one of the things one needs in order to
be good at foreign languages is a good memory. We should get rid of that
idea straight away, and at the same time the idea that one cannot learn
14
languages if one has a bad one. Even if you have a memory much worse
than average there is no reason why you should not learn a foreign
language, or several foreign languages, perfectly well. We can see that
this is so simply by considering the fact that every 'normal' person in the
world, whether they have good memories or bad ones, clearly has a
memory good enough with words for them to remember thousands of
meanings in their own language, and exactly how those meanings are
used.
§8 Bilingual people don't have particularly good
memories
Bilingual people, people who have been brought up speaking two
languages, also provide a good demonstration of how memory is not
important for learning languages. Bilingual people have to remember
twice as many or almost twice as many words as people who only have
one native language. They do this successfully without any special effort.
Yet obviously we cannot suppose that all bilingual people have better
than average memories. They will have memories of varying efficiency
just like any other group of people.
§9 Connect foreign words to 'things', not to words in
your own language
Remembering the words of a foreign language depends on how you
remember them, not on how good your memory is. The secret is to
connect foreign words to things or ideas, not to words in your own
language. In other words, you should not try to remember words (or
phrases or sentences) by translating them. Think instead directly of the
thing the word represents. For instance, if you are an English-speaker
learning French do not try to remember that 'lit' = the word 'bed' but that
'lit' = that thing that people sleep in. The same goes for abstract words.
Think of the idea of fear, not the word 'fear', when you are learning the
French word 'peur'.
If this seems a strange approach to suggest, consider the fact that when
you were learning your own language you had no other language you
could translate the words of your own language into. You had to
'translate' the words of your native language into things or ideas in your
mind. That is the natural way to use words and to learn them. Let us look
at another example from English/French. What happens when an
English-speaker learns, as part of her own language, the word 'souffle'?
She does not say to herself: I must remember that the word 'souffle' = the
words 'light frothy dish'. She gets in her mind a picture of the thing that is
light and frothy that one can eat. Yet in fact, of course, 'souffle' (with its
15
acute accent and all!) is a French word. So the English-speaker is learning,
quite naturally and without any worry, a French word in the same way
psychologically that she is learning all English words, and in the same
way that she should learn all French words if she is studying French.
The importance of connecting words directly to things and ideas can
perhaps be seen rather well if we think of telephone numbers. Imagine
you were asked to memorize just a single column of names and their
numbers in a telephone directory. You would surely find it very difficult,
particularly if you did not know personally any of the people named in
the column. It would require a person with an outstanding memory to
learn that whole column of numbers within a reasonable time.
Many people find they can learn words if they are given pictures they
can associate with them. This is an excellent method as far as it goes, but
the trouble is that it doesn't go very far. One can really only use pictures
to illustrate words for concrete objects. One cannot make pictures of
abstract ideas, nor of most actions. Attempts to do so are dangerous in
two ways. Students can easily misunderstand what the picture is
supposed to represent; and they will almost inevitably start searching for
a word in their own language, which it is the whole point of pictures to
stop them doing. It should always be immediately obvious what a picture
is intended to represent.
There are indeed some purely practical though important differences
between the ways people learn the words of their own language and
those of foreign languages. We shall discuss the details of those
differences in chapter 8 (Vocabulary 2), particularly in §§119,121 and 126.
§10 What motives are effective for language learning?
The need for an inquisitive attitude
So a good memory is not one of the things one must have to be a good
linguist. What, then, does one need?
Most important of all is probably one's attitude to the language one is
learning. One needs to be curious, inquisitive, about the language itself.
(In practice, if one has the right curiosity about one foreign language, one
will probably have it about any language one wishes to learn.) That
inquisitiveness is usually enough by itself for a person to learn a foreign
language successfully, while without such an interest it is often very
difficult for people to get very far, however strong their other motives
may be.
Necessity can be a powerful driving force: the need, for example, to
learn a language in order to cope in a foreign country or engage in at least
a minimum of conversation or correspondence with foreigners. But the
16
sad fact seems to be that desperately desiring a nicer job, or a rise in
salary, or more efficient and profitable conduct of one's business, or
wanting to enjoy a holiday more, is no guarantee by itself that one is
going to learn a foreign language well and quickly, however intensive a
course one takes in it. Many people would have been spared much
disappointment, disillusionment and frustration if there had been more
awareness of this truth, and many business people and others would have
saved themselves a lot of money if they had realized it.
As a rule, just an urge to have a command of a language for the sake of
having a command of that language is enough to give a person the power
to get that command. An ulterior motive without that urge is unlikely to
produce the desired result. Naturally this interest in a foreign language
for its own sake is often bound up with an interest in a country and its
people; or learners want to learn a language - French, for example because
they think it sounds beautiful.
One needs to grasp at a language for its immediate rewards. At its most
extreme this is a feeling of 'I want to do it just like the natives' and it is in a
way a childish itch, the same sort of itch that makes children so efficient at
learning language.
Aiming direct at the language itself in this way probably also
encourages the imaginitive, flexible approach that is basic for any
effective grasp of a foreign language. It is striking how well so many
international sportsmen and sportswomen speak foreign languages. This
may surprise some people. But it is not really surprising when one
considers their urgent need for immediate reward That immediate reward
is not only being able to communicate for practical purposes, though that
is undoubtedly important in many cases. What probably impels people in
the world of sport most of all is the need to be 'one of the lads' like
everybody else. (They also enjoy the wonderful advantage of constantly
hearing the foreign language in practical action. Many of them may
believe it was the formal lessons they had that were the key to their
success. This is unlikely.)
To have a good chance of learning a foreign language successfully your
motivation should be both long-term and short-term. You need
motivation that does not fade when you come up against difficulties or
Tiave other things to do'. But you ought also, if possible, to be in a
position to reach a clearly defined goal after a maximum of 3 or 4 months,
so that you are conscious of making definite progress and spurred on to
new efforts.
17
Where there's a will, there's a way
§11 Teaching languages to children is not effective;
adults learn better
Many ordinary people have almost certainly been aware for a long time
that young children are not as good at learning foreign languages in class
at school as older ones. That is, they are not good at formal language
learning as organized by adults. No sensible person would try to teach
French, say, to English-speaking five-year-olds at school, although they
might well encourage the children to 'pick it up' in a French-speaking
community. Trying to teach a foreign language to a five-year-old in a
classroom can only come from badly misguided theories.
On the other hand, a twenty-year-old starting a new foreign language,
at university for instance, usually makes so much more rapid progress
than a ten-year-old at school that most people would think it silly even to
compare them. Among other things, adults can even acquire a far larger
vocabulary in a foreign language, and far more quickly, than a child can
in her own language, for reasons explained in §119. See also §126.
§12 Language learning should be enjoyed, not imposed
We have suggested that a 'childish itch' is a good thing to have for the
learning of languages. We hope it was obvious that we were not using the
phrase in any unfavourable sense. On the contrary, it is precisely the kind
of childish joy that can be got out of mastering a foreign language that
makes it so worthwhile.
But no-one should ever be forced to learn a foreign language. Learning
a language should never be a duty, and it is morally wrong as well as
ineffective for it to be imposed as a task. If it is, many will not experience
it in the way they should be allowed to. Learning a foreign language can
and ought to be enjoyable.
Unfortunately many educationists in the field of language studies
compulsory or otherwise - seem to have a different attitude. The approach
often appears to be to try to get students to learn almost without noticing
it, to manipulate them into success. Boredom is to be avoided at all costs.
Students must be kept amused, and learning resistence must be
overcome.
It is surely a clear sign that at least some educationists do not believe
that foreign languages can really be interesting in themselves. We are no
longer so barbarous that we are prepared to flog people into learning
18
them. Therefore other means of encouraging the study of languages have
to be found, and the modern sophisticated way is to sugar the bitter pill.
(See also §43.)
Should all children really be made to learn foreign languages? How
many British people of even those who have studied French well into
their teens could use that language to tell a visitor how to get to the local
post office? Do the educational powers-that-be really believe that the
curriculum is going to produce millions of young people who can
communicate effectively in one or more foreign languages? If not, what is
their excuse for forcing children to study something most of them would
patently rather not study, particularly when it is liable to put many
people off foreign languages for life?
It is probably going to be found fairly soon, at least in Britain, - though
it will very likely not be admitted - that the attempt to train in languages
both the young and the mature for the opportunities of the great open
European market has been a failure. This will be partly the harmful result
of compulsion and partly because, as already argued, ulterior motives do
not often work well as inspiration in the learning of languages.
But the moral question is just as important as the question of the
effectiveness of study. Why can the decision to study a language not be
left to individuals, whatever their age? We should not be trying to
prepare large numbers of people to be efficient and yes, perhaps highearning - cogs in a successful economic machine. Training should be to
help individual humans do the things they want to do. To children we
should be trying to give the genuine freedom of choice and the real
independence that are rightfully theirs.
As noted by Olle Holmberg (professor of literary history at Lund 193759), 'the best things in life are the occupations one chooses for oneself; the
worst are so-called pleasures forced upon one.'
Cosa fatta per forza, non vale una scorza
Forced love does not last
§ 13 Learning a language is observing
The first essential for effective language learning, then, is to be interested
in the language itself. But if this is the necessary basic attitude, what must
one do? We come here to the heart of the process of all language learning,
both the learning of foreign languages and children's learning of their
own language.
Learning a language is observing; that is, simply noticing what words
mean what, and how the words are used together to produce broader
meanings. (See further §§28-30, 3233, and 167-177.)
19
§14 You must do the work yourself
Stated like this it may seem rather obvious. But in practice many language
students act as if they didn't know-that observing is the key. The danger is
that if one forgets that observation is the essence of learning language,
one will make the worst mistake one can make as a student of a foreign
language: one leaves the work, or at least part of the work, to other
people. In other words, one relies on teachers. We discuss the role of
teachers in more detail in chapters 4 and 5 (§§38-66). Here we only want
to emphasize that when you learn a foreign language you must do all the
work yourself. Teachers can guide you; with a bit of luck they may even
inspire you; but they cannot observe for you. This does not necessarily
mean you have to work harder. On the contrary, millions of students
could work far less hard but far more effectively if they concentrated on
observing, instead of wasting their time on pointless tasks.
Observing comes naturally to children learning their own language. It
is an urgent matter for them, as they want to share and communicate with
the world around them, but, as we know, they do not see it as a task.5 The
ideal for the rest of us, when we try to learn a foreign language, would be
to do it in the same relaxed way as children.
Les alouettes ne vous tombent pas toutes rôties dans le bec
You should not expect larks to fall ready roasted into your mouth
Notes
1. An example AG has long found intriguing is that although Norway and
Sweden have such very similar languages and cultures, and the two
languages have almost exactly the same set of vowel sounds, Swedishspeakers tend to pronounce the sound of English 'oo' (/u:/) far more
correctly than Norwegians. However, the difference has seemed less
marked in recent years.
2. There are at present very wide differences among adults in the ability
to learn foreign languages, far wider than the differences among
children learning their native language. All normal children are good or
very good at learning their language. Adults' learning of foreign
languages, on the other hand, varies from the apparently hopeless to
the perfect.
Many people seriously underestimate how proficient many adults
are at foreign languages. Many adults can in a matter of months or
very few years become much 'better' at a language than ten-year-old
children speaking it as their mother tongue. They can understand far
more words than the native children, and they can use far more
words. The only way in which the children may be superior is in the
20
accuracy of their grammar and pronunciation. Accuracy is a small
and unimportant part of the command of a language, as long as it is
not so lacking that it seriously interferes with understanding. It is
thus quite untrue to say that people suffer a decline in their ability to
learn language after a certain age. If all the distractions of adult life
are taken into consideration, it would probably be truer to say that
the basic ability to learn new languages increases with age.
It is reasonable to suppose that there are two main reasons for the
differences in apparent ability among adults. One will be that cultural
influences have varying effects on different individuals. The other
will be the varying will of the adults to learn a foreign language.
Children presumably all have much the same will (or urge) to learn
their language.
3. There is a problem with theories of language learning and their
application, whether they are 'behaviourist', 'cognitive', or any other
sort. They all tend to treat the humans that are the subject of them as
beings that go through certain (natural?) mental processes when they
learn foreign languages. In principle at least, it is believed, we can find
out what these processes are; on the basis of our knowledge of the
processes we can then manipulate the activities of students so that they
learn the foreign language more easily and efficiently. Once again,
though, we must emphasize the difference between what people do and
what they ought to and can do. There are only two effective ways to
learn a language: 'naturally', without conscious thought; and
deliberately. The whole basis of the 'deliberate' method is - or ought to
be - conscious rational thought. It is pointless to choose the 'deliberate'
method if you are not going to think constantly about what you are
doing; about both logical methods of learning and the details of the
language you are learning.
4. In recent years there has been a revival of interest in what is now called
'learner autonomy'. Students of foreign languages are encouraged to
find out what methods of learning suit them best . Some good general
principles have been proposed. (It is suggested that good language
learners are self-aware, inquisitive, and tolerant of differences between
their own and the foreign language, self-critical, realistic, willing to
experiment, actively involved, organized. See Ellis & Sinclair, 1989,
pp.6-7.) But if one really leaves a person to find out her own best way of
learning languages, one risks doing something very like throwing a
small child into the water at the deep end and expecting her to swim.
Many people who have not thought carefully about learning languages
beforehand, or read or listened to rational argument about how to do it,
21
are likely to be guided by a mish-mash of ideas, assumptions and habits
that make little or no practical sense. And telling would-be learners of
the diverse experiences of other learners does not help those who need
advice. Discovering what others have done does not tell them what
they should do themselves. Further, if they decide they like the sound of
a method and try it, they may get stuck with it, believe it gives them
some success, and so not try another perhaps more rational approach
that might have been easier and given quicker results.
On the other hand, if one advises students on the results of language
learning research, one is not only to a large extent taking the learner's
autonomy away; one is also yet again confusing what people do with
what they could do.
5. It is not possible to draw a clear borderline between the desire for
mastery and the desire to communicate. The merging of the two is
surely seen in small children, who apparently without effort pick up the
language of their playmates when they go to a foreign country. It seems
likely that the efficiency with which they do it is due at least as much to
the wish to share their companions' mastery of the language as it is to a
wish to communicate. One reason one cannot teach a language formally
to those same small children must be that in class at school they have no
need either to communicate or to share as regards the foreign language.
22
2
BASICS 2. UNDERSTANDING THE BASIC NATURE
OF LANGUAGES
§15 Languages are translations of 'life', not of other
languages
Children, though, have two great advantages. First, they are allowed to
take many years to learn their language, a length of time that older
children and adults cannot usually allow themselves for learning a
foreign language. Secondly, they do not have one language already, so
they cannot get muddled by it, and they appreciate, without thinking,
something that is fundamental to the nature of all languages: They are not
translations of other languages; they are direct 'translations' of reality, of
things, feelings, ideas, actions, of human experience.
The result of this is that at one level all languages are in principle
exactly the same, that is to say, they are sets of meanings, collections of
words for directly representing the world.1
§16 Every language is different and divides the world
up differently
But it also means that every language is in a sense completely
independent of all other languages. Each language divides the world up
in its own way, a different way from other languages. One can see this at
the very simple level of single words. For instance, Italian has two words,
On the other hand, English has two where Italian, like many other
languages, has only one:
This does not mean that when you have two words it does not matter
which you use. Each word has its separate meaning, as we can illustrate
with
do the washing up
and
make a plate
23
But Italian-speakers use 'fare' for both. In the same way, Italians use
'sapere' when they are talking about knowing facts or truths - for 'I did
not know she was here' they would use 'sapere' - and 'conoscere' when
they want to express the sense of being acquainted with somebody or
something - for 'I know her well' they would use 'conoscere'. So we can
see that 'know' has at least two different meanings.
There are untold thousands of cases like this throughout the languages
of the world. English can use the same word to describe a person who is
annoyed because his neighbour has a nicer house, and a person who is
upset because he thinks his wife is interested in another man: 'jealous'.
But Swedish, for example, calls one 'avundsjuk' and the other 'svartsjuk'.
However, it is by no means always as simple as that. In Swedish, for
instance, Isra' as an adjective has the sense of 'good', but 'bra' as an adverb
means 'well'. On the other hand, of all the things English simply calls
'good', some would be called 'bra' in Swedish but others - such as food would be called 'god'.
§ 17 Prepositions don't fit from one language to
another
Prepositions are famous for being used in their own special and
'different' way in each language, and cause great difficulties to students
all over the world. (See §§111,129 and Appendix 8.) If you look up the
Spanish word 'por' in a Spanish-English dictionary, you will almost
certainly find that the first word given is 'by'; and, vice-versa, if you look
up 'by' you will find 'por'. Yet for a sentence such as
She's walking about IN the garden
the Spanish would be
Estd paseando POR el jardin
In the same way, if you look up the Swedish 'pa' you will find 'on' and
vice-versa. Yet the English for
jag har inte sett henne PA mycket länge
is
24
I have not seen her FOR a very long time
And although dictionaries will tell you that Italian 'da' first and foremost
means 'from' or T?y', and the other way round,
She must go TO the doctor
= Deve andare DAI dottore (!)
And so on. Nearly everybody thinks it is the other people's language that
is peculiar. But the true moral to be drawn is that you must recognize that
every language works in its own special way, and if that's peculiar, then
your own language is just as peculiar as any other.
§ 18 Words in one language do not usually mean
exactly the same as words in another language
It is also important to understand that there are not many words in a
language that mean exactly the same as words in another language. (This
naturally does not apply between languages that are very close to each
other, such as the Scandinavian languages, or Russian, Ukrainian and
Bulgarian. But here we are really talking about what are effectively the
same words.)
If we imagine a word in one language (let's say English)
25
'Gentle' is in fact an example of a word that possibly has no exact
equivalent in any other language. It can of course be translated, but only
in a very rough and approximate way. The first thing to notice is how
'gentle' has to be translated in one context by a certain word and in a
different context by another word. (In some contexts it might even have to
be translated by a combination of words.) Its most likely appropriate
Russian equivalent is given for each of the following sentences:
26
Seven different Russian words are thus used for the same English word,
and further uses of 'gentle' in other contexts might require further
different Russian translations. And there is almost certainly a part of the
meaning in 'gentle' that is missing in all translations, whatever word is
used.
'Gentle' is perhaps a rather extreme case. But there are huge numbers of
words in the world's languages that have this same unique character,
even if not always so clearly.
§19 Whole expressions, too, are different in different
languages
Again, different languages express the same combination of ideas in
different ways:
27
We can see here not only that some languages sometimes leave out
meanings that other languages have to put in, and vice-versa, but also
that different languages 'think' about the same reality in different ways.
We see here that Italian, for instance, 'has...years', whereas English says
'is...years old'. (See also §§99-103.)
It is interesting that bilingual people are nearly always much better
than average at learning foreign languages. This is almost certainly
because people brought up with two languages realize naturally (and
usually unconsciously) through their own experience that different
languages work in different ways, and so their minds become more
flexible and more able to grasp how another language connects direct to
'life'.
§20 Do not learn by translating into your own language
That foreign languages work differently from your own is the first and
most basic thing to observe and remember about them. Do not try to learn
them by constantly translating them. We have already pointed out how a
much more effective way to remember words, phrases and sentences of
the foreign language is to connect them directly to things, people, events,
feelings and ideas in real life. We have just seen, in the previous sections,
28
the immediate practical difficulties involved in translation and how the
same word in one language may have to be translated into another
language by different words in different contexts. But the difficulty is also
more basic. If you always try to turn the foreign language into your own
you will never truly understand it, and you will certainly never master it
and be able to use it naturally and fluently. This is because translation
goes right against the basic nature of language that we explained above.
Translation is never truly 'true'.
§21 Translation is essential as a practical instrument
for beginners; it is translation as a 'mentality' that is
dangerous
What we have just said does not mean that you should never use a
translation given you in a book or by a teacher, or that you should never
use a dictionary. On the contrary, there is only one practical way to take
the first steps in learning a language, and that is to learn meanings
through translation. It is the only method that can give the beginner a
reasonable amount of knowledge within a reasonable time. To
recommend any other approach, such as the 'direct method', is to do a
great disservice to would-be language learners. You can only make that
direct connection between words and 'things' etc. that we have
recommended if you have first found out what 'things' the foreign words
represent. Translation is the only quick way of finding out.
But there is a right way and a wrong way of using dictionaries, and
translation generally, which we suggest in detail in §§117-118,128-131,
and 134-145. What we want to warn against here is not translation as a
practical instrument. Both EVG and AG are convinced that translation is
an essential practical instrument for any beginner making a conscious
study of a new language. (We each use somewhat different practical
methods, which we discuss in §105.) What is terribly dangerous, though,
is the translation 'mentality', the approach to foreign languages that
cannot see them or learn them as anything but translations of the mother
tongue.
It also does no harm to translate phrases and sentences literally in the
way we have just done in §19. On the contrary, this is probably the
simplest and best way to explain to a beginner the way a language works.
But neither this nor any other sort of translation should become a habit. It
should only be used right at the beginning in order to 'get you into' the
language. Once you have got a fair idea of the basks of a language you
should think of translation as something to be avoided.
§22 Translating is not the path to complete and certain
29
understanding
Many language students insist that they cannot 'really' or 'completely'
understand anything in a foreign language, from sentences to single
words, unless and until they have translated it into their own language.
Some do not go as far as this, but say they cannot be sure they have
understood until they have translated. Naturally, if you are not sure you
have understood something, and you have someone with you who knows
the foreign language, you can suggest a translation and ask that person if
you are right. But that is quite a different matter. What we are talking
about here is your basic approach and the normal practical method you
use to study the language. It really is a very bad idea always to turn the
foreign language into your own. If you still desperately hanker after such
translation, please consider two facts:
Young children have no other language to turn their mother tongue
into as they learn it. Yet we all know that in the end they learn it far more
effectively than most people who try to learn that language as a foreign
language. The children can only turn their language into 'life'. So if ever
you get a longing to turn another language into your own, remind
yourself that children can't do that, and yet they get to know exactly what
words mean.
Secondly, you can only translate a piece of one language into another if
you have already understood it properly. (If you have not understood it
properly you will translate it wrong.) But if you have understood it
properly there is no need to translate it!
Putting the cart before the horse
§23 Translation diverts your attention to the wrong
thing
There is a very basic practical psychological reason why you should not
translate. If you constantly translate you will find it far more difficult to
remember how the foreign language was expressed. Your attention
should always be on the foreign language, not on your own.
As we have just pointed out, you can only translate if you have
understood first. If you go on from there and turn the 'real life' in your
mind into your own language, you take a fatal step. You break the crucial
connection between the foreign language and 'real life'. You interfere with
the proper use of the foreign language in both 'directions', that is, both
comprehending and producing the language. When you hear or read the
same words or phrases again, you will tend to experience them in terms
30
of your own language, and so the true meaning will get distorted.
Equally, when you want to speak or write you will tend to have forgotten
the words and phrases that express what you want to say, as you will
have 'left them behind' in your hurry to turn everything into your own
language.
Alternatively, you may remember some expressions superficially, but
because the exact meaning has been overlaid by your translation - a
translation almost certainly only appropriate in certain contexts - you will
forget the proper use of the expression. Indeed, it will probably never
have been anchored in your mind in the first place, because of that haste
to translate.
Apart from anything else, this will probably mean that you will tend to
use many expressions in quite the wrong way, to convey meanings that
the expression does not have, or at least not in that context.
§24 Translating acts as a barrier to understanding
speech
Furthermore, if you try to translate as you listen to the foreign language,
you will find that you are putting an almost insurmountable obstacle in
the way of understanding the speech you hear. In real everyday situations
you simply do not have the time to both translate and understand.
§25 Translating can make language learning far more
difficult, sometimes for whole countries
It is often an insistence on translating that makes learning a foreign
language much more difficult for some individuals than for others.
Sometimes, even, this misguided approach can affect whole countries. It
is quite possible that it accounts for a lot of the difficulties in Japan, for
instance.
The practical command of foreign languages in Japan is far below the
average for highly literate communities, and this is especially remarkable
when one considers the attention paid to them in Japanese education. This
cannot be due simply to the fact that the Japanese language is very
different from English, the first foreign language for students in Japan,
since, as we have seen in §2, speakers of equally different languages can
speak English very well.
§26 Translating may also spoil the enjoyment
The translation approach may also deprive the learner of that delight
there can be in mastering a foreign language. AG's experience has been
that 'translating' students tend to have a tense anxiety about what is for
them a laborious learning process. That is perhaps partly because it is not
31
an effective method. But it is probably also because they do not
experience the thrill that one can get from controlling the direct link
between life and a 'new' language in the same way as the native speaker.
(It is not normally a thrill for the native speaker, because the native
speaker takes it for granted.)
It can perhaps in some ways be likened to learning to ride a bicycle.
Learning to ride a bicycle by carefully analysing how the muscles must be
used to apply the laws of gravity, energy and motion to the bicycle would
not only be hopelessly unsuccessful; it would be horribly boring. But a
child who learns how to ride a bicycle delights in the
natural confident mastery gained through becoming one with the
machine without any intervening process.
§27 Good translators don't translate
It is also worth considering what good translators do. They could not
even begin to translate properly if they simply transferred the words of
one language directly into those of another. What they have to do first is
turn words into the 'languageless' ideas, the 'real life' in their minds that
we have been talking about, and then, as a second stage, turn those ideas,
that 'real life', into the other language.
There can be little doubt that no person who learns a foreign language
solely through translation will ever be able to speak it completely
idiomatically and fluently. To truly master a language you will have to
get 'inside its skin', just as you have got inside the skin of your own
language. You don't get inside a language's skin by translating it.
Note
1 It is important to be clear about what is really happening inside people
who are described as 'thinking in the foreign language'. Strictly
speaking nobody thinks in any language (see Gethin, 1990, pp.194-219).
What an English-speaker (for instance) is really claiming - though he
may not be aware of it - when he claims to think in French is that when
he hears or reads French he turns the language directly into ideas in his
head without going via English words; and when he speaks or writes
French he turns his ideas directly into French, again without going
32
through English words. There are several simple proofs that we do not
think in language, but perhaps the simplest is to consider what we
mean when we say we understand a piece of language, in the first place
a piece, any piece, of our own language. We do not just repeat inside
our heads the language we hear. We turn it inside our heads into
something else that is not language at all. Let us call that something
ideas, or pictures of reality - nobody has yet pinned down exactly what
the something is, and we shall know a great deal more about ourselves
if anybody ever does. But whatever it is, it is clear that if ever and
whenever we cannot turn language into that something else, we do not
understand. Not being able to make that conversion in our minds is
what we mean whenever we say 'I don't understand', whether our own
or a foreign language is involved. Quite simply, we hear words but they
don't mean anything to us (or at least we realize we have not grasped
the whole meaning).
33
3
BASICS 3. BASIC PRACTICAL PRINCIPLES OF
LEARNING
§28 When and where you should observe - listening
and reading
Observing, we have said, is the basis of all language learning. But when
should you observe, and where should you observe? The answer to the
first part of the question is: as far as you have the energy, whenever you
come in contact in any way with the foreign language.
The answer to the second part of the question is: everywhere. However,
in practice things are not as simple as that. In principle, of course, one can
observe and learn from both listening and reading. But observing as one
listens is difficult, particularly when one has just started on a new
language. Even at a later stage it is difficult for many people to observe
exactly what a person says at the same time as trying to follow the
meaning of what the person is saying. This is one of the possible reasons
why some people who have a lot of conversation practice in the foreign
language do not make the progress one would expect. Observing as one
listens how the language is used can be done, though, and you should do
it as much as possible once you find it fairly easy to understand.
§29 Try to concentrate on exactly how people say
things
AG recalls: 'A method I often used with my classes in English was to
make some remark to them, and then, after one or two more sentences, if
it was clear that they had heard and understood the remark, and if I
thought it contained a useful piece of usage that they ought to observe, I
would ask: 'What exactly did I say about so-and-so?' or 'What was my last
question?' At the beginning they would seldom remember exactly what I
had said, although they were perfectly able to continue the conversation. I
used to ask for repetition of all sorts of usage, both grammar and
vocabulary; two examples can illustrate what I mean. I might say:
A It's best to leave the bottle in the shade,
and I might get back something like
B It is best to place the bottle in the shadow.
showing that they had failed to notice, among other things, the distinction
between 'shadow' and 'shade', although they had obviously understood
the sentence perfectly well. Or:
A I'm not very keen on driving so far in the dark.
34
which might be given back as
B I do not like to drive that long distance at night.
revealing that among the several points they failed to notice was the
characteristic English use of the '-ing' form, something that it is very
important to learn for anybody who wants to speak and write truly
idiomatic English. It will be very difficult for students to make progress if
they are not going to notice such things. The fact that both the B sentences
are in themselves possible correct sentences - if not very idiomatic - is
irrelevant. The essential point is that the students were not observing
what I said, but contented themselves with their 'own' usage, usage as
they thought it ought to be irrespective of what they had actually heard. If
one does not notice new things, one stands still.
'If you are really serious about learning the foreign language you are
studying, and you have a teacher, and the teacher doesn't sometimes test
you in this way, I suggest you ask to be given such questions. It forces
you to concentrate, so it's hard work. But it's a healthier activity than a
great many of the tasks that teachers set language students, because you
are sharpening up your faculties and practising that crucial observing. It
is also immensely satisfying to be tested like this and get the answer
right.'
§30 Observing through reading
However, it is far easier, at any rate at the beginning, to observe through
reading, and you can learn more from it. When you read you can take as
much time as you like over the observing. You can study the text in as
much detail as you like. The written word is always there, it stays put.
Unlike the spoken word, it doesn't fly away so that you have to catch it, so
to speak, on the wing. You can make notes on the printed pages
themselves, and you can come back again and again, as many times as
you want, to refresh your memory about how the various parts of the
language work. (If you keep the texts you have marked, you can even
make an index of the points you have noted. See §153.) It is also much
easier to find exactly the sort of material you want. It is true that in its
essence a language is something that is spoken. But for practical purposes
a language is in a sense in its most solid and accessible form on the pages
you read. Apart from pronunciation, which is a separate skill anyway, it
is reading that will give you most information about a language at the
start, and that information can and should include the language people
use when they talk. Ways of observing through reading are described in
§§167-177. See also §§43 and 179.
Facal a beul is eun air sgéith
35
A word from the mouth and a bird on the wing
§31 Learning how the letters of other languages are
pronounced (see also §258)
But the first thing you must do, before you start reading or anything else,
is find out exactly what sounds the letters of the foreign language
represent. Even if the letters are the same as your own, you will usually
find that they represent sounds that are slightly different from the sounds
represented by the same letters in your own language. You will find that
some sounds are completely different from your own.
Whether the alphabet is the same as yours or not, you should practise
reading every day, even if it is only for a few minutes. Read aloud if that
doesn't disturb people around you. Otherwise just make the sounds in
your head. It does not matter if at the beginning you understand almost
nothing of what you are reading. The important thing is to become so
familiar with the relationship between letters and sounds that very soon
you can read the language aloud correctly without thinking about it.
In one way, practising reading a script that is the same as your own has
more problems than practising a new script. That is because you may find
yourself slipping back into pronouncing the letters in the way of your
own language. Constantly make sure you are not doing this.
§32 What you should observe
What should you observe? Again the answer is: just about everything.
You should always be saying to yourself: 'This other language is different!.
It's different. It's different!' In some cases, of course, you will find that the
way it works is not in fact different, but until you do find it's not different,
always assume it is. In that way you will observe as quickly and
efficiently as possible.
A good way of deciding in detail exactly what you should notice is to
ask yourself: 'If I had been writing or saying this, would I have used
exactly the same language?' If at any point you have to confess 'no', then
there is something you must pay special attention to and think carefully
about. If you use this criterion, you may be surprised, to begin with, at
some of the things you bring to your own notice. In particular you may be
struck by how important 'little' words are. (See §§167-177)
§33 It is important to notice the contexts in which
words are used
Many people do not pay enough attention to detail. You need to be
especially sensitive to the detail of context. You need to be aware of
exactly what words are used with what other words, and, perhaps even
36
more important, to be aware of what words are used for the real life
situation being expressed, with its particular practicalities, atmosphere,
attitudes or tone. This awareness, or sensitivity, is not nearly as difficult to
practise as many people believe. We have virtually all shown this
sensitivity in learning our own language. But in learning a foreign
language we must first clear from our minds the prejudices about both
vocabulary and grammar that we have collected from our own language,
and remember that words in one language very seldom have exact
equivalents in another.
To look at some examples of the language in context we have just been
talking about, let us imagine that we are students of English as a foreign
language. If you are in fact a native English-speaker you may be a little
surprised at first at the sort of points we suggest are important; but they
are precisely the sort of thing to look out for if you are studying a foreign
language.
We should notice, for instance, that it is,
check the baggage (not 'control' the baggage)
put one's clothes on (not 'take' one's clothes on)
get into the car (not 'go' into the car)
a rise in temperature (not rise 'of temperature)
In the morning when we are in bed we
get up (not 'go up' or 'stand up')
We must distinguish between words like
road, street, route, way
and between phrases such as
(She's) outside, out, not at home, away, gone away
At a rather more advanced level of language, English would say
His provocative ideas were INEVITABLY attacked
but on the other hand
He explained he had been UNAVOIDABLY delayed
And we must be careful to distinguish between words such as
woman, lady, female, dame or
old, elderly, ancient, aged, mature
and learn to use each, with its own particular flavour or shade of
meaning, to express what we intend. English-speakers know that these
are not just alternatives to each other. We must remember that exactly the
same principle applies to other languages.
In §§167-175 we study a whole passage of English in detail to show
how much can be learnt from even a short piece of language.
§34 Different levels of knowledge; active and passive
37
knowledge
The extent of linguistic knowledge and the degree of linguistic skill can be
indicated in many different ways. EVG eventually decided to classify the
different levels mainly on the basis of vocabulary, the number of words
that one ought to know to reach a certain 'point', for speaking on one
hand, and for reading on the other. This is because it is the knowledge of
words that is crucial in the learning of a language - not knowledge of
grammar, as many people seem to think.
The various levels of proficiency according to the vocabulary mastered
are shown in a table in §251, together with suggestions for the number of
phrases (everyday expressions) that one ought to aim to learn. That
classification of levels is in the first place based on EVG's own experiences
in the learning of many languages and in teaching some ten of them. It
should not, however, be regarded as anything more than a guide. There
are no general rules for the definition of different levels, and judging
which level one is at will always remain a more or less subjective matter.
Note that for speaking and writing one needs an active vocabulary, that
is to say, the words one can remember for using oneself. For reading or
listening one only needs a passive vocabulary, that is to say, the words one
can understand when one reads or hears them, but some of which one
would not think of for oneself if one was talking or writing. In their own
language, too, people usually understand many more words than they
actually use themselves. See chapter 22.
§35 The importance of organization, independence and
self-confidence
'Better a lazybones who can organize than a workaholic who endlessly
rushes blindly on.'
(Stig Gunnemark)
Even with the greatest enthusiasm in the world, students of languages
will waste a terrible amount of time and effort if they do not know how to
study them rationally and effectively. The proper organization of work,
time and material is a key element in the learning of languages. With it
you will learn far more quickly how to speak, read and write well. A few
people seem to be born organizers; but most students of languages can
learn how to organize, even if the ability is poorly developed in the
beginning.
Organization, independence and self-confidence are all bound up with
one another. If people can combine them with the right sort of motivation
they can achieve great things in the way of language learning. Organizing
ability will increase one's 'independence', that is to say, the capacity to
38
work entirely on one's own. This will in turn increase selfconfidence, and
the more self-confidence one has, the greater tends to be one's eagerness
to learn more about the foreign language - and vice-versa. Self-confidence
is needed very particularly when one starts to speak in a foreign
language. Travel abroad can increase self-confidence, provided that one is
well prepared and can spend sufficient time in the foreign country. (See
§60.)
Hilf dir selbst, dann wird dir derHimmel helfen
Heaven helps those who help themselves
§36 The need for concentration, time, repetition and
practice
Language learners should try to build their activities on the three 'pillars'
of concentration, repetition and practice. Particularly at the beginning,
concentration - in more than one sense - is essential. In books on learning
languages it is often maintained that hard work is the most important
thing. One gets the impression that one only has to 'work' to learn a
language. However, it is not the work in itself that produces results, but
well organized work. Try to work economically. Don't disperse your
efforts in all directions, and feel that you are achieving something just
because you are doing something, but think carefully. What work is
necessary? What belongs to each stage of my language learning?
At what we can call the 'crawl' stage you should concentrate on 'crawl'
words, 'crawl' expressions and 'crawl' grammar. At this stage only try to
learn the minimum necessary. §§89-104, with §§250-251, explain the
numbers and sorts of words and expressions (or 'phrases') that beginners
at a language need to know, and the words and phrases needed at later
stages. §150 discusses how much grammar you need to know. Do not at
any stage spend time on what you already know, or on anything you do
not need to learn. Concentrate particularly on the words, phrases and
grammar that you find difficult.
Time is another aspect of language learning that needs concentration.
You not only need a long enough time in which to make some real
progress. You also need to devote enough regular hours to your studies
during that period.
There is a minimum period you should have available. Below this the
learning process suffers. Time is needed to 'digest' knowledge. Skill in
speaking requires a certain time to develop, and, above all, for listening
the ears must 'mature' (see §184). On the other hand, you must study
sufficiently often. If you study furiously for eight hours, but then allow
six or eight weeks to go by without attending to the language at all, you
39
will almost certainly find each time that you have to start more or less
from the beginning again. It is better to do, say, a 60-hour course in a
month, rather than extend it over 4 or 5 months. (See §§245-249 and 6061.)
'The drop of rain maketh a hole in the stone, not by violence, but by oft
falling.'
(Hugh Latimer)
Try constantly to repeat what you are learning - mostly silently to
yourself - at any and all times of day, in and out of doors. Words and
phrases are what you will need to repeat most, but pronunciation and
grammar are important too.
If you are studying at school it is essential to have your own books grammar, dictionary, etc. Without them you will probably find it
impossible to do the necessary repeating, make any notes you may want
to make, and work in a systematic and effective way generally.
Finally, you should practise. Use every conceivable opportunity to
listen and speak, to read and write. (See §§178-192.)
Tenteki ishi o ugatsu
Never ceasing drops wear away a stone
§37 More time, and intensive study, are needed for
difficult languages
A great deal of time and intensive work is needed from the very start in
order to learn to speak a language which is difficult at the beginning. (See
§§240-244.) The pressures are threefold: the language is basically difficult
to learn to speak; one has to learn a great deal even as a beginner; and one
has to learn quickly, sufficiently quickly to avoid getting stuck at the
obstacles one meets right at the beginning of the journey- Outside
pressures are liable to have a far greater effect on one's studies,
particularly on one's ability to organize them properly.
The more difficult a language is, the more important it is to obtain an
overall view without delay. Otherwise there is a serious risk that one soon
becomes completely lost in the jungle of words, phrases and grammar.
Some languages should be studied intensively even if one is going to
content oneself with simply reading them. Otherwise it will take far too
long to learn how to read normal texts at a reasonable speed - one will be
constantly looking up words in the dictionary instead. This applies to
languages like Irish, Russian and Arabic.
40
4
LEARNING AND LESSONS 1. HOW USEFUL ARE
TEACHERS?
§38 Languages are learned, not taught
The most important thing of all to understand when one is learning a
language is that 'learning' is the key word. One is never taught a language.
One can only learn it.
A person who does not apply this principle - consciously or
unconsciously - will find language learning very hard and very slow; and
until the principle is publicly recognised and applied there will probably
be little or no improvement in the command of foreign languages
generally.
§39 Language learning has not improved
There is no evidence that people have got better at learning languages in
the last thirty or forty years, in spite of all the new theories, tools and
techniques that have been developed. There is no objective way of testing
whether language learning has improved. Tests of the traditional sort compositions, translating, precis writing and so on - were always and
obviously still are subjective, so they can't be used to judge whether
people have got better or not over the years. But so-called objective tests
cannot be used for that purpose either. They have not been used
consistently in the same 'concentration' over the period they have been in
use. They do not, in the main, test the things that are important in foreignlanguage learning - even comprehension is a partly 'creative' activity in
real life, as one has to think of possible meanings for oneself rather than
have them suggested for one from outside - and there is no objective way
of judging what is important. Moreover, people can be trained in the
techniques of multiple choice and other 'objective' tests, so they are not
really objective at all. Impressions are still the only thing one can go on.
As far as English as a foreign language is concerned, AG's personal
impression is that standards have declined somewhat. This view is
apparently shared by some people concerned with the problem in other
countries, such as Germany and Sweden. The lack of progress has been
pointed out, for instance, by Professor Emeritus Johannes Hedberg
(Gothenburg), one of Sweden's most experienced workers in the field of
English-teaching.
§40 Teachers can't do the learning for you
The thing that more than anything else stops people learning a foreign
41
language effectively is the belief that the teacher is in some skilful way
going to fill one with knowledge of the language. This is to believe in
magic. Students tend to believe that the essential thinking work is going
to be done by the teacher. Dedicated students believe they must work
hard, and they do work hard, which means they conscientiously carry out
all the tasks the teacher sets them and they study their course books
regularly (or regularly use their computer programs). It will all do little or
no good if they are lacking in self-reliance and active curiosity.
It is sad that this situation, where students rely far too much on their
teachers, is very common. But things do not have to be like that. You can
do ten times better with only a quarter of the effort if you rely on yourself
and work in a rational way.
It seems to be a very widespread opinion that teachers are not doing
their job properly if they do not set regular homework. In practice such a
failure may indeed be a sign of a lazy, unconscientious teacher. But in
principle it is quite wrong to demand that the teacher should set regular
tasks, for yet again it puts the onus on the teacher, instead of on the
student, which is where it belongs. You should never have to ask for tasks
to be given. If you are studying and learning in the right way you will
always have more than enough to do on your own initiative.
Die gebratenen Tauben fliegen niemanden ins Maul.
Roasted doves fly into nobody's mouth
§41 What can teachers do? Explain grammar?
It is useful to look realistically at what a teacher can do, first of all as a
teacher of a class. She, or he, can explain rules of grammar. But she is
unlikely to do this better than any reasonably well thought out grammar
book. The author is likely to have worked out the explanations just as
carefully as most teachers, if not more so. It is much better for the student
to study the grammar by herself at home, where she can go at her own
individual pace and think about problems at leisure. It is a terrible waste
of time for the teacher to do this work in class, and any notes students
make will probably mostly be inadequate at best. The only grammar that
it is really worth a teacher talking to a whole class about is either points
that the teacher thinks are neglected or badly explained in the books the
students are using, or questions on grammar raised by individual
students. (See §§44-46.)
§42 Explain words?
An even greater waste of time, an even more misguided activity, is for the
teacher to give the students detailed explanations of the meanings of
words. We shall explain in §§139145 how this is wrong in both principle
42
and practice. But we should point out already here how, once a teacher
starts explaining vocabulary, he may find he is spending hours on just
very few words. Even if he does not do actual harm by encouraging a
faulty approach to vocabulary, he will achieve nothing of value; there are
far better ways in which he can spend his own and his students' time.
There is just one sort of word of which this is not true. There are some
words that are often confused with other, often similar words. If the
distinctions in meaning are clear cut it is useful for students to have them
pointed out to them. An example of such a pair in English are the
adjectives 'economic/economical', and in Italian the nouns 'sinistra/
sinistro'. Once again, though, there are books for many languages which
draw attention to words of this kind, and their lists are likely to be more
systematic and complete than lists that teachers make up for themselves.
(See also §§238-239.)
§43 'Student participation'
It seems that teachers have come to realize more and more that simply
talking about grammar and words is not a good way of spending a lesson.
So instead they have tried to 'involve' their students in the lesson more.
The result has been that a lot of teachers now go in a great deal for
activities they call group work, pair work, or role play. Students are given
various tasks that they have to carry out on their own, or they enact little
scenes, such as buying railway tickets or asking for directions, or even
have short debates among themselves.
One wonders whether the main reason why so many teachers are keen
on such methods is that they are rather desperately trying to solve
practical problems in the classroom. There are several such practical
problems. There is the problem of discipline (where classes of children are
concerned); the problem of finding something everybody in the class can
be active in, because the teacher cannot give individual attention to each
student; the problem of boredom, keeping learners amused.
It is difficult to believe that things like group and pair work and role
play are really recommended because teachers truly think and have
actually found that they are better and more effective ways of teaching
languages. Reason, too, suggests that they are not sound methods.
First, language learning is a task that has to be carried out by
individuals on their own. It is a process of 'noticing' that has to be done
singly. The more the process is shared and so spread out among others,
the less effective it will be.
It is too often forgotten that simply by using the language one can learn
nothing. One cannot speak until one has some language to speak with,
43
and one can only learn that language by observing - listening and reading,
and noting what one hears and reads. There is no other way. So it is
obviously very important that students should hear correct language. Yet
in classes where they do most of the talking themselves they will hear
each other's often incorrect speech far more than they hear the teacher's.
(Let us hope that the teacher's speech, even if he is not a native speaker, is
always right.) Students clearly cannot learn from language that is wrong.
But they are also not learning anything new by saying things that are
correct, since the fact that it is correct shows that they have already
learned it (by observation).
Nor can students learn from the things their companions say that are
correct, because they cannot know whether those things are in fact correct
or not. Over the years AG has known several students of English as a
foreign language who did an exceptionally large amount of talking in
English, especially with their fellow students of different nationalities.
They were usually warm personalities and delightful companions. But in
several cases their English was less accurate at the end of their language
course than it was at the beginning. What was even sadder was that
sometimes their companions' language became less correct too. They
plainly could not believe that people who talked and 'practised' their
English so much were not excellent models to imitate.
Any general conversation in class (whether or not the teacher takes part
in it) is going to be artificial until everybody present becomes thoroughly
personally interested in it. At that point all, or nearly all, present will stop
observing the language that is being used their own as well as the
teacher's.
It is another matter that trying to talk may well - and should - draw
one's attention to things one does not know how to express, and so
strongly encourage one to find out. But that sort of cause and effect
cannot operate in the classroom. It needs unhurried thought by each
student on his own. And if it is objected that practising talking in the
classroom is the only way students can become confident in using the
language, one must argue that it is simply not true. In the real world
outside the classroom, confidence depends largely on the individual
personality.
For people who by nature don't have the right sort of temperament, the
necessary boldness and lack of shyness, the only thing that will give them
true confidence is the confidence that they have mastered enough of the
language. Furthermore, talking a lot in the foreign language outside the
classroom to native speakers is an excellent thing to do from the point of
view of getting into the habit, and so long as one recognises that it is
44
practice, not learning.
The other great disadvantage of 'talking' activities in class is that it
reduces even further the extent to which the teacher can control and
observe her students' learning, and reduces the amount of work that can
be done in a given time. And any tasks given to students in class that
involve writing (whether or not they are part of group or pair work) are a
fearful waste of precious class time. The teacher cannot possibly check the
work effectively during class, so it will inevitably just add to the burden
of correcting work she has to do out of classroom hours. It is very
doubtful whether many teachers have the time to do that properly. (See
§§202-208.)
Olla de muchos, mal mejida y peor cocida
Too many cooks spoil the broth
§44 Lessons should do what students cannot do by
themselves
The first principle for anybody who teaches languages in classes should
be to do in class only things that cannot be done as effectively somewhere
else. In recent decades many different devices and techniques have been
thought up for the teaching of languages. We do not think they have led
to any improvement. If languages are going to continue being taught in
classes, the old-fashioned method of the teacher talking to the students is
still the best. (In the profession this method is sometimes called 'chalk and
talk'.) But there should be nothing old-fashioned about the manner in
which the teacher talks. The talk has to be completely informal and
flexible.
One of the worst mistakes made in language-teaching circles in recent
years is the demand for the so-called 'structured lesson'. The teacher is
supposed to plan in advance exactly what she is going to teach, and keep
to a timetable during the lesson in order to be sure she covers what she
thinks she needs to cover. It is hard to think of a more misguided
approach. It cuts the teacher off from her students and the lesson becomes
something fossilized. Above all, it completely ignores the particular needs
of the particular individuals in a particular class on a particular day.
§45 Teachers should answer and ask questions; they
must know how the language works
Apart from what is the foremost task of a language teacher - showing
students how to learn - the only really useful thing a teacher can do in a
class is to answer questions, and also to ask them. If the students do not
know what questions to ask and how to ask them, it is the task of the
teacher to show them. This way of teaching means that the teacher does
45
not have to do any day to day preparation. It makes all lessons completely
flexible. They can always be adapted to the students' needs of the
moment, but that does not prevent the teacher taking up and emphasizing
themes she thinks are being neglected.
But if this method of giving lessons takes away much of the daily
drudgery of a conscientious teacher's life, it also means that the teacher
has to 'know her stuff. If the language she is teaching is not her own, she
must obviously know it really well. That, though, is only the beginning.
Her own or not, she must have a confident practical knowledge of how
the language she is teaching works. By this I mean a conscious knowledge
that the teacher can explain in a way that most native speakers cannot.
Students sense a good teacher's enthusiasm and genuine interest in the
language, and that she has thought about it and found out about it for
herself, not just learned by rote from text books.
AG says: 'In my own lessons at least half my 'talk' has usually consisted
of questions. Most students find this stimulating. I have never singled out
individuals in turn but instead always questioned the whole class and
waited for spontaneous replies from anybody who wanted to give one. In
that way a teacher can involve everybody the whole time without
embarrassing those who do not want to answer. A teacher has no right to
impose interrogation in front of others on people to whom it may be
unwelcome; moreover, competition between students has no proper place
in language learning, or any other sort of learning for that matter.'1
§46 The problem of exercises
Finally, a teacher can put 'questions' to his students in the form of
exercises and tests to be done during his lessons. (See Appendix 10 for a
discussion of what sorts of test and exercise are useful.) However,
exercises and tests are a complete waste of time if they are done in
writing, since obviously they can in that case be done by the students at
home. Furthermore, written answers place a big extra burden on the
teacher. He is faced with the dilemma discussed at greater length in §204.
Is he to correct all the exercises really conscientiously and thoroughly, and
find that this takes so much time that he either has no life he can call his
own or has to skimp other important jobs? Or is he to skimp the
correcting work itself, with the result that it was not really worth the
students' while to do the exercises in the first place? (See also §§191 and
196.)
Exercises that are done orally in class are a different matter. The teacher
can 'correct' the students as they go along, and the discussions the teacher
and the students have about the problems can be very valuable. But the
46
principle that teachers should not force individuals to give answers
publicly still holds. This probably reduces the value of the exercises. Yet
more important is the fact that exercises done in class do not attend to the
particular needs of individual students.
§47 Classes take time and effort away from learning
As things are now, nearly all lessons to a class simply take time away
from learning. As a rule the greater the 'intensity' of a course of lessons
the more this is true.
A truly 'intensive' course would in fact consist of at least 45 hours a
week, of which a maximum of 5 hours - preferably less - would be with a
teacher in class. Students would devote all the rest to studying on their
own, naturally including being out and about if they are in a country
where the language concerned is spoken. (See §§57-58.)
The snag is that the institutions that offer language courses cannot
afford to organize them in this way. Most would probably collapse if they
did. They have to offer a large number of hours in order to justify the
already excessive fees. The result is that practically everybody who goes
on a course ends up paying large sums of money for being prevented
from doing what they really need to be doing.2
Many of the tasks that teachers give to classes these days only make
matters even worse. If for instance the teacher is supposed to be training
students to understand the spoken word, and plays them a cassette and
gives them questions to answer on it, either in class or as homework, all
he is doing is giving them a test (which may very well discourage many
of them). They are not learning anything. The time and effort students
spend on this task should instead be spent on actually learning how to
understand better by learning more vocabulary, and, above all, by
constantly listening to the spoken language. In short, you won't master
'listening comprehension' by answering questions; you have to practise
listening.
Projects that the teacher gives to be carried out by the class, or by parts
of it, are not likely to be much better. Class projects for discovering
aspects of vocabulary, say, usually involve the spending of a lot of time
that is quite disproportionate to the amount of vocabulary that each
individual student actually learns in the process.
One cannot help feeling that a great deal, perhaps the greater part, of
the activity suggested or recommended to teachers and their classes is
thought up mainly to make sure that the students have something to do.
Or perhaps, to put it even more unkindly, to ensure that teachers have
things to ask the students to do. It may seem very modern and
47
enlightened to promote lively, often entertaining activity on the part of
the students. But the only activity that matters is the activity of learning as
much as possible of the foreign language as fast and effectively as
possibly.
AG recalls: 'The headmaster of the boarding school I went to almost
certainly did my companions and me a much greater service than any
entertainment would have done when he forced us at the age of 14 or 15
to learn vast numbers of Latin irregular verbs by heart in preparation for
the Oxford and Cambridge School Certificate examination. We were
summoned to his spacious elegant study out of lesson and 'prep' hours to
recite them to him, and woe betide any of us who got one wrong. We
feared we might be caned mercilessly if we failed; this nationally famed
Reverend headmaster had already frenziedly thrashed one boy in front of
the rest of us in the class when the youth protested sotto voce - but not sotto
voce enough - at the hugeness of the task imposed. 'Cor!' he had recklessly
breathed. Barbarous. And the approach to Latin - as if its 'deadness'
meant that any real meaning it had was purely accidental - was utterly
benighted in those days. But at least our headmaster was getting us to do
some genuine direct learning.'
§48 The need for a completely new sort of language
lesson
The failure to attend to individual needs and the difficulty of attending to
real learning are disadvantages that apply to all foreign-language
teaching in classes. So does teaching foreign languages in classes really
work? We have already suggested that there are no clear signs that
foreign-language learning has improved since the second world war. It is
time, we believe, to re-think our whole approach to language learning.
The teaching of English as a foreign language, which has had a big
influence on the teaching of languages generally, has become a very largescale business. This is part of the trouble. It has meant that entrepreneurs
have made large amounts of money, and that attention has been
concentrated on promoting their schools' image at the expense of both
students and teachers. It is said that the huge growth of the industry has
required the 'professionalisation' of its teachers. But is it as a great multinational business that language learning should be organized? And what
does the new 'professional' training mean that teachers can do? Perhaps it
means that some, even many, of them can teach better. But if that better
language teaching does not produce clearly better language learning, the
whole enterprise is misdirected, for teaching is not the end; the end is
learning.
48
This may seem obvious. However, not many people seem to remember
it. Most of the emphasis is on the skills of teaching, not learning. Much
less attention is paid to whether individuals are making more, or less, real
progress in a language than they would if they tried learning in a
different way.
§49 We need language guides, not teachers
A teacher who can show students how to study systematically on their
own should be valued highly. Enthusiastic teachers can give students
greater motivation, and truly competent ones can give learners selfconfidence. Unfavourable factors, such as that one lacks practice in
studying or that one feels one has little 'talent for languages', can up to a
point be counterbalanced by a teacher's efforts.
'Blow on a spark, and there will be a great fire; spit on it, and it will go
out; both results come from the one mouth.' (Ecclesiasticus, or The wisdom
of Jesus ben Sira, 1st century B.C.)
Every person who assists learners of a particular language can be
regarded as a language teacher. The Hungarians in particular are well
known for their helpful attitude. 'In Hungary there are ten million
language teachers for foreigners who want to learn Hungarian.'
But we need to recognize the essential truth stressed earlier: languages
can only be learnt; they cannot be taught. Language learners need to
realize that they must do practically everything for themselves; that if
they know how to learn they have little or no need of teachers; but that if
they do not know how to learn, teachers will do them no good. Indeed,
teaching for the most part hinders language learning, for, as we have
already pointed out, students believe that their teachers are doing the
work for them. The more they rely on their instructors, the less students
achieve.
What we are proposing can not only give happier and more effective
lives to students and 'teachers' alike, but also keep a need for just as
many, if not more, of what we shall now call language 'guides'.
Most people probably agree that the best help one can give learners is
individual attention. But again, even this is useless if the student does not
know how to learn. What the student really needs is somebody who can
do two things: show him or her how to learn a foreign language; and
answer questions about that language. Those questions must be thought
of by the student. If students do not find questions to ask, it means either
that they are not interested enough to do that crucial thinking for
themselves, or that they need to be shown how. (See below, §51.)
As things are now, though, it can often be difficult for students to find a
49
really good private teacher. Then, if one can be found, the number of
lessons conventionally believed necessary will almost certainly be far too
expensive for most people.
But when students have that independence essential for learning
languages, they will need only a fraction of the number of lessons that
they at present attend at language schools or other teaching institutions.
So, although they will probably still pay high fees for the individual
attention they get, they will only have to pay a tiny proportion of what
they normally spend on private lessons (or even classes at schools) today.
On the other hand, language guides will be able to help a far larger
number of different individuals than they can at the moment. In this way
they will be able to make a decent living out of providing a far more
genuinely useful service than they can hope to do at present.
Qui demande, apprend
He who asks, learns
§50 Co-operative language guides
It would be a service best organized in the form of co-operatives, which
would need much smaller amounts of space, equipment and
administration, and where the money would go to the people who did the
work. People who wanted to become guides could be given free
apprenticeships at such co-operatives. They could attend - and participate
in - both the advice sessions with the individual students, and the
frequent discussions that there would be between the members of the cooperative. That would be stimulating for all concerned. This sort of
system would make it far clearer than it is possible to do at present
whether the guides were doing their job well. As things are at the
moment students have very little control over the quality of the teaching
they get.
Rather than teacher training courses, what language guides need, in
addition to an apprenticeship, is the experience of learning one or several
foreign languages themselves. If a student's native language is different
from the guide's, the guide should ideally know it. The understanding
this gives the guide of his student's particular problems and the time it
often saves in explanations are a marvellous help for both student and
guide. But all language guides must learn at least one foreign language,
and learn it really well. They have no right to preach what they have not
themselves practised.
§51 How to ask questions
The principle for finding the questions you should ask is basically very
simple: Ask how you should express ideas you do not know how to
50
express. If you have the interest in learning that is essential, you will
never have any shortage of queries about how to say things, or how to
write things, or about grammar or the use of individual words. But
always remember that the foreign language very likely expresses things
differently from your own.
For this reason you should always ask:' How does the language express
such and such an idea?' It is a good principle never to ask 'Can I say...?',
because that nearly always means that you have simply translated your
own language directly into the foreign language, hoping, consciously or
unconsciously, that the foreign language is as much as possible like your
own. But if you want to learn the language well, you should not have
such an attitude. It is precisely one's own language one needs to escape
from. So forget it. Welcome the novelty of your new language. Always try
to get 'inside' it, get the feel of it, find out what is typical of it.
This does not mean that you should never use your own language
when you ask questions about the foreign language. If the person you are
asking knows both languages, by far the most efficient way of getting the
information you want is to ask for a translation of what you say in your
own language. (Always make sure you and your informant are thinking
of the same context.) At the same time, this method will often remind you
forcefully how the two languages are different. (See also §§167-177 and
145.)
You can also, of course, ask questions about the meaning of things you
don't understand, but this is not so important, and in any case you should
only ask after you have tried to work it out for yourself.
Mieux vaut demander son chemin que de s'egarer
Better to ask the way than to go astray
Notes
1. Not only competition between students, whether as individuals or as
teams, but also any sort of system of immediate 'rewards' for correct
answers or successful accomplishment of tasks, whatever precise form
it takes, is manipulative and morally repugnant. And the morally
repugnant aspect of systematized immediate praise, or emphasis on
success, or of any method of exercising some sort of oblique control
over somebody else's learning activity is inseparable from the practical
defects of such techniques.
First, they make students concentrate on the wrong things, on the
immediate, the ephemeral. One defect of these 'reinforcement'
techniques is the same that we criticize in connection with exercises
(§§155-156). The student thinks, 'I must get the answer right now, so
51
that I get my reward now.' So he tends not to think in broader terms
and about problems. His effort is no guarantee of performance in the
future.
But there is something even more seriously wrong about any sort of
rewards system. It is basically a way of getting people to do things that
they do not naturally want to do - or at least that they do not want to do
for the things' own sake. We must emphasize again the need for
language learners to have a greediness for the language itself. For this
reason alone any system of 'reinforcement' or reward does the learner a
disservice, because it leads her aspirations in the wrong direction,
deceives her as to what her true requirements are. Morality and the
practical coincide. They both point to allowing a person to do what she
is inclined to do.
These objections also apply in any computer assisted program. See §65.
2. The two commercial enterprises of, on one hand, institutions that offer
long or intensive language courses given by a staff of 'qualified'
teachers, and, on the other, the sellers of three-week wonder cassette
courses, appear to contradict one another. The claims of each implicitly
deny the validity of the claims of the other. We must be being fooled by
at least one of them. (See §§245-249.)
52
5
LEARNING AND LESSONS 2. WITH OR WITHOUT
LESSONS
§52 AG's experience of learning languages without
lessons
'At this point, I have a confession to make. Since I had my last French
lesson at school when I was fourteen and a half, I have not taken a single
lesson in any language, let alone attended any courses. Yet I have learned
enough by myself to read six languages with little or no difficulty
(Spanish, Swedish, French, Danish, Norwegian, Italian, in that order), and
to read - and for a period even write - enough German to cope with
practical things like letters. My accent in foreign languages is good, and I
learned Swedish well enough to pass as a native speaker in Sweden. I
passed the London University 'intermediate' exams in Spanish and
French, getting high grades in both languages - in Spanish the highest although neither were the subject I was studying for my degree. I also
passed listening (monitor) tests in the three Scandinavian languages. I
further have to report that I have not made a single note on paper about
any of the languages I have learned, nor used a single tape, nor ever made
use of a language laboratory for the purpose of learning them.
'My busiest language-learning time was between 1944 and 1948. During
that period I learned my 'practical' German, and almost perfect Swedish,
and developed my Spanish and French to the level at which I was able to
pass the exams. I spent most of those four years working in full- or halftime jobs that had nothing to do with the languages.'
§53 How eagerness produced the methods for getting
on with the 'real thing' with the minimum of fuss
'I do not mention all this to show that I am cleverer than others. My
purpose is the opposite. I think I was able to learn as much of these
languages as I did and as quickly as I did because I was always interested
in the language I was learning; because I was inquisitive, and wanted to
know how it worked; perhaps above all because I was eager to master the
language for the sake of mastering it. It wasn't actually necessary to learn
any of the languages - no job ever depended on them at the time I learned
them. Finally, it was because I learned how to learn and relied on myself
alone, and I did that because I was fascinated by the problem and thought
about it constantly.
'So you should believe that many people, probably you yourself, can
53
learn foreign languages without the help of anybody - except the authors
of books! Clearly not all the methods which have suited me would suit
everybody. It seems certain that there are important differences in what
goes on in the brains of different people when they learn languages,
foreign or their own. We still know next to nothing about the process, and
even less about the individual differences.
'Nevertheless, there are some principles which reason suggests apply to
most people, if not everyone, and it may be useful if I explain briefly the
things I have done when I have learned languages, and why I did them. I
shall go into greater detail in later chapters.
'Obviously I have always begun with a book on the language. (Often
one of the Teach Yourself Books published originally by English
Universities Press, now by Hodder & Stoughton; or one of the Colloquial
books published by Routledge & Kegan Paul.)
'Before anything else I concentrated on the pronunciation. I listened to
the language on the wireless to get the genuine 'feel' of it, and imitated
phrases and short sentences I managed to catch, and took immense
pleasure in echoing them exactly as the speaker had said them. I also
constantly read short passages aloud, again trying to produce the real
native sound.
'As I went through my book I never wrote anything. I never made notes
(but see §165 in the chapter on Grammar), nor did the exercises in writing.
I did not make notes because in the end it is in my head that the
knowledge has to be; and did not write the exercises because it is a waste
of time.
'The first one or two times you go through your book it is probably best
not to bother about the exercises into the foreign language at all. You
should avoid anything that slows down or delays the process of becoming
thoroughly familiar with the foreign language itself. You should not
spend time and effort making laborious conversions from your own
language into another one that you do not know much about yet. What
one needs is to see and understand words of the foreign language as
quickly as possible, soak oneself in it as soon as possible. When you have
read or heard quite a lot of the language, you will be much more at home
with it; then you may be able to put your ideas straight into the foreign
language without going through your own at all. And even when you do
translate, it will come far more easily to you.
'If my book has exercises for translating in both directions I not only do
the ones that are meant to be from the foreign language into my own; I
also look at the answers (in the foreign language) of the ones that are
meant to be done the other way round, and try to understand them as
54
well. In that way I double the amount of material I can study in the
foreign language.
'Moreover, if I am doing exercises from my own into the foreign
language, whenever it is slow and heavy going for me to work the
answers out I go straight to the back of the book to see what they are. This
is not some sort of 'cheating'. Exercises are not there - or should not be
there - as a test. One's purpose is to learn. Once more, one does this most
quickly and effectively by observing the language as it in fact is, not by
racking one's brain thinking how it might be. Again, it is a terrible waste
of time to delay for long the essential thing: contact with the foreign
language itself.
'On the other hand it is very important to study the language of the
answers, and work out exactly why it is as it is. Time spent on that is not
wasted.
'So I have always tried not to spend too much time on my first book of
instruction on a language. Instead, after going through the book once
fairly quickly, I usually went through it again, and even after that I often
went back to it, that is, whenever I needed to. Meanwhile I wanted to get
on with things! I wanted to use my new language as soon as possible in a
real way, learn it effectively from real examples of it. So I never read
simplified texts. Instead I went almost immediately to the genuine article.
'What this 'genuine article' was depended on my practical
circumstances at the time. For Spanish and French I went to history texts
(and in the case of French, to Casanova's memoirs!). As an Englishspeaker I found much of the vocabulary of these Latin languages easy (see
§§218-225 and 90-91), particularly in subjects like history. (History had the
added advantage that it was a subject that interested me; that is
psychologically important.)
'German vocabulary is a bit more difficult for English-speakers,
particularly the verbs. I read one work of literature with parallel texts in
German and English. Then, as it was the period just before and after the
end of the second world war, I used to go to talk to German prisoners
who at that time could often be found standing in little groups at the side
of the road in the evening, waiting to be taken back to camp after their
day working in the fields.
'I remember one slightly comic occasion when I was talking to three
Germans in their prisoners' uniforms in the little market town near where
we lived and a fellow Englishman came up to us and asked me where a
certain building was. I was so taken up with the excitement of talking
German with real Germans that without thinking I answered with 'Im
Marktplatz' ('In the market place'). It was only when he quickly made off
55
with a look of utter bewilderment on his face that I realized what I'd said.
I think my German companions thought I was a bit barmy too.
'I learned Swedish in my early twenties; Italian not until my late fifties
and early sixties. But with both languages I had the enormous advantage
of living in the country concerned. In both countries, but particularly in
Sweden, I greedily used all the opportunities offered me. I unceasingly
examined the road and shop signs. In shops and restaurants I listened
intently to fellow customers. On buses or trams or trains I strained to
catch every word of the passengers near me, and studied the sound of
every word. When I got home I practised the announcements of the tram
driver. I listened to all sorts of programs on the radio. I listened to shopassistants and waitresses, and tried to prevent them noticing I was a
foreigner. And, perhaps most important of all, I read newspapers. (See
§131.)
'I have not become as proficient in Italian as I did in Swedish. This is
partly because I have not read as much, and partly because 1 was not so
much involved in Italian everyday life and so have not heard as much.
And forty years on I may not have had so much energy.
'When one knows one of the three main Scandinavian languages it is
very easy to learn to read the other two. A few years after learning
Swedish I had occasion to read material of very varied kinds in both
Danish and Norwegian, and I have done translation work with all three.
'As I have already said, my intention here is not to show how talented I
am. Quite the contrary. For a start, there are many, many people who are
far more accomplished linguists than I am. Beside EVG's achievements
with languages my own are ridiculous. But I managed to learn quite a lot
of foreign language quite quickly, and get a genuine feel for it at the same
time. I have described my own experience with languages at some length
because I want to show what can be achieved with enthusiasm and
curiosity. I want to emphasize, too, that learning and using a language
have always been enough fun in themselves, so I have had no need of any
sort of 'entertainment' on the way. I have never had any need for amusing
textbooks or amusing lessons or amusing exercises.
'I have already mentioned how when I was at school I was not
considered by anybody, including myself, to have any particular talent
for languages. But then I suddenly became fascinated by the Spanish civil
war, and then all things Spanish, and 'taught' myself Spanish. I forgot to
think in terms of abilities, of whether 1 had them or not. It didn't occur to
me to ask myself whether perhaps I couldn't. I had an ambition and just
went ahead and did it. At that stage I still had a lot to learn about learning
languages, and I made many mistakes. But the important thing was the
56
eagerness that carried me through. I wanted to do it, and I wanted to do it
well.
'Both my own personal experience with languages, and my experience
of observing many other people who wanted to learn English as a foreign
language have convinced me that the most important thing is the attitude
one brings to the work. If they are genuinely interested, most people can
do it. Believe you can do it; and when you have done it, enjoy the new
self-confidence that you will have found.'
Enthusiasmus ist das schönste Wort der Erde
Enthusiasm is the world's most beautiful word
§54 Deciding whether to take lessons
So if you want to learn a language, should you have a teacher or attend a
course? To make the right decision you must understand exactly what
they can give you.
If a teacher or an institution tells you - or implies - that they will train
you up to a certain standard in a certain time, do not believe them,
because they do not know, and they do not know because nearly
everything depends on you. No remotely responsible institution or
teacher will make promises of this sort. They know that students of
languages vary tremendously in what they are able to achieve. Most
teachers, perhaps, think that this variation is due to differing basic
abilities, but as we have tried to convince you, this is probably not true in
most cases: some students do better than others usually because they have
a better attitude to language learning or a better understanding of how to
learn, or both together.
Nor should you believe that if you go to a private teacher or take a
course, you will necessarily pass whatever examination you want to take,
or at least be much more likely to do so. Unfortunately it does not follow.
It is worth noting, as an example, the figures for the two main Cambridge
(England) Certificate exams in English as a foreign language. Of overseas
candidates (who make up four fifths or more of all candidates) on average
less than 65% of First Certificate candidates and less than 45% of
Proficiency candidates are successful. The vast majority have attended
courses, and most of the remainder have probably had private teachers.
You could of course argue that the percentages would be even lower if the
students concerned had not had lessons, in class or privately. All AG's
experience suggests, however, that lessons make a difference to whether
they succeed or fail to only a tiny proportion of students, and even then
mainly only if they are coached efficiently in exam preparation and exam
technique. (See Part III, §§259-296.)
57
In the economic system under which we live it is unfortunately natural
that most institutions and private teachers give prospective customers the
impression that they are going to help them greatly to pass their exams,
maybe even that such help is essential. Yet teachers who are honest with
themselves know that at the beginning of (let us say) a ten-week course one
can tell from the grading tests within a very small margin who are going
to fail at the end; and that nothing the institution concerned does is going
to alter those individuals' fate. Equally, realistic teachers know that
practically all those they know are going to pass at the end of the course
could pass already at the beginning, assuming they have a fairly good
understanding of what they will be asked in the exam. Naturally a lot of
students who take much longer courses, and who would have failed their
exams at the beginning of the course, will pass at the end. But that is not
necessarily anything to do with the course. They might have improved by
the necessary amount without it.
§55 Find out about the lessons before signing up
So before you commit yourself to either a private teacher or to a course at
any language-teaching institution, and spend a lot of your time and
money, there are several important questions to ask. The first and most
basic is one we have suggested before: is the teacher or course going to
give you anything you cannot get on your own?
Let us look at the most important things that you might not be able to
do for yourself and that you must find out about before you start paying
for any lessons. Do the teachers (or teacher) spend a large part of the
lessons - it should be at least a third overall - discussing and showing how
to learn for oneself? (AG has for nearly three decades always told his
students that his most important task was to make himself unnecessary.)
Do they spend as much time as is needed to answer fully every one of the
individual questions that individual students want to put to them? Have
they enough time to go through all the students' mistakes with them
individually^ to appraise their progress individually? If they are mainly
going to talk about things that you can read in books, or play 'games' in
class, or make you carry out various tasks that are supposed to be
'stimulating', you should probably not bother about either courses or
private lessons. You have to ask yourself at the end of every lesson: Have
I learned more in this lesson than I could have learned in the same time
by myself, or learned anything that it would have been impossible for me
to learn by myself?
§56 Lessons to help you pass exams
If you want to pass an exam, there are further essential things you must
58
find out about first. You must question the teacher or institution very
carefully. This can be very embarrassing to do for some people. If it is
embarrassing for you, you should try to be brave and not be overawed or
let your mouth be shut and your convictions shaken by anything anybody
says. They may tell you that they are the experts and know what they are
doing. If they do that, you must still press them, and ask them exactly
what they are doing about exams, and what their philosophy about them
is.
Some institutions and teachers take the attitude that they have a higher
duty: they should concentrate on the pure teaching of the language,
cultivate an appreciation of its literature and culture, promote excellence
and true learning, above the sordid distractions of those troublesome
examinations. One has to remind those with this attitude that the whole
course of a person's life may be determined by teachers who have that
person in their classes. Many students, unlike their teachers, have no
choice but to descend to those distractions, sordid or not.
So if you have an exam to pass that is important and they say 'yes', they
will prepare you for it, before you let them accept you as a student - and
your fee - you should get a promise from them that the whole of every
lesson, as well as all of any homework you are given, should be devoted
to practising for that exam. (If you have the time, the money, and the
inclination, you can devote yourself to the 'finer' things after you have
passed the exam.) That in effect means that the teachers get you to
practise previous exam papers and constantly discuss them with you. If
the teacher does not do this, you have every right to complain, and get
your money back if they do not meet your demands.
Be very careful about how you interpret any statistics an institution
publishes about its exam pass rates. An institution might truthfully claim
a pass rate of 90%, or even 100%. This will almost certainly mean that it is
very carefully selecting its candidates. It is only allowing to take the exam
those it has tested in advance and who it is almost certain are going to
pass. It is very difficult to find out from outside to what extent an
institution selects its candidates, and so exam pass figures by themselves
mean almost nothing.
§57 Intensive courses. Are they worthwhile?
Any course which consists of less than 15 hours a week with the teachers
should scarcely be called 'intensive'. You should do at least twice as many
hours of study on your own as there are course hours, or even four times
as many. Thus, if a 'course' consists of 25 hours a week, you should be
prepared to do altogether a minimum of 75 hours' work a week on the
59
language. Consider this carefully before you decide to spend your money
and time on an intensive course.
Intensive courses are now more popular than ever. The participants,
however, are often not at all satisfied with the results. This probably
applies particularly to those who travel abroad, partly because they are
more inclined to believe in miracles. They think that after a couple of
weeks they will be talking like natives, although before their journey they
could not speak a word of the language. Sometimes what they knew of
the language in advance has shown itself to be so inadequate that they
cannot keep up with the course - and thus the many hundreds of dollars'
worth of money they have spent on their language trip has largely been
wasted.
One of the reasons for the excessive faith in intensive courses are the
sensational reports which from time to time appear in newspapers and
magazines. They often start with the reporter trying an intensive course in
Spanish (a language that is easy at the beginning, unlike French). After
one lesson he 'knows' fifty words and a few simple phrases, and from this
draws the conclusion that he would be able to talk fluent Spanish after a
week of intensive teaching...
However, it is one thing to learn something that one forgets after a few
days, and quite another thing to learn language that one remembers
permanently. One has learnt properly only what one has fixed
permanently in one's memory. An intensive course is of dubious value if
the knowledge and skills are so superficial that students forget them as
quickly as they have learnt them. Many fairy tales have been told about
the rapid learning of languages by those attending intensive courses. The
truth is that from knowing nothing at all one can scarcely learn to speak a
fairly easy language adequately in less than two to three months, and a
difficult one will take eight to ten months. When beginners are claimed to
have learnt to speak English in a month it is safe to assume that in reality
they had considerable knowledge of the language beforehand. Where
languages that are difficult at the beginning are concerned, it is quite out
of the question to be able to go from 'zero' to speaking the language
adequately in only a couple of months.i (See also §§245-249.)
§58 Choosing and preparing for an intensive course;
follow-up
Before you apply to join a course it is a good idea to first find out whether
the organizers of the course you have in mind have course leaders and
teachers with considerable experience of work outside the education
system. Practical knowledge of the 'real world' (in the export business, for
60
instance) should have given them a good understanding of the aspects of
a language it is most important to teach in order to produce the promised
results.
Beginners in particular need teachers who can speak their own
language. Beware of the so-called 'direct method'. ('Only in the foreign
language, never in your own language.') It is only at advanced levels that
there is anything to be gained from exclusively using the direct method.
It is usually advisable to do some sort of preparation before you set off
on an intensive course and it is nearly always necessary to do some
follow-up studies. Otherwise there is a danger that you will not get much
out of the course.
Unfortunately some course organizers give advice such as 'Do some
revision with your school grammar', 'Go through the textbooks you have',
and so on. Preparatory programs in the true sense of the term are rare.
Unless it is a matter of a complete beginner's course, the organizers ought
to at least provide word and phrase lists and perhaps a grammar
summary, so that the participants know well in advance what they should
know before the course starts.
In order to maintain the level of speaking ability you achieve on an
intensive course you need to go on practising speaking and perhaps to do
other follow-up work as well. Reading and writing courses, too, should be
followed up in an appropriate way, but follow-up work is not of such
vital importance as it is after courses that teach speaking skills.
§59 Trial lessons
Before you register for a course or pay any money, you should really go to
some trial lessons to see what really goes on in them. It is scandalous that,
as far as we know, most institutions will not allow this. If only
prospective students could become aware of this problem, co-operate
over it, and create a climate in which it was the accepted thing for them to
inspect in advance the teaching they were being invited to buy. If they do
allow you to attend a few lessons to see if you like them, still be on your
guard. You may find the teachers very nice, and feel that the lessons will
be fun. Remember that that does not necessarily mean they will give you
what you need.
§60 Studying abroad: plan and prepare in advance
One of the most effective ways of improving one's knowledge of a
language and one's ability to use it is to spend time in a country where it
is used as the everyday language. A couple of weeks practising the
language abroad can sometimes achieve just as much as several months'
plod in one's own country. One learns faster and better, not only to speak,
61
but also to read and write, assuming that the time spent abroad is used
rationally. Through finding immediate practical use for what one learns,
one can feel more motivation and inspiration than ever before.
To achieve real success, however, one must understand in advance how
one's language studies should be organized in order for them to be
effective; one shouldn't just set off on spec in the belief that 'everything
will work out all right when I get there'. Naturally there is a big difference
in the amount of planning needed, depending on whether one is going to
spend nearly the whole time on a language course with an already fixed
program, or intends to study on one's own and not take part in any
course. (See §61.)
The following two lists contain advice on how you can get the most out
of studying abroad. They are based first and foremost on EVG's own
experiences in some twenty countries where he has studied languages,
most of them difficult languages from his own Swedish point of view. If
the foreign language is relatively easy, you need not learn so much before
the journey. (See also chapter 12 on the skills of speaking and listening.)
Knowledge and skills desirable before your journey
abroad
Pronunciation. Acceptable pronunciation, in the first place of central
words (see §95) and phrases.
Grammar. More or less correct grammar for the purposes of simple
conversation. It is not necessary to swot up a lot of inflexions before the
journey. These you will learn much more quickly in the respective
countries as you use them in real life. (But you should learn the most
important ones back at home.)
Words. At least 200-300 by heart.
Phrases. As many as possible by heart - at least 25-50.
Ability to understand and speak. At least be able to understand slow
speech. If possible a certain familiarity with speaking the language. You
should have practised asking simple questions: 'Have you...? - Can you...?
- May I...? - What is...? - When...?' and so on.
Reading ability. Be able to read simple texts - perhaps with the aid of a
dictionary.
Writing ability. Be able to form simple sentences, including questions,
elementary information, greetings etc.
Things to think about before your stay abroad
1. Take with you word and phrase lists, pocket dictionary, phrase book,
and grammar compendium (preferably in looseleaf form); possibly a
larger dictionary as well. Make sure before you leave that you can find
62
your way around your books and lists quickly and confidently, so that
you don't waste time finding the information you need.
2. If you can, travel alone. Interference in the form of 'infection' from
your own language is a deadly threat to the efficacy of your language
studies abroad. You must also keep away from people who insist on
speaking English to you if you are an English-speaker, or on speaking
German to you when you are trying to learn Hungarian, and so on.
3. Concentrate entirely on the foreign language. Use every opportunity
to listen to it, speak it, read it and write it. Always carry on you a pocket
dictionary and pencil and paper, so that you can always find out about
and check words, and make a note of them.
4. It is a good sign if you don't 'think' in your own language when you
wake up in the morning but in the foreign language, saying words,
phrases and sentences 'inside you'. Keep it up, and beware of interference
from your native tongue!
Finally, try to find time for follow-up work as soon as possible after your
return home, so that you don't lose too much of your skill in speaking the
language.
Kangaku-in no suzume wa Mogyu o saezuru
The sparrows at the Kangaku-in academy can twitter the Mogyu text
§61 Studying abroad: go on a course or study on your
own?
There seems to be a widespread view that if one wants to study a
language abroad one should go on a course. Even when one goes on a
course, though, what we have said above about preparation for study
abroad still applies. Nevertheless, it is cheaper and as a rule more fun and
more effective to study on one's own. Not only does one learn to speak
the language; one has experiences which give one self-confidence.
The advertisements wax lyrical about the enormous advantages for
young people of going on language courses abroad. But one cannot help
wondering why it should be necessary to travel abroad in order to have
lessons for a very large part of the time - just as at school or on courses at
home. Perhaps it does to some extent stop the journey being nothing but a
holiday trip with chums from their own country. But they are more than
likely to meet compatriots on the same course and so risk that fatal
'interference' we have discussed above. We hope at least that these
language course trips are sometimes somewhat more useful than
suggested by a specialist in the field in a newspaper interview two years
63
ago: 'It is usually fun and with any luck they will learn to speak the
language a little more freely.'
According to an official report in 1989, only about 200 of the
approximately 700 language schools in Britain could be regarded as
satisfactory, and it was considered safe to say that most of the foreigners
who attended courses in that country were disappointed to a greater or
lesser degree. But the language-teaching industry will no doubt continue
to flourish in Britain, and in France, Germany, Spain and other countries
as well, no matter how inadequate the instruction given.
But don't be impressed by official status and academic qualifications
either. Never assume, because a language school has been approved by
some official or professional body, and its teachers have done training
courses at important-sounding institutions, that it is going to give you
what you need. The only things that will give you that are the teachers'
enthusiasm and, above all, their conscientiousness. Having a 'qualified'
staff can lull a school's management into self-satisfaction and
complacency. It is enough to impress and attract students, and keep the
money rolling in. 'Qualifications' can have the same harmful effect on the
individual teacher. With his diplomas or degrees safely achieved, he may
no longer have that urge to constantly learn more about the language, and
dedicate himself to his students, whatever his age and experience, that is
essential for a good teacher.
AG comments: 'Over a period of more than thirty years I worked with a
large number of different teachers. Some had professional qualifications,
some did not. In not a single case were their qualifications relevant to
their worth as teachers.'
Non è tutt'oro quel che riluce
All is not gold that glitters
§62 Two other good reasons for taking lessons
Some people, though, may feel they do not have the strength of mind to
do the work unless somebody else constantly insists. If so, it could be
worth their while to attend lessons even if these do not give them exactly
what they need. But they should not feel aggrieved if their lessons do not
lead to the long-term results they hoped for.
And there is one excellent reason, other than the desire to learn a
foreign language efficiently, for going on a course at some institution,
particularly in an institution abroad. If you have the money to spare - and
language courses are very expensive these days - as well as the time, then
attending a course can be one of the best ways in the world of meeting
people and making new friends in pleasant circumstances. AG comments:
64
'So long as you know exactly what you are doing, what you are spending
your money on, I recommend it sincerely and warmly. Over the decades I
have made the acquaintance of thousands of young people who came to
study English as a foreign language at the institutions in England where I
worked. I am pretty sure I'm right in thinking that many of them look
back on that period as the happiest time in their lives. And knowing them
made me realize that most people are nice if they feel free, are left alone,
and don't continually have things expected of them.'
But if you want to get as much as possible out of attending a course at
an institution abroad, we would very strongly urge you not to go in a
group of your compatriots. Go as an independent individual. In this way
there will be more incentive for you to work on the foreign language; and
you are far more likely to make interesting friends from different parts of
the world.
§63 Working and learning as an au pair
If you will not miss the excitement and companionship that can come
from attending an institution, there is little doubt that one of the very best
ways of improving one's mastery of a foreign language is to live and work
with a foreign family for a while as an au pair. You can hear the language
constantly, often in its most basic forms (particularly if there are children
in the family), and in completely natural and 'real life' contexts.
There is also the enormous advantage that working as an O H pair is
much cheaper than going on a course in the country concerned. In fact,
you should be paid at least 'pocket money'. It is true that traditionally au
pairs are young women; but it is hard to see why older women, and men
too, should not be au pairs, so long as they are not too set in their ways.
Good host families are invaluable. But would-be au pairs must be
careful. You can end up with unpleasant hosts who are simply concerned
to exploit you. Several countries have regulations on the conditions and
treatment of au pairs. Find out about these before you go, and try to make
sure that your host family observes them all at the very least you should
really be treated even better than the regulations require.
The hours you spend working for the family should be strictly limited.
You should be paid a minimum amount. You should not be asked to do
any heavy work - though of course you can volunteer to do it if you feel
so inclined. You should be able to have all your meals together with the
family, and indeed they must treat you as a complete equal, and share
their everyday life with you, or at any rate be prepared to do so if that is
what you want. They must be prepared to answer, so far as they are able,
all the questions about their language that you ask them.
65
If you are lucky you will form a lasting friendship as well as learning a
great deal about the language.
§64 Language laboratories
Language laboratories probably became popular in language teaching
circles mainly because they were a product of our technologically
wonderful age and because many people think it is fun to learn things
with machines. In reality the value of a language laboratory depends
almost entirely on the value of the programs used in it. The same applies
to a book.
Apart from providing examples of pronunciation, language
laboratories cannot do anything that books cannot do. Books can do the
same things more flexibly, more efficiently, more quickly, and more
conveniently.
As for pronunciation, it is explained how we think you should go about
learning that in chapter 6 (§§67-88). Even here language laboratories do
not in practice have any advantage. You can do everything useful a
language laboratory can do to help you learn pronunciation, and much
more, with a simple radio-cassette recorder.
So we urge you very seriously not to spend time and money on going
to language laboratories of the traditional type. The use of computers to
help you learn foreign languages is quite another matter.
§65 Computer assisted language learning
What is now usually called 'computer assisted language learning' attracts
by its very name, because it appears to recognize the basic truth urged at
the beginning of chapter 4: one is never taught a language - one can only
learn it. Perhaps the description was chosen merely because it made
possible a neat acronym (CALL). If that is the case, let us hope it proves a
chance that leads to happy results.
A language learner who needs outside help really needs that individual
attention we have already discussed - a source that can supply the specific
information that will solve the problems the learner has discovered for
herself. Computers would seem to be ideal for this purpose, if the right
program can be devised. A competent human explainer could perform
this task equally well. A really good human explainer will probably
always be able to do it better than the most sophisticated computer
program imaginable. But even where there is no problem of expense, it is
likely that there will sometimes be situations and times when there are
not enough competent human explainers to go round.
It is probably true that nothing can be as stimulating, inspiring even, as
a live teacher, nothing as effective as a live teacher for creating that
66
enthusiasm for learning a language that we say is necessary to do it well.
There are many language teachers who are inspiring in this way, and they
can often be inspiring at the same time as having utterly misguided ideas
about teaching - or rather, learning - languages. This matters little, or not
at all, if they perform the basic task of stimulating students to start doing
the work for themselves. If they are warm people with obvious passion or
intellectual vitality, they will transmit the essential excitement and the
seed will be sown, whatever their formal ideas on the subject may be.
But reliance on inspiring teachers is probably not practical in the real
world. If we continue to rely solely on teachers to give students a
knowledge of languages, there will probably continue to be many
teachers who are not inspiring, even with the best will in the world. And
even the charismatic teachers will not inspire every student; some of the
most charismatic, by a combination of their very energy with their
particular personalities, provoke resentment in some individuals.
The entire enterprise of teaching languages through human teachers is
rather a hit and miss affair. It is surely clear to the unprejudiced that at the
moment at least it does not always work very well. We have already
suggested that language teachers, as they are at present, should
disappear. There will be no real advance in language learning amongst
people in general until a completely new climate is created. It will be a
climate where it is taken for granted that the language student is
genuinely interested in the language in the first place. She needs only an
aid that does two things for her: first, answers efficiently the questions
that she herself puts to it, and second, shows her and reminds her of
problems - or rather, keeps her up to the mark in discovering and
recalling problems for herself.
We hope that computer systems will soon be able to give this sort of
double aid. We discuss the possibilities in detail in §176 and §208.
So computers can probably make a wonderful contribution to foreignlanguage learning. But it is essential that we decide beforehand on the
basis of realism and rationality - and morality - what the uses are that we
ought to put computers to. We should never allow what computing
technology can do, now or in the future, to determine what we actually do
with it.
There is perhaps a tendency for researchers in the field of computer
assisted language learning not only to develop techniques for applying
presently accepted principles of language teaching, which alone is
regrettable, since there is no evidence to suggest that those principles are
particularly effective. But they seem to go even further, and explore
methods of teaching and of testing on the basis of what is made possible by
67
computer systems, instead of first deciding what is rational and
psychologically realistic without any reference to computing. Naturally it
is neither necessary nor practical to make up our minds about the entire
scope of language learning before sitting down before the computer
(although it should not be assumed even that teaching, as opposed to
learning, is necessarily part of the problems to be examined). But it would
be a terrible mistake to judge the value of any methods of teaching or
learning by how successfully they can be applied by computer systems.
Information technology must be kept in its proper place as the servant,
not the director, of human beings' search for more practical and effective
ways of doing things.2
The problem of using computers in the right way for helping language
learners is made even more difficult by the fact that it is very hard to
judge whether a language learning program is a good one or not. In
principle it should be easy. Only the student herself can judge properly.
She has only to ask herself: Can I now read or listen to the things I want to
read or listen to and understand them easily? Can I say or write the things
I want to say or write?
In practice, though, it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to judge
the effectiveness of any program objectively and accurately. The result
depends so much on the approach of the individual student, both to
language learning in general and to the particular program. This is a
further reason for stressing the importance of the student's own curiosity
and enterprise. It may be an awkward truth, but it is one we must accept:
a computer language learning program may be excellent but may often
fail either because students do not know how to use it properly (because
in turn they do not understand enough about how languages work and
how one should learn them) or, just as likely, because they do not truly
have the urge to use it properly; and a program may be a bad one but
appear to succeed in many cases because its users bring an overwhelming
enthusiasm to it.
We believe it is very important for all students of languages to keep a
balanced attitude to computers. They should never allow themselves to be
seduced by the wonders of our ever developing information technology.
However clever its systems seem to become, it will never be able to teach
languages to students. Only students themselves can do that.
Nevertheless, we should like to end our comments here on computers
and learning foreign languages on an optimistic note. We believe they
could play a crucial part in providing that freedom of choice and
independence that we have urged before, and indeed encourage the self-
68
reliance that is the essential condition for good language learning.
§66 All the things you can do on your own
Here is a summary of the activities you should be able to perform by
yourself without the need for any instruction from teachers.
1. First of all, you should not need any help with reading your
beginner's book if it is a reasonably good one, though there may well be
points in it that are not clear and that you would want to ask someone
about.
2. You can study and learn vocabulary and grammar in the ways
suggested in chapters 7-10 (§§89-166).
3. You can read. There are two kinds of reading you can do. 'Quantity'
reading is explained in §§117-131, and 'intensive' reading in §§167-177.
4. You can read and constantly refer back to your grammar book. See
§§151-153 and 167-177 again. You can also make your own grammar
charts. See §165.
5. You can do exercises. See §§155-159 and Appendix 10.
6. You can listen to the radio, television, tapes, or 'live' people in order
to learn pronunciation (§§67-88), practise understanding (§§183-186),
observe vocabulary and grammar (§§13, 28-30, 32-33,117-131,178-186).
7. You can read aloud to practise your pronunciation (§§81 and 86).
8. You can write letters or 'compositions' (§§189-192, and the chapter on
Mistakes, §§193-208).
9. You can collect questions you want to ask about the language, so that
when you get the opportunity you can consult advisers who you think
could help you. See §§45, and 49-51. §§167-174 will also help you to
understand what sort of questions you should collect and ask.
Notes
1. AG is rather sceptical about intensive courses altogether: 'I think that as
usual the crucial factor is the effort made by the learner. In my view a
really effective intensive course would be one in which no more than a
fifth of the hours of study would be with a teacher - or teachers - and
these would be question and answer sessions, and discussions of
general principles rather than lessons.
Courses where the students 'live' together with the teachers, and share
domestic as well as intellectual life with them, can be effective. But
there is no way of measuring the effectiveness of different types of
course, since it is not possible to measure what the individual
participants are putting into it. Measurement of mere hours spent tells
one almost nothing.'
2. Multiple. choice language testing is an example from outside
69
computing of the kind of cart before the horse thinking we have in
mind. Educationists in many parts of the world felt that more objective
methods of assessing people's command of languages were needed. Let
us assume, for the sake of argument, that the multiple choice tests they
devised were objective. (They are not in practice, since people can be
trained in them. See §§268-275.) The tests worked splendidly in the
sense that they produced very tangible results in the form of clear and
often wide variations in the figures achieved by those tested. But do
multiple choice tests really have much to do with the mastery of
languages? Almost certainly not. Even understanding (not to speak of
talking) is in part a 'creative' process. One has to think of meanings
oneself. They are not suggested by someone else. Multiple choice
questions are quite irrelevant to what actually goes on in a person's
brain when she or he uses language in real life. But they work very well
indeed from the tester's point of view, and so are used more and more.
Multiple choice is thus an example of how a system has been allowed to
become a criterion simply because at one level it is possible and
practical. An information system dedicated to refining techniques of
this sort would be meaningless. It could also be harmful. (See also
Appendix 10.)
70
6
PRONUNCIATION
§67 It is important to aim at a reasonable accent from
the beginning
Already as a beginner you should try to acquire an acceptable accent. Try
to avoid a 'pidgin' accent - the foreign language should not sound like
some form of your own language. You should not give yourself the time
to get into a habit of faulty pronunciation that becomes difficult to get rid
of. If you do not take this task seriously from the very start, you may
always find it difficult to make yourself understood later.
Furthermore, to learn words effectively most people need to be able to
pronounce them more or less correctly, even if they only pronounce the
words 'silently' to themselves. This applies even if one has reading, not
speaking, as one's goal.
Well begun is half done
§68 'Good enough' pronunciation
To be understood by the native speakers of a foreign language you must
obviously be able to pronounce the different sounds of their language
correctly enough for your listeners to be able to recognise which words
you mean. To be understood you do not have to pronounce the sounds
perfectly. They simply have to be close enough.1
Unfortunately, or interestingly, depending on how you look at it, what
is close enough in one language is not necessarily close enough in another
language. For instance, in many languages it does not matter if you
pronounce an 'i' sound shorter
or longer
than it
really should be: listeners will still understand which word you intend.
But in English if someone says to you 'I shall be leaving there next next
week', when he really means 'I shall be living there next week', some
confusion is liable to follow.
Other examples of distinctions in English that some non-native
speakers do not make are in the vowel sounds in the first syllables of
'butter'
and 'batter'
(a potential source of
problems in the kitchen) and in 'firm'
and 'farm'
On the other hand, an English-speaker would be making a big mistake if
71
he assumed that all 'e's are pronounced the same in Italian. He should
appreciate the difference between the 'close' vowel in 'e' (and) and the
'open' 'e' in 'è' (is). (Italian 'o' also has both open and close sounds.)
More often than not listeners will probably be able to tell what you
mean from the context, even if you don't manage to make every single
one of the proper distinctions in sound. Thus, in practice, you are unlikely
to have many misunderstandings because you mispronounce 'tè'
(open=tea) as 'te' (close=you). But AG remembers how once, 'when I was
beginning to learn Italian, I said 'zero' to an Italian friend with an
unvoiced 'z' and a close 'e', while it should be pronounced with voiced 'z'
and open 'e'. This friend was usually very quick on the uptake, but on this
occasion it was some time before he grasped what I was talking about.'
There are other sorts of differences in sound that are important. Some
languages, such as Italian and Swedish, make a distinction between short
and long consonants that can change meanings (e.g. Italian 'copia' - copy and 'coppia' - married couple - or Swedish 'tiga' - keep silent - and 'tigga' beg). Some languages, like Burmese, Chinese and Vietnamese, have
differences of 'tone' that many speakers of other languages might consider
small; to Burmese-, Chinese- and Vietnamese-speakers they are not small
at all, and make crucial changes to meaning. The Chinese word 'ma', for
instance, has several meanings which vary according to tone; two of the
more common are 'horse' and 'to curse'.
So, in any language, you do not have to have a perfect accent to be
understood perfectly well; but you do have to master a minimum of 'near
enough' sounds, that is to say, near enough sounds for most, if not all, of
the various distinct sounds of the language. If you have achieved that
minimum, and have no particular interest in pronunciation, and no
particular practical need to improve it, we would strongly urge you to be
content and leave your pronunciation alone. Many people think a foreign
accent is charming, anyway!
§69 The realities of learning pronunciation
AG says that he personally finds the pronunciation of any language so
fascinating that from the very start he aims for perfection. Is a perfect
accent in a foreign language possible, and if it is, how many people is it
possible for? Well, to begin with we should realize that all normal human
beings are physically able to make all the sounds that any other human
being can make. This is clear from the fact that children of many different
races master the pronunciation of English in the United States, and of
Portuguese in Brazil, for instance; and practically all children brought up
in a 'foreign' country pronounce the language exactly as the local
72
inhabitants do.
On the other hand it is also a fact, sadly, that it is far rarer to find
someone who pronounces a foreign language perfectly than a person who
can use grammar and vocabulary just like a native speaker. AG says: ' I
have to go further than that and report something that at first may seem
very discouraging. Among the thousands of students of English as a
foreign language that I have observed, I cannot recall a single one whose
pronunciation truly improved in any noticeable way.
' I must make plain exactly what I mean by this statement. Not all the
students' pronunciation was bad - far from it - and many improved in the
sense of learning and applying more facts about the pronunciation of
English - the fact that 'worry', for instance, does not rhyme with 'sorry' but
with 'hurry'; or that 'advertise' is stressed on the first, not the last, syllable.
Furthermore, the fact that I personally have never noticed a person
improve his pronunciation naturally does not mean that it does not and
cannot happen.
'But it is extremely rare for a person to change the essential sound he
makes, to develop an accent that seems less foreign than it did before. I
am sure all this could be changed. But as things are now, there seems to
be a fixed limit beyond which most people never improve their accent, a
limit that varies from person to person and that is reached already after
the first few weeks of study of any new language.
'I said above that I do not know anybody who has truly improved. I
used this word deliberately, because unfortunately many innocent
teachers think they have managed to improve their students'
pronunciation in class, but fail - or are unwilling - to notice that the
students fall back into their old ways the moment the classroom door is
behind them. What is probably even worse is that the students themselves
are likely to believe that their pronunciation classes have made them
permanently better at pronouncing the language. It is the old story. The
student thinks the teacher has improved his accent, and so relies on the
teacher instead of himself, when what he should be doing is constantly
thinking about, listening to, and practising sounds for himself outside the
classroom.'
§70 Do not study the phonetics, but pay constant
attention to the particular sounds of each language
However, the solution is not to study the phonetics of the language,
whether through lessons or by yourself. Studying the phonetics is an
academic and theoretical approach that simply does not work in practice.
Even among people who have made a special study of phonetics, only a
73
few pronounce foreign languages really well, and some are hopeless.
Among those who have not studied phonetics, a few pronounce foreign
languages very well, and some are hopeless. None of the people AG has
known personally whose accents were good enough for them to be taken
for native speakers had studied phonetics, while he once knew a
professor of comparative phonetics at a well-known European university
whose pronunciation of English was a caricature of his native accent.
On the other hand it is essential to become aware of the special features
and distinctions in the pronunciation of the language you are studying.
There are general points, such as that in English a particularly important
part is played by stress, or by the unstressed vowel sound as in the last
syllable of 'butter' or in the first and last syllables of 'America' (see
Appendix 1); or that in Swedish there are different 'accent', or stress,
patterns which can affect meaning. Equally, each language has a large
number of more detailed - and fascinating - characteristics, like the
differences in Italian we have already mentioned between open and close
'e' and 'o', and between 'long' and 'short' consonants; or the fact that V in
Spanish has a sound quite different from English or French V; or that
Swedish has three different sounds which to inexperienced English ears
all seem to be equivalents of English 'sh'; and so on. You should find out
about and constantly be on the look-out for all these special features.
Unfortunately, despite the new aids the twentieth century has given to
learning foreign-language pronunciation - the radio and tape recorders
above all - its teaching in schools is still unsatisfactory in many parts of
the world. For instance, in Swedish schools (far from the worst in the
world) teachers tend to forget to correct the pronunciation of English at
the beginning of each school year, and a pupil may continue from class to
class making the same mistakes without anybody attending to them. The
problem is illustrated by the way Swedish-speakers often pronounce the
verb ending '-ed' as /Id/ or /It/ where the pronunciation should be /t/.
Thus 'helped' sounds like 'hellpit', and so on. Many have not even learned
to pronounce 'ch' correctly, but pronounce 'ch' and 'sh' the same: they
make no distinction between 'cheap' and 'sheep'.
Furthermore, too little attention is paid to the 'articulation base'. The
articulation base is the way native speakers use vocal chords, tongue, lips,
etc. when they form the sounds of language and combine them into
words. The pronunciation of German and French, for instance, is more
energetic and precise than that of many languages. It can even happen
that if one speaks a foreign language with the articulation base of one's
own language, the native speaker will have the greatest difficulty in
understanding what one is saying. In each language, the words lie in a
74
very particular place in the mouth.
But it is a serious mistake to think that you are going to make any
appreciable improvement in your pronunciation of a foreign language
through a close study of tongue positions or intonation patterns. It doesn't
help, and for most people it is unbelievably boring. For a few sounds it is
indeed possible to give simple practical instructions that are effective. For
instance, people who have difficulty producing the English 'th' sound can
do it if one tells them to stick their tongues out between their teeth and
blow. On the other hand AG remembers an instruction he once read on
how to produce one of those Swedish equivalents of the English 'sh'
sound. It told the student to make a groove in his tongue. It is, of course, a
ridiculous instruction, which few, if any, people could follow. It is not by
attempting such conscious control of our tongues, or by following lines
and curves in a book, or by watching our lip positions in a mirror, that we
are going to master the pronunciation of foreign languages.
This is not to say that nobody who studies the way the sounds of a
language are made is going to improve their pronunciation of it. Some
people may well do so. But when they do improve, it is likely for the most
part to be because such shady makes them pay close attention to sounds,
not because they master the sounds by analysing and trying to apply the
method of producing them. As with all language learning, the solution to
problems of pronunciation is constant curiosity, constant attention to
detail.
§71 The international phonetic alphabet
However, very often not enough energy is devoted to teaching students
the phonetic alphabet. English, in particular, is very difficult to study
effectively without a knowledge of the phonetic script used in textbooks
and dictionaries.
The phonetic alphabet is always a great help when the spelling of a
language is not an adequate guide to its pronunciation. So it is a good
idea to have at hand the international phonetic alphabet (not a 'homemade' or an Anglo-Saxon one) when you study languages such as Irish,
Scottish Gaelic, Romanian or Polish. The phonetic script can always help
to make one feel more secure and to acquire a more correct accent. (See
Appendix 2.)
§72 The problems of pronunciation are mainly
psychological; the key is listening
This becomes obvious when we remember how we learned to pronounce
our own language. We listened and imitated. Children make the 'right'
sounds without any instruction. It is true they usually need a little time at
75
the very beginning to get some of the sounds right, but this is almost
certain to be because their 'psychological' ears need to become attuned to
the detail of sounds, rather than because they do not at first 'know how to
make' the sounds. Human beings have the capacity, mysterious perhaps,
to hear many subtly different sounds and then make exactly the same
sounds themselves, without thinking consciously at all about the process
of making them. The really crucial stage is the listening. After that
humans seem to know instinctively how to use their mouths to reproduce
- perfectly - what they have listened to. Unfortunately most teachers
persist in recommending unsuccessful methods of learning
pronunciation. They worry about the wrong problem. It is not producing
the right sounds that is the main difficulty. The difficulty is in the
listening part, and the problem is a psychological one.
The problem that faces all students of a foreign language is that they
have a language already. This gets in the way of mastering all parts of
another language - grammar, vocabulary, and, perhaps more obstinately
than either of those two, pronunciation. A child learning her own
language cannot turn what she hears into something else, because she
hasn't got anything else. So there is nothing to distract her when she hears
new parts of 'her' language. She may sometimes make mistakes at the
beginning, but it cannot be because she is twisting what she hears into
something familiar.
It is interesting to see what adults may do when they have nothing
familiar to turn to or distract them. AG reports how 'Many years ago, in
the days when the institution I worked at still arranged pronunciation
classes for its students, I had a group of Spanish and French-speakers
whose English pronunciation was appalling. I reminded them that
English spelling was often bizarre, something they enthusiastically agreed
about. I then presented to them a word I was fairly certain they had not
heard or read before. 'Dingy, ' I said, 'is particularly odd. It is spelt like
this.' And on the blackboard I wrote ZHUGHDEMB, at the same time
repeating the word 'dingy' several times, fitting its two syllables to the
two syllables of the 'word' on the board.
'I then invited the students to say 'dingy' themselves. They did
extremely well. One French girl, whose pronunciation was normally
particularly French, got everything exactly right, from the individual
sounds to the intonation. I finally confessed the truth and wrote DINGY
on the board. The French girl threw up her hands in delight at
recognizing, not the word, which she had never seen, but the letters. "Ah!"
she cried. "D a i n g e e e!"'
The moral of this story is that if they really listen, and act only on what
76
they hear, most people can pronounce sounds correctly. In practice they
tend instead to reject what they actually hear and hasten to turn it into the
first familiar sounds that it reminds them of. Those familiar sounds are of
course those of their own language. This is the true significance of the fact
which everybody knows: that is, that the members of each community in
the world have their own typical accent when they speak foreign
languages. This fact does not mean that it is physically difficult for people
to pronounce foreign languages. It means that they are lazy, distracted, or
inhibited, or suffer from a combination of those conditions.
§73 The temptation to pronounce what you see, not
what you hear
The French girl in AG's little experiment also showed how students of
foreign languages who can read (which today means nearly all of them)
have a double temptation. When they speak a foreign language they tend
to see the words in their minds. (This is natural enough, because it is
mainly in its written form that they will have first come into contact with
the language, and from the written form that they will have learned most
of their vocabulary.) So it is not only sounds that they want to distort into
other, familiar sounds. The written form of the words tempts them to
pronounce, not what they in fact hear, but what they think they ought to
have heard (according to their own language) on the basis of the letters
they see, or have seen in the past.
But the corrupting effect of the written forms often extends a stage
further. When students hear a new word they are liable to instantly
imagine it in its written form. Immediately they do this they risk cutting it
off in their minds from the sound they actually heard, and again give it
the sound they think it 'ought' to have.2
By insisting on such a preposterous spelling for 'dingy' AG was able to
detach the students' minds from the letters, because there was no
remotely recognizable link between the letters and what they heard. They
were thus left with nothing to go on except the sounds themselves. They
had never heard - or seen - that particular combination before and so had
no prejudices about how it ought to sound - and so they got it right. One
can often get the same effect if one 'invents' sounds that one's audience
(whether of mixed or a single nationality) thinks are just noises which do
not belong to any language. Nearly everybody can imitate them, however
'peculiar'.
Most people are not very aware of exactly how they use language, and
so there may be doubts about whether people really 'see' words in their
minds when they speak them. But that word 'worry', already mentioned,
77
illustrates how in fact that must be what millions of people do, at any rate
when they speak foreign languages. The significant thing about 'worry' is
that no other language has a word with a similar meaning which looks or
sounds similar; therefore any mistake in pronunciation cannot be due to
confusion with a word in their own language. Thus if people pronounce it
to rhyme with 'sorry' instead of 'hurry', it can only be because they do see
it in their minds. They cannot get the mispronunciation from anywhere
else, since they do not hear it pronounced like 'sorry' - unless, perhaps,
they've been listening to Irishmen!
Now, most students of English do in fact mispronounce 'worry' as if it
rhymed with 'sorry', which shows how easily prejudices can prevent
people listening properly. If students of English were really thinking in
sound and not in letters they would pronounce 'worry' correctly, but
often spell it 'wuny' or 'wury' or even 'wary'. In fact, they practically never
do; AG cannot recollect a single instance in the nearly fifty years since he
started correcting students' written English.
§74 Listening too much to yourself instead of to native
speakers
There are other factors, all psychological, that may add to the difficulties
most people have with the pronunciation of foreign languages. A
widespread tendency, one suspects, is for learners in practice to listen to
themselves and each other rather than the real thing. In this way a vicious
circle is set up which it gets harder and harder to break out of. Many
foreign-language learners hear themselves more than they hear native
speakers, at least up to a stage when it is too late. This is one of the ways
in which concentrating on 'practising' talking the language can have a bad
effect. If you worry about talking yourself rather than listening
inquisitively to native speakers, you will hear a great many wrong sounds
as well as wrong words. You will get into habits that will be almost
impossible to break; you will very rapidly get to the point where the
wrong way you do it yourself will be so much more comfortable than any
other way.
§75 Self-consciousness
This addiction to doing it the comfortable way is perhaps connected to, or
at least strengthened by, another factor that probably affects a lot of
people. Many people almost certainly have a bad accent because they are
self-conscious (non-native English-speakers: check you know the meaning
of 'self-conscious', which is a 'false friend'! - see §238). Self-conscious
people are actually perfectly capable of excellent accents if they have
listened well. But they think they will sound silly if they pronounce the
78
language as the natives do.
AG says: 'I am myself a self-conscious person, but in my case, that
which otherwise is no doubt a character defect has had the opposite
effect. I am so anxious not to stand out and attract attention in public
places or among strangers that I do my utmost to get the accent absolutely
right. I urge other self-conscious people to use their weakness in the same
productive way. There is no good reason why self-conscious people
should not achieve excellent foreign accents.'3
§76 Imitating for fun
There are other indications that more people than you might think are
capable of pronouncing foreign languages well, and that many people
who think they can't pronounce them well in fact could. For instance,
there are people who can imitate the regional accents of their own
country, but who are not good at pronouncing the accents of other
countries. Yet very often the sounds of those regional accents are just as
foreign to their own normal way of speaking as those of the foreign
languages they have difficulty with. The crucial difference is that in one
case they are having fun, and do not see what they are doing as a task;
while in the other they feel inhibited and anxious about something they
do indeed see as a task. In the case of the regional accents they have
concentrated without thinking on the right thing: listening. They first
observe, and then imitate. It is ironic that the observing is not strained. On
the contrary, it is when it is completely relaxed that it is most careful and
acute and so most successful - the observers are enjoying themselves.
Relaxed enjoyment seems to work well, too, when people repeat
phrases from a foreign language in order to laugh at the native speakers
of that language. AG has known several students of English, at least, who
could repeat English phrases with a perfect accent, although normally
their English accent was moderate at best. They got the sound right
because they were acting spontaneously. If he had asked them to say the
phrases as part of a test in class, their pronunciation would almost
certainly have been as bad as usual. It is true that their phrases were
usually short. But precisely because they were mocking somebody, they
concentrated effortlessly on the essential thing: the other people's speech,
not their own. Listening, not worrying about manipulating your mouth, is
the key.
We are not recommending you to learn pronunciation by mocking
people. The important point is that the mockers show that one can in fact
do something one thinks one cannot do.
§77 Psychological mysteries
79
We do not want to suggest that there are never any problems connected
with turning observation of the speech of others into the right sounds in
one's own mouth. Quite often, for instance, a person can imitate some of
the regional accents of his own language, but not others. In adults the
conversion of hearing into speaking can clearly be a complicated and
confused process. But the complication is almost entirely psychological.
An Englishman who can imitate a Scottish accent but not an Irish one
does not have difficulty with the second because although he knows what
to do physically to pronounce the Scottish, he doesn't know what to do
physically to produce the Irish. There appears to be a mysterious point
where either the brain 'grasps' the sound it receives and conveys it to the
mouth's nervous system, or fails to grasp and convey it because of some
block or distraction. It is at that point in the brain's processes, not at some
point in the control of the muscles of the mouth, that difficulties may
arise. We do not claim to remotely understand those mental processes,
and we don't think there is anybody else who does either. But in order to
have any chance of dealing in a conscious way with problems of
pronunciation it is essential at least to realize where they mostly lie.
§78 Becoming less mentally flexible
However, some of the psychological pronunciation difficulties are more
tangible and can be identified more precisely. One of the more serious
problems is that as one gets older one tends to find it more and more
difficult to hear every one of the distinct sounds that human mouths can
make. One tends to get so used to a certain set of variations of sound those of one's own language for the most part - that one's mind becomes
closed to important distinctions between the various sounds of other
languages. It is important to understand that this is a purely
psychological difficulty and nothing to do with a physically less sensitive
ear. If it was a physical problem, adults would gradually find it more and
more difficult to distinguish the different sounds in their own language.
One of the best-known examples of this difficulty is the inability of
Chinese- and Japanese-speakers and others to distinguish between T and
V. Most speakers of these languages simply cannot hear the difference,
and if they cannot hear the difference it will be impossible or nearimpossible to pronounce the difference.
AG recalls: 'Many years ago I used to feel secretly rather superior about
this matter. My own pronunciation of foreign languages was very good.
So, I told myself, I would always be able to distinguish between sounds in
any language. I should not have boasted to myself. One day I asked a
Thai student of mine to tell me about the Thai alphabet. 'What is the first
80
letter?' I asked, 'g o,' he said. That seemed fine. 'What is the second?' I
asked, 'k o,' he said. That seemed fine too. 'What's the third letter?' 'k o, '
he said. 'No, no, ' I said, 'not the second, the third.' 'I'm telling you the
third, ' he said. The difference apparently lies in the consonant sound. He
repeated the pair of the second and third letters for me about fifty times. I
still couldn't for the life of me hear any difference at all. It taught me not
to be quite so pleased with myself.'
There are other failures to observe sounds properly for which there is
perhaps rather less excuse than in the cases above. There are for instance
cases where the listeners could in fact notice sounds if they were simply
more alert and paid more attention. For instance, English does not have
long consonants in the middle of words, but it does between words, as in
pairs such as 'black cat', 'bad day' and 'home-made'. Yet many Italian- and
Japanese-speakers fail to notice this, despite the fact that their own
languages have long consonants. They tend to give the full separate value
to each of the two parts of English long consonants, often producing what
to English-speakers' ears is a rather comic effect. The reason for this is
almost certainly that very few Japanese or Italian words end in
consonants and so Japanese- and Italian-speakers do not expect long
consonants between words. Speakers of (for example) Swedish, which
does have long consonants both between and within words, do not make
this mistake.
§79 Being careless or lazy
There are other difficulties, not so fundamental, but more immediate and
practical. One is that, although one may have listened well to a sound and
can pronounce it perfectly well, at certain points in a foreign word or
combination of words one simply forgets to pronounce the sound as it
should be pronounced at that particular point. This is especially liable to
happen either when a word is similar to a word in one's own language, or
where the sounds (or, simply, the letters, those treacherous things!) that
come before or after prompt one towards a certain sound in one's own
language.
Let us look at an example from a native English-speaker's point of view.
The Italian word for 'circus' is 'circo', so that's the first thing that tempts
the English-speaker to pronounce the first vowel sound in 'circo' as in
'circus'. Then the situation is made even worse by the fact that there is an
'r' after the 'i', so if you are not careful you will let that confirm that it
should indeed be pronounced like 'circus'. So if you are not concentrating,
you may pronounce what should be
81
as
or perhaps, even worse, with a word like 'cheer' in mind, as
- or, still worse, without the /r/ as
Your Italian
listeners are very puzzled. What on earth is this 'ciaco' ('cherco' to you)
you want to go to? And yet all despite the fact that very probably you are
perfectly capable of pronouncing 'circo' correctly. You must be very
careful, particularly when you are just starting to learn a new language,
not to fall into traps like this. It is a very common mistake, which becomes
a seemingly unbreakable habit in many people, yet a completely
unnecessary one.
§80 A physical difficulty
There is another difficulty, though, for which there is much more excuse.
It is, for once, a physical difficulty. As we get older it seems that our
mouths get used to producing certain sounds in a certain order, and
become less flexible than they were when we were children. The difficulty
is then, not that of producing the right individual foreign sounds, or the
right intonation, but of combining the right sounds quickly one after the
other in a natural way. This may indeed need practice. The difficulty of
moving the tongue quickly from one unfamiliar position to another, in an
unfamiliar order, leads to the temptation to return to the familiar
positions of one's own language. This is, indeed, not just a question of
tongue position, but of the whole 'set' of the face and muscles.
Let us take another example from the English-speaker's pronunciation
of Italian. In the infinitive of the reflexive verb 'convertirsi' ('convert
oneself = be converted) the quick sequence of Italian 'i', 'r' and 's' at the
end does not come naturally to most English-speakers, and so there may
be a tendency, even among those who generally pronounce Italian well, to
convert the 'i' or the 'r', or both, into something English-sounding. And so
we are back to the same sort of problem as we had with 'circo'.
However, this is not really a great problem most of the time, unless you
are aiming at a perfect accent, and even then one can often solve the
problem simply by always speaking slowly. Not even all Italians speak at
the rate of knots.
§81 Finding out, listening and imitating - and being
eager
AG reports:
concentrated
language on
phrases and
'When I have learned foreign languages I have always
on the pronunciation before anything else. I listened to the
the wireless to get the genuine 'feel' of it, and imitated
short sentences I managed to catch, and took immense
82
pleasure in echoing them exactly as the speaker had said them. I also
constantly read short passages aloud, again trying to produce the real
native sound. I have already described how I carefully studied sounds in
various situations in Sweden and Italy.
'We mentioned above the three sounds in Swedish which all sound like
'sh' to an inexperienced English-speaker. They provide a good example of
some of the principles and methods I think are useful for learning foreign
pronunciation. (Studying them was also an important stage in developing
my personal understanding of pronunciation.)
'One can find the three distinct sounds in a phrase like ''sju hekto
(seven hektograms of minced meat). The first thing, of course, is to
become aware that there is a difference between the three sounds. So you
must make sure the book you are using tells you such things.
'I was a bit discouraged when I first learned about the three sounds. I
was able to hear that (1) was different from the other two and different
from the English 'sh' sound. But I couldn't hear that (2) and (3) were
different from each other or from the English sound. I read the instruction
to make a groove in my tongue that I mentioned before, and it was at that
point that I began to realize that trying to follow directions about tongue
and lip movements was not an effective way of learning pronunciation.'
§82 Be determined that you can and will get it right
'I hope my experience at this stage will encourage others who are keen to
improve their accent in a foreign language. But I must stress once again
how probably the most important factor is one's determination to get it
absolutely right. Next, as I have said, I had the enormous advantage of
living at the time in the country concerned.
'I was really annoyed that I couldn't hear the difference between (2) and
(3) and the English sound, so I spent several weeks making a special effort
listening intently to them at every opportunity; sometimes I asked people
to say the different sounds to me. The first encouraging thing was that
although my mind had clearly become closed to the distinctions, this
turned out, at least in this case, not to be an incurable condition! (I was
only 22 at the time. Whether I could summon up the same flexibility of
mind now, at 69, 1 do not know.) Although I cannot now remember, I
suspect that my awareness of the distinct sounds came very suddenly, my
83
ears opening from one moment to the next, as it were. This is what has
happened in several cases since.
'After that it was easy. For a few weeks I practised the three sounds
busily. But I did not think consciously about what I was doing with my
mouth, let alone stand in front of a mirror. I simply imitated. By this stage
I suspect that my practising was largely unnecessary, and more than
anything a way of enjoying and confirming my success. I had already
done the essential work of 'hunting' the sounds.'
§83 Intonation
Without correct intonation (the 'melody' of the voice as one speaks) one
can never 'speak like a native'. In fact, for an accent good enough to allow
you to pass as a native speaker, perfect intonation (including the basic
stress pattern) comes before perfect mastery of all the sounds. A
completely native intonation will usually cover up slight flaws here and
there in the pronunciation of individual sounds. Most of us know people
of our own language community who have their own personal,
unconventional way of pronouncing certain sounds. There are many
people who lisp, or pronounce 'r' in an unusual way, for instance, but
their fellow citizens still instantly recognize them as native speakers.
Faulty intonation can sound ridiculous, and can occasionally irritate
people. But defects in intonation seldom give rise to misunderstandings.
So for purely practical purposes it is more important to make sure you
have achieved a comprehensible pronunciation of sounds and words.
It is even more absurd to study intonation patterns in a book or under
the instruction of a teacher than it is to make a 'scientific' study of tongue
positions in order to master individual sounds. Indeed, any sort of study
is the wrong way to go about capturing the intonation of a foreign
language. You will grasp the essence of a language's intonation in literally
a matter of seconds, or of a few minutes at the outside, or you will never
master it at all. There will almost certainly be some details that you will
add later, but they will be added on to the basic 'tunes' of the language
you have already grasped.
Although you should not study intonation, you need intense
concentration to master it. However, once again you should not strain
anxiously. You should concentrate because you find it fascinating to
imitate exactly what you hear, because it is exciting to get it just right. If
you can feel it is fun, an enjoyable challenge, like playing a game, you will
concentrate naturally.
§84 What you need for a good accent
This is perhaps a good point at which to get rid of the idea that one has to
84
be musical to be good at pronouncing foreign languages. There is little or
no connection. Lots of unmusical people speak foreign languages with a
superb accent, while there are famous opera singers whose pronunciation
of foreign languages is abominable - sometimes so bad that they are
incomprehensible. (This does of course not mean that no musical people
pronounce foreign languages well; many do.)
But to be good at pronunciation you have to take it seriously. There are
probably at least two reasons why, more often than not, people are better
at other aspects of a foreign language than they are at its pronunciation.
One is that they are discouraged. Because there are so few people who
speak foreign languages with a perfect accent, most people believe it is
virtually impossible to achieve one; you have to have a special freakish
talent to do so. The other reason is simply that most people in practice whatever they may say - do not regard pronunciation as very important.
In one way they are absolutely right to have this attitude. If your
pronunciation is good enough for you to be generally understood there is
no immediate practical reason for bothering any more about it. That is all
the more true if you have already reached a standard in all the other
aspects of the language that satisfies you.
AG says he could himself never restrict his ambition in that way. That,
though, is purely a matter of personal temperament and inclination. But a
casual attitude to pronunciation can lead to bad results for people who
are just beginning a foreign language, particularly if it is their first.
Students usually start off, quite rightly, with the pronunciation. If they do
not take it seriously enough, don't try to get it as right as possible, there is
a risk that they will approach all the other aspects of the language in the
same way. So it is important, right from the beginning, starting with
pronunciation, to get into the habit of doing things for yourself. So you
must work at it!
However, as we have already emphasized, this does not mean boring
study. First, clearly, it means finding out exactly what the sounds of the
foreign language are, and whether there are sounds that are peculiar to it.
After that it means listening, listening again and again, listening as much
as you have time for. Listen out especially for those particular sounds you
have learned about, but be careful not to assume automatically that you
are getting all the more 'ordinary' ones right. One can get into bad,
unbreakable habits with certain sounds if one is not on one's guard. Get
the 'feel' of the intonation, and imitate short snatches of it. It doesn't
matter if at the beginning you don't understand the words.
§85 What to listen to - radio, television, tapes
85
At the start it can be very helpful to listen to a tape, if it draws your
attention to the right things, and if the language on it is spoken naturally
and realistically - try to get the advice of a native speaker on the latter
question. The advantage of a tape at this stage is that you can repeat
particular sounds as often as you like. But it is not worth spending a lot of
money on a tape, unless you have no alternative.
If you can receive broadcasts in the foreign language, by far the best
thing to listen to is the radio. Television is next best, but you are likely to
be distracted by the picture and not concentrate enough on the sound.
After a short while commercial pre-recorded tapes cease to be useful.
They cannot give you a true idea of the language. It is pointless to listen to
the same passages of language over and over again. Very soon they
become dead. On the radio you can hear a natural variety - constantly
changing subjects and constantly changing voices. And while listening
repeatedly to the same tapes is clearly artificial, at the same time tapes fail
to repeat just those things that ought to be repeated. It is only by listening
regularly to the constantly new things on the radio that you will learn to
recognize the things that really do come back again and again in the
language, both as regards sounds and expressions.
(As a very young man AG once spent a night in a youth hostel in Basle,
From the other side of the dormitory he heard another young man talking
perfect English with a perfect accent. He turned out to be a Dutch medical
student. When asked how he had learned such superb English, he said he
had just listened secretly to the BBC during the war.)
§86 Listen directly to your own voice, not to tapes of it
Listening to tapes you make of your own voice are not as useful as many
people think. If you rely on them to make an appreciable difference to
your pronunciation, you will probably be disappointed. It is possible that
when you listen to your tape you will pick up a few tangible and specific
mistakes that you did not notice when you listened directly to your own
voice. But AG's experience is that in general if a person cannot hear
himself as he speaks and judge whether he is doing it right or wrong, he
will not be able to judge when he listens to a tape of himself either. If he is
not listening properly to himself, he is probably not listening properly to
native speakers.
Furthermore, listening directly to your own voice is much more
practical and convenient. You can repeat what you hear on the radio or
television (remember, just a word, phrase, or short sentence, not more)
without a gap, which is really the only effective way to do it - imitation
must be instantaneous. You can judge properly whether you have got it
86
right, because you can compare immediately. And finally, if you are not
satisfied with your performance you can repeat your little bit of language
as many times as you like until you feel you've got it.
If you tape a passage of yourself speaking, listen to it, compare it with a
native original, and resolve to do better next time, you are very unlikely
to achieve much. And this is quite apart from the fact that you will spend
far more time and money. Once you have a satisfactory radio, and enough
privacy, the best and quickest way of learning pronunciation will cost you
nothing. If you are having difficulty with particular sounds you can of
course tape short pieces of native speakers on the radio, and play the
relevant words back to yourself again and again. But the constantly
renewed 'living' sound is nearly always better.
Practise, too, by reading short passages aloud. Some people even find
they can practise pronunciation, at least up to a point, by reading or
talking 'aloud' silently inside their heads. It may work for you too.
When you read aloud you must practise to become flexible in your
pronunciation. By all means practise the very common expressions. They
are of course important. But it is equally important to be able to say
completely new things that you have never heard or said yourself before.
§87 Which accent?
Most languages are spoken with accents which vary from place to place
or according to the speaker's class or social status. Choosing the accent
you should learn is not always easy. What is most important is to learn an
accent that can be understood by as many people as possible, so the first
thing is to make sure the accent is a clear one. For instance, if you are
learning Italian, it would not be a good idea to develop a strong Tuscan
countryside accent, because although Tuscan is supposed to be the basis
of standard Italian, many Tuscans tend to 'swallow' their words and often
Italians from other regions of Italy find it very difficult to follow them.
(Naturally if you can acquire a Tuscan accent for use in rural Tuscany as
well as a standard Italian accent, you will have nothing to worry about.)
Learning an accent that most people can understand does not
necessarily mean, however, that you have to learn the most widespread
accent. In the case of English, for example, the best accent to learn is
possibly the British standard (or 'received') pronunciation. This is spoken
by a comparatively small proportion of native English-speakers, but it is a
fairly clear accent, and although few people outside the British Isles use it,
it does not belong to any particular region. Far more people speak
American English than British English; AG personally prefers many
American English accents and several British local accents to British
87
'Received Pronunciation', but the latter is in a sense neutral, and it has the
added advantage that it is an accent that very great numbers of students
of English have already used as their model.
Very often, of course, it does not matter at all if you learn a local or
minority accent. This can apply to English as well. But with English, as
with practically all languages, before you start acquiring an accent which
is not a standard one, you should make sure you have found out about
any possible drawbacks. Unfortunately the world is such that some
accents are laughed at or despised by other native speakers, so it is
probably better to avoid those.
§88 Two equally good approaches to pronunciation
To sum up, there are two main practical ways you can approach
pronouncing foreign languages. If you can pronounce a foreign language
well enough for people particularly native speakers - to understand
exactly what words you mean, and you are not interested in perfection, be
wholly content with your achievement. If you do not want to be perfect,
but feel somehow that you ought to improve your accent, and so spend
time and perhaps money on formal pronunciation studies, you are most
unlikely to achieve very much, and may cause yourself pointless distress.
On the other hand, if you really want to pronounce a foreign language
perfectly, if you are excited by the challenge, if you go about it in the right
way, and if you enjoy working at it, eager at any moment of the day to get
back to those radio knobs, then you should be confident that you will
almost certainly succeed.
Notes
1. 'Phoneme' is the technical term for the range of sounds that are close
enough to be recognized by native speakers of a language as one
particular sound and not another sound. Changing from one phoneme
to another (e.g. from 'barf' to "bat') will change the meaning, or (e.g.
from 'barf' to 'bav') produce a 'word' without meaning. But the
variations of sound within a phoneme (called 'allophones') do not
change meanings. For instance, many English-speakers pronounce 'lip'
with a 'clear' / and 'pill' with a 'dark' /, but both I's belong to the same
phoneme in English, and the meaning of 'pill' does not change if it is
pronounced with a 'clear' I.
2. The conclusions drawn from AG's story may be dismissed by some as
being based on a solitary anecdote. They may demand the academic
rigour of systematic experiment. This, however, is not possible. For any
repeat of the experiment, several conditions are essential. The subjects
must believe unquestioningly that the spelling truly is as it is falsely
88
stated to be; they must not try to turn what they hear into more familiar
sounds; and they must be completely unaware of the intentions of the
experimenter. There is only one way to be certain all these conditions
have been satisfied: to get the same result that AG did!
3. A very important factor in language learning, especially as regards
pronunciation, is the feeling one has about oneself. To feel one's identity
is bound up with one's nationality or culture is probably a big
hindrance. But it seems a pity for people to feel like that. It is not only a
practical obstacle to learning languages; it also suggests lack of
confidence in one's individuality. Is not the best way to retain one's
identity simply to go on being one's own unique self? One does not in
any way become less oneself by speaking somebody else's language
perfectly, just as one does not lose one's identity by speaking one's own
language perfectly. Inside one remains oneself, whatever mode of
expression one chooses to use. It seems a brittle identity that has to
depend on the outward signs of a nationality.
89
7
VOCABULARY 1. PRINCIPLES AND FIRST STEPS
§89 What words do you need to know?
Words, or perhaps we should say meanings, are the essence of any
language. But what words should you learn, and which should you learn
first? The answer is that it depends, as usual, on what you want to use the
foreign language for and how good you want to be at it. But everybody,
whatever their special interest may be, needs to know roughly the same
basic vocabulary. Everybody needs to know the pronouns, the main
prepositions, conjunctions and adverbs, question words, basic verbs, basic
nouns, and basic adjectives. Even if your only interest in the language is
as, say, a biologist, or a cook, or a lawyer, it is essential for you to know
those basic words first.
§90 Active and passive vocabulary, and transparent
vocabulary
In some ways it is easier to learn to read a foreign language than to speak
it. But one needs a far smaller vocabulary in order to speak well enough
for practical everyday purposes than one needs for understanding
everyday speech. That is because when one speaks one chooses the words
one uses, and one obviously tries to make do with what one has, while
one has little control over what the native speaker says. The native
speaker is liable to use a great many more words than a beginner can
understand. To understand something like a newspaper, where one has
no control over the words used at all, one needs an even bigger
vocabulary.
Your passive vocabulary, then, will have to be bigger than your active
vocabulary, but there are two factors that make this quite easy to manage.
First of all, when you listen or read, the words are presented to you. You
don't have to dig them out of your memory. Secondly, in many languages
you will find words whose meaning is 'transparent' to you. (See §§218229,231-239.)
As the first foreign language you learn it is probably a good idea to
choose one that is fairly transparent, unless you urgently need to know
one that is not. But do not choose one that is too transparent. If you do,
you may get a shock later when you come up against a language that is
much less transparent! However, it is probably safe to say that there is no
foreign language that is too transparent for English-speakers.
§91 Transparency can be different to different people
90
A very 'transparent' language is not necessarily one that has a very large
proportion of transparent words. Its true 'transparency' will depend on
how many transparent words you actually meet in your reading or
listening. This means, in turn, that not everybody who speaks the same
language will find a particular foreign language equally transparent,
especially after they have got beyond the basic vocabulary stage. For
instance, an English-speaker whose contact with French consists
exclusively of reading about history or economics, say, will find French
far more transparent than an Englishspeaker whose only reading in
French is novels.
Furthermore, an English-speaker learning German who only hears the
language in connection with domestic matters might find it more
transparent than French, while one who reads history in French and
German might find French the more transparent language.
§92 Being selective is half the secret
Choosing the right words to learn is an essential part of the solution to the
practical problems of learning a language, particularly for beginners. If
they can find out which words are the most important, they can
concentrate on those and learn them really properly first, without wasting
time and effort on unnecessary words.
The fact that the general, or non-technical, vocabulary of a language
consists of, say, 300,000 words is of purely theoretical interest to someone
who is just starting to study a new language. We can usually only learn a
small part of each foreign language that we take on. For that reason it is
very important not to hurl yourself headlong into a new language
without being clear from the very beginning about what you should
learn. One of the fundamental principles for any beginner ought to be
what we can call word economy.
It is much better to know 500 or 1,000 words well than 3,000 words only
half learnt. Don't let yourself be taken in by assertions that you must
know such and such a number of words in order to 'function' - it is you
yourself who will decide whether or not you 'function' with a vocabulary
of any particular size.
As the table in §250 shows, no more than 400 different words cover
about 90% of all the words in your everyday spoken vocabulary. In order
to read you need to know more words than those, but only as passive
vocabulary, and with a knowledge of 1,500 words you can read a
considerable amount reasonably well and get quite a lot out of it. Learn
the most important words properly instead of grabbing constantly at new
ones. Strain at too much and you may lose the lot!
91
A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush
§93 The basic vocabulary
In connection with analyses of how many words it is necessary to know,
the term 'basic vocabulary' often crops up. Deciding on a particular basic
vocabulary is the first step in selecting the words one is going to learn.
As a maximum (or Maxi) basic vocabulary, 8,000 words can be
regarded as quite sufficient. As appears from the table in §251, that
number of words constitutes a 'complete communication system'.
But when it comes to learning a language, we can think in terms of far
lower figures. E VG has found it useful to work with vocabularies of 400500 words and some 150 phrases, or 800-1,000 words and about 300
phrases, or 1,500-2,000 words and still more phrases, for both learning
and teaching at different stages and for different purposes.
Around 2,000 words is now such a standard figure in books with a
basic vocabulary that are published in Europe that we can call it the
European basic vocabulary. (See §250 and §251:3.) An example of a 'basic
word book' is Grundwortschatz Deutsch, with more than 2,000 words in six
languages: German, English, French, Italian, Spanish and Russian
(published by Ernst Klett, Stuttgart, in 1971).
However, the basic vocabularies are very similar all over the world.
Most of the words, or, more correctly, most things and concepts, that are
important in one country are also important in another. Non-IndoEuropean languages too, such as Finnish and Hungarian, are today
typically European as regards the make-up of the vocabulary, although
the words and sentences in themselves appear very alien to speakers of
the Indo-European languages. So there is no reason why one should not
use one's mother tongue as the starting point when learning foreign
languages.
§94 One has to crawl before one can walk: the 'active
minimum'
2,000 words, though, are too many as a basic vocabulary for beginners.
About 400 words is a suitable first basic vocabulary. In due course this is
replaced by the 'Mini Basic Vocabulary', 800-1,000 words.
EVG writes: 'A basic principle for studying a language effectively is,
first, to learn thoroughly an active minimum. This applies irrespective of
which particular skill one wants to concentrate on, that is to say, not only
speaking (understanding the spoken word and making oneself
understood in it) but also reading and writing.
'By 'active' here I mean that beginners should learn the equivalents in
92
the foreign language of words and phrases in their own language, and
learn them as well as possible, preferably by heart. 'Minimum' means 'first
things first', that is, as quickly as possible getting down to learning what
is most important in the way of words, phrases and grammar, even when
the learning is hard going.
'Children crawl before they walk, and it is the same with learning a
language: first we crawl, and then we begin to walk. For the purpose of
learning an active minimum I have put together 'mini-material' in
Swedish, English and other languages, 'minilex' for words, 'miniphrase'
for everyday expressions, and 'minigram' for grammar. The first part of
this material is 'crawl-material': about 400-500 words in MINILEX A,
approximately 150 phrases in MINIPHRASE A, and the most essential
grammar in MINIGRAM. A complete Minisystem, English-Swedish
Minilex A, Miniphrase A + B, and Minigram, can be found in Appendices
3,4 and 5 of this book. (Minisystem A's are in preparation for other
languages, as well as MINILEX B, with a further 400-600 words, and
MINIPHRASE B, with about 150 more phrases. MIDILEX contains about
2,000 words, including MINILEX A and B.) This material is based on my
experience in the learning of many languages and in the teaching of some
ten languages, both in Sweden and other countries.i
'The 'mini' material gives beginners an invaluable overall view: they
know what they have to concentrate on 'in the first round'. This is
particularly important when the language is difficult at the beginning.
Moreover, their assurance and self-confidence is increased by the fact that
the Mini material is specially adapted so that they can study effectively on
their own. They need not be afraid to 'crawl-speak' or 'mini-speak' when
they are conscious that they know the most important words and phrases
by heart.
'In order to 'crawl-speak', or 'survive-speak', however, one can get by
with considerably fewer 'crawl-words' and 'crawl-phrases'. When I
travelled around Hungary for the first time, I used, according to my notes,
less than 200 words and phrases but could nevertheless make myself
understood by those who only spoke Hungarian, and at the same time I
understood everything of importance that others said. In other countries,
such as Greece, I have 'survive-spoken' with about 300 words and
phrases.
'More words are needed for 'crawl-reading', that is, about 800, but here
we are talking about 'passive' words - and one can of course begin to read
with an even smaller reading vocabulary. I began to read non-fiction in
Irish, Lappish and Turkish when my passive vocabulary in those
93
languages did not consist of more than 400-500 words.
'Note that the 'crawl-phrases' must be so well learnt that you can use
them without hesitation - as if you are pressing a button. In other words,
you must know them completely by heart. (Your knowledge of the 'crawlgrammar' must be equally solid.)'
'Every language is an ocean. Navigate first in coastal waters, along
charted channels.'
A buen entendedor, pocas palabras
A wise man needs few words
§95 Concentrate on central words!
Anybody who wants to learn a new language ought first to concentrate
on common words that may be needed instantaneously, those which can
be called central words (or 'instant words'). You should lear n these so that
you know them 'automatically' and can use them without hesitating.
Examples of central words
(Nos.1-10 of our 'crawl' or 'survival' word list of almost 500 words from
English to Swedish.) Some 'instant words' consist of 'pointing' words or
'gesture' words. Or rather, it is a matter of 'speech without words' - one
can get by without knowing the respective words in advance. When one
points at an object everybody normally understands what one means. The
same applies when one uses an international gesture instead of a word or
a phrase. (These days one doesn't even have to point in supermarkets etc.:
one simply chooses, takes, and goes to the check-out to pay.)
§96 Don't learn unnecessary synonyms
It is better to know one word well than several words badly, particularly
if they have roughly the same meaning (i.e. if they are synonyms) or if
one of them is used much more than the other. You should not spend
94
time and energy on learning synonyms without practical value.
A knowledge of synonyms is essential for speaking and writing at an
advanced level, but not at the lowest levels. In a 'survival list' there should
be as few words as possible, preferably only one as an equivalent for each
word in the 'home' language. Especially at this stage it is important to
maintain 'word economy'.
§97 Don't bother about marginal 'interest' words in the
beginning
Most 'interest' words - words belonging to particular 'fields of interest'
or to subject areas of various kinds - are not central to vocabulary
learning; they are marginal. You should not learn these marginal interest
words at the expense of central words. If you do, you are only acquiring
seeming knowledge - easily learnt and unimportant words instead of the
ones you really ought to be learning. It is the sort of thing that is called
'poling down stream' in Malaysia and Indonesia, as in the saying
Pole down stream, crocodile laugh ---when you pole yourself down
stream the crocodiles laugh, because you are so stupid.
One seldom needs to remember without delay the words for animals,
plants, parts of the body and illnesses, any more than the names of pieces
of furniture or household utensils. As a result of the spread of department
stores and supermarkets, words that were previously common in speech
are now used comparatively rarely in everyday life. This applies, among
other things, to many of the names in different languages of items of food,
clothes, writing materials and various odds and ends.
In the teaching of beginners in some countries a lot of time is wasted on
marginal words. Many students are still deceived into thinking that it is
important to know the equivalents of words like 'monkey', 'donkey',
'elephant', 'snail', 'parrot', 'plum', 'pear', 'cherry', 'raisin'; 'horseshoe', 'bow'
(as in bow and arrow), 'padlock', 'church bell'. There is nothing wrong in
itself with knowing a lot of marginal 'interest words'. But there is usually
plenty of time to look them up in a pocket dictionary, and in principle you
should learn them at a later stage, after the central words.
The list below is taken from a picture in a Swedish school-book for
English, and is accompanied by hints on how the teacher should make
sure the pupils lear n the 25 words by heart. Should they and the teacher
really spend their time on all this sort of thing? There cannot be many
students who need to lear n more than at the most five of these words by
heart: soap, towel, toothbrush, mirror and toilet paper. And by all means
the pronunciation of two others: comb, sponge. But the other 18? It is to
be earnestly hoped that most teachers in primary schools are sensible
95
enough to see to it that their pupils have the opportunity to learn rather
more important words.
(There are many even worse examples of misdirected energies: Italian
coursebooks for use at the elementary stage of English, for instance, in
which the children are given lists to learn of the names of the creatures to
be found at the seaside.)
§98 Important central 'interest' words
However, not all 'interest words' are 'out-of-the-way' words. Some are so
common and important that it is proper to treat them as central words
from the learning point of view. Particularly within the 'interest-areas' of
Time and People there are plenty of central words. The following should
be learned as soon as possible:
Time: day, night, morning, evening, hour, week, month, year, time
(once, the first time), Monday etc., spring, summer, autumn, winter,
holiday.
People: father, mother, child, son, daughter, brother, sister, husband,
wife, man, woman (gentleman, lady), boy, girl, relative, friend. Examples
from other 'interest areas' of words we need to learn at an early stage are:
hand, foot, head, eye
flat/apartment, table, chair, window
hill, wood, river, lake
trousers/pants, dress, skirt, shirt
money, wallet, key, watch, bag
town, street, road, office
book, newspaper, letter, card
water, bread, meat
weather, rain
In foreign countries we need to know at least what the following signs
and notices mean:
96
It is important, too, to know the names of certain countries, nationalities
and languages. In any language with which we are involved we must at
least learn what our home country is called, together with our nationality
and the word for our language.
§99 Confidence comes from knowing common phrases
well
In this book the term 'phrase' is used to indicate everyday expressions and
other common short sentences. They are just as important as separate
single words. One cannot work out common expressions for oneself
simply by combining various words with the help of some grammar - it
doesn't work! A great many everyday ideas are expressed by each
language in its own special way.
Nevertheless, this does not mean that most everyday expressions are
not consistent with grammar, and it is a very good idea at the beginner's
stage to study the grammar of common expressions in a practical phrase
book. At this critical stage of your learning this will teach you a lot about
97
both the common usage and the grammar of the language, and help you
to get a genuine feel for it. (See also §§158-159.)
The mastery of a core of common phrases is invaluable for one's selfconfidence. One can then at least 'say something' in everyday situations.
To be able to speak reasonably well one needs to know at least 100
phrases. But even at the 'crawl' stage an active knowledge of 25-50
phrases is necessary. You should know them so well that you 'hear them
inside you' and use them automatically, without hesitating. Such phrases
can be just as important as words. (See Appendix 4: Miniphrase A + B:
English-Swedish.)
An active knowledge of phrases is also necessary for one to be able to
write easily and naturally. For reading, on the other hand, one only needs
a passive knowledge that does not take much time or work to acquire; it is
merely a matter of knowing what the phrases mean in one's own
language.
§100 The most important phrases first!
For beginners 'phrase economy' is just as important as 'word economy'.
First learn all the most important phrases. Concentrate on a small number
of phrases at a time. If you try to learn too many all at once, you may find
it difficult to remember any of them. As with words, learn the phrases
with your own language as the starting point. Limit yourself to just one
equivalent in the foreign language to begin with, but make sure you know
it by heart. Only when you know that phrase 'absolutely' should you start
studying variations.
As examples of phrases that one must know already at the 'crawlspeaking' stage there follow here twenty-five everyday English
expressions with equivalents in French. (See §251:1.)
98
'Don't forget to add 'madame' or 'monsieur', loudly and clearly, after short
phrases (except of course to close friends).
"Note also: 'A bientot' ('Until soon') and 'A demain' ('Until tomorrow')
§101 Learn one-word phrases before longer phrases
Instead of trying to learn long sophisticated variations beginners should
as far as possible concentrate on phrases consisting of one word, or at the
most two or three. One-word phrases are usually abbreviations of longer
phrases and consist of a single noun. They are naturally easier to
remember than longer ones. Here are a number of cases where it is a good
idea to begin with one-word phrases and wait until one can use them
automatically before one starts learning the equivalent multi-word
phrases (in brackets).
The next stage is to add the appropriate polite expressions. Thus
'Name?' becomes 'Could I have your name?' (French: 'Votre nom, s'il vous
plait?' German: 'Ihr Name, bitte?')
As a rule just one word is enough when asking the way or going
shopping.
Toilet? = Where's the toilet (lavatory, John)?
99
Station? = How do I get to the station?
But by all means begin with 'Excuse me' - 'Entschuldigen Sie' in
German, and 'Pardon, madame' or 'Pardon, monsieur' in French.
(Questions in French are often introduced with 'S'il vous plait, madame'
or 'S'il vous plait, monsieur'.)
If, for instance, one wants to buy picture postcards it is usually enough
simply to say the one word in the foreign language:
Postcards? = Can I get postcards here? / Do you have any postcards?
In the same way, one or two words are sufficient when one is buying
other things. Many people in foreign-language teaching circles seem to be
still living in a bygone age. They have not noticed that there are such
things as cars and supermarkets. When one is driving in a foreign town
there is seldom time for more than a single word when one asks the way for example, 'Centre?' (there is no time for 'Excuse me, could you tell me
which is the quickest way to the city centre, please?') or 'Airport?' (no time
for 'Excuse me, is this the right way to the airport?'). In supermarkets one
can manage quite well enough without any words or phrases; nor does
buying shoes and dresses require any training in words and phrases
before one travels abroad.
Exercises in asking the way, shopping and ordering in restaurants are
for the most part wasted time and effort. The words learned are mainly
marginal 'interest' words. Both at the beginner's stage and later there are a
whole lot of other things which are much more important to practise and
fix in the memory.
§102 Complete question sentences, and longer phrases
Learning question sentences consisting of at least three to four words
requires a lot of practice, up to the point where one knows them by heart
and 'hears them inside oneself.
Most Germanic and Latin languages form questions in much the same
way. Special attention is needed, however, for the mastering of questions
in French, and formulating questions in English is even more
troublesome, on account of the way 'do', 'does' and 'did' have to be used.
Phrases that consist of more than three or four words are usually hard
to remember. So when such phrases are common and important one must
keep at it and practise them till they are fixed in one's memory.
§103 Idioms, sayings and proverbs
The term 'idiom' can be defined as 'an expression characteristic of a
particular language'. We often find an 'idiomatic' expression in another
language illogical and peculiar. If we translate an idiom word for word
into our own language it usually sounds ridiculous.
100
'He is pulling your leg' does not mean he is tugging at one of your
extremities, and you are not wishing misfortune and misery on somebody
if you say 'Hals- und Beinbruch!' ('Neck and leg break!') in Germany; on
the contrary, you are wishing them 'Good luck!'
For speaking and writing purposes you need to have an active
knowledge of only a few idiomatic expressions. On the other hand you
ought to learn as many as possible 'passively', in order to be able to
understand what you read in the foreign language. Among the languages
of the western world, English is particularly rich in idiomatic
expressions.2
Those who enjoy learning well-known expressions - including proverbs
and sayings can at the same time absorb a considerable amount of
information about words, pronunciation and grammar, and so combine
profit with pleasure. Such familiar expressions often form part of poems
and songs. Sometimes there are so many in a single poem or song that the
whole of it has itself become a famous piece of language.
§104 Don't waste energy and time on fancy phrases
Nevertheless, especially in the early stages, but even at a later stage, you
should be careful not to waste your energies on what may seem to you
entertaining or exotic words and idioms. For instance, many students of
English as a foreign language seem to be fascinated by the expression 'cats
and dogs' in the context of the weather. Yet it is of no importance
whatsoever if students do not know this phrase. (They are almost certain
to understand it from the context if and when they do hear it.) It naturally
does not matter if they acquire it effortlessly as an extra that they think is
fun. But it is misguided for them to grasp at such an expression if they do
not first know how to say 'It's raining hard'.
AG remembers how many years ago he had a student who was
entranced by the phrase 'salad days'. 'For a time she tried to bring it into
every composition she wrote for me, and would interrogate me at length
about it each time I explained she was using it incorrectly. I seem to
remember she only gave up when I assured her that it was an expression I
had never used in my life, and that it was extremely unlikely that I would
ever use it during the rest of it either.'
§105 Two ways of learning the basic vocabulary
EVG and AG use rather different ways to learn the basic vocabulary of a
'new' foreign language. AG writes: 'I prefer to get the words firmly fixed
in my memory by going through my beginner's book again - and yet
again, if necessary. In this way, if it is a reasonably good book, I can
observe all the words in realistic contexts. (At the same time it is a good
101
way of getting a reminder of the grammar. See §152.) Many people will
find that this is a more effective, as well as quicker, method of acquiring
vocabulary than learning the meanings of a set number of words.
Contexts give words real and 'living' meanings that can be much easier to
remember than the 'dead' isolated words of a list. EVG urges learning in
context too (§111), but this can be more difficult and take more time by his
method, because one has to find and organize the contexts for the selected
words. The ideal is, of course, beginners' books with sentences and
passages carefully organized to illustrate all the basic vocabulary.
'I also prefer to learn words 'passively' to begin with; that is to say, I
start with the words or, more often, the sentences of the foreign language,
and observe the meanings in English. This is in contrast to EVG's method,
which is to learn words 'actively' from the very beginning (§108), that is,
start with the words and phrases of one's own language and learn what
the equivalents are in the foreign language. With my method one
probably becomes familiar with more words sooner, and in a more
interesting way.
'On the other hand, EVG's method is far more systematic than my
random approach, and in one way far more efficient. I have on several
occasions found that my own easier-going way of doing things has
suddenly left me lost for a very basic, common word or phrase that I
ought to have known. (I may be 'familiar' with it, but I quite simply do
not remember it.) To know that one knows several hundred basic words
and fifty basic phrases by heart, that one can use them unhesitatingly
whenever they are needed, can give much greater confidence in speaking
than my method. Which method you choose should depend on your
temperament, as well as on the immediate purpose of your studies.'
The rest of this chapter (§§106-114) describes EVG's principles and
techniques for learning basic vocabularies.
§106 Remembering words and phrases - the basis of
language learning
Organize your memory! Learning words and phrases is in a sense the
most important part of learning a language, and therefore remembering
them is the very foundation of being able to read or speak or write.
But it is only what one has learnt for the long term that one can be said to
have learned properly. If you soon forget words, phrases, the
grammatical inflexions etc., the learning has been a waste of time and
energy. (Learning for the short term is typical of learning for school,
learning for exams, learning for certificates etc.)
An important condition for remembering is selection, choosing precisely
102
what ought to be remembered and leaving the froth, everything
unnecessary and pointless, to its well-deserved fate - to be forgotten. The
aim must be to remember central words and central phrases so well that
one says them automatically without having to think about them.
§107 The best 'surroundings' and contexts for learning
Easily the best place for learning a foreign language is in the country
concerned. There one can achieve a really effective combination of
talking, reading and writing. (If possible make notes of words and
phrases you notice in the course of conversations.) In one's own country,
as well as reading, one should listen as much as possible to cassettes, the
radio, or television. Practise writing, too. That will always force you to
discover new words.
§108 Learning on the basis of one's own language
When I begin learning a foreign language I start out from words and
phrases in my own language. This is for two reasons:
1.1 know what the minimum is in my own language, i.e. the most
essential words and phrases in my own language that I need to know the
equivalents of in the foreign language.
2.1 need an active knowledge of those words and phrases. In other
words, I need not only to be able to understand words and phrases when
I meet them, but also to be able to recall them instantly when I need them
myself. But see below, §114.
§109 Practicalities, including constant mention to the
problem
The physical things I personally work with are parallel lists, slips of paper
I keep in a pocket or have by the bedside, and slips fixed to doors at
home.
On the lists I put the words or phrases of my own language in a column
on the left and the foreign words or phrases on the right. Learner's books
often have lists of the foreign words in each chapter or 'lesson', with
equivalents in one's own language to the right. In other words, they are
'passive' lists. I turn these into 'active' lists by reversing the order.
On one side of the pocket slips I write the word in my own language on
one side, and the foreign equivalent on the other. One should carry such
slips constantly with one. It is both practical symbol and practical
application of the practical rule that is perhaps the most important of all:
always keep your mind on your aim: mastering that language!
The 'door slips' are particularly useful for consolidating one's
knowledge. I use them especially for phrases. I write the phrases on them
in the foreign language, but they are for an 'active' purpose, that of
103
reminding me how the various ideas are expressed in the language
concerned. (See §114 below.)
I use the lists and pocket slips in two ways:
1. I write down what I think the equivalents of several words or phrases
are in the foreign language, and then check if I'm right in the right hand
column or the other side of the slips.
2. Say (aloud or to myself) what I think each equivalent is and check
immediately in the other column or on the other side of the slip.
When studying systematically as a beginner I find it best to use both
methods. More 'advanced' students can limit themselves to the second
method.
If one is studying seriously and systematically, it is important to be
going through one's material as often as possible and making sure than
one really knows it 'actively'. If one has 'mini-lists' of words and phrases,
one should keep at them until one knows everything in them with easy
certainty and confidence.
§110 Organizing the words and phrases
I do not normally learn single words in alphabetical order, except when
revising or checking that I know them. Instead, I divide the words in my
Minilex A list into grammatical groups: verbs, nouns, adjectives etc. (It is
worth noting that in most basic word lists there are too many nouns. In a
basic word list of about 400 words, nouns should constitute a maximum
of 30%.) I apply the same process to the words I find in the texts of my
learner's book. I make small lists of the different grammatical groups.
Phrases, on the other hand, one can well learn in the order they appear
alphabetically in one's own language. An alternative is to learn them in
groups: Greetings, Requests, Apologies, and so forth.
In any case, it is important whenever possible to
§111 Learn words with other words
As a rule words should be learned and repeated in varying
'environments' (contexts). This applies above all to verbs, pronouns and
prepositions. Try to learn or revise them, not as isolated words, but as
part of word groups or phrases or sentences. You will often have to be
content with learning and practising some words separately because there
is no 'surrounding material'. As regards words that often occur separately
this hardly matters, particularly in the case of adverbs: 'here', 'now',
'already', 'soon', 'then' etc. Verbs are important but often hard to learn. Try
to learn them in sentences which illustrate their use.
Not only words and phrases, but grammar too is best learned 'out in
the field' through conversations with native speakers. During my stays in
104
various European countries I have usually made a point of talking to
people during the day and studying words, phrases and grammar in the
evening.
Try to find the time - and energy - to learn the most essential inflected
forms together with the basic form when you learn a word. Thus in
Finnish not only 'kysyä' (ask) but also 'kysyn' (I ask, I shall ask) and
'kysyin' (I asked). It's a good thing to learn a whole sentence together with
the word and its most important inflected forms. E.g. 'Kysyin häneltä
tietä' (I asked him the way) - with 'hän' (he) in the ablative and 'tie' (way)
in the partitive. It is especially verb inflexions that one must learn, at least
as far as European languages are concerned.
Nouns, adjectives and verbs are often followed by a particular
preposition, which ought to be - indeed, must be - learned
simultaneously. For example:
Where 'case languages' like German, Russian and Icelandic are concerned
it is necessary to know which cases the different prepositions govern. (See
the German examples above.) Knowing the accompanying case is
naturally particularly important when there is no preposition at all, as is
usual in Finnish, Estonian, Lappish and Hungarian. Thus in Finnish one
has to learn not only 'tottunut' (accustomed) but also 'tottunut siihen'
(accustomed to it); 'siihen' shows that 'tottunut' is followed by the illative.
(The base form is 'se' = it.)
§112 Use both your aural and your visual memory
when you learn phrases
Use your visual memory when writing and reading phrases and your
aural memory when practising together with the radio, or teachers, or
with the help of cassettes. The aim is to 'hear them inside oneself rather
than 'see them in front of one' - after the initial learning, try to make it the
aural memory that plays the dominant role.
Seize every opportunity to use the phrases you have learnt in real life -105
- when you meet foreigners, etc. Carry around with you slips of paper
with difficult phrases written on them and practise them as often as you
can. The final goal is to know the common phrases so well that you never
hesitate, but say them automatically, as if you were pressing a button.
§ 113 Learn 'ensemble' languages in sentences - not
word by word
There are certain languages which beginners must as soon as possible
start practising in whole sentences if they want to speak them. One could
perhaps call them 'ensemble' languages.
French is an important 'ensemble' language. It is essential to learn to
speak French from the very beginning in units larger than single words,
that is, in groups of words and in short sentences; at a later stage in longer
sentences too. There isn't much point, either, in practising speaking 'word
by word' in languages like Russian or Arabic - they, too, are 'ensemble'
languages.
§114 Becoming independent of ones own language
Starting out from one's own language, and learning how its meanings are
expressed in the foreign language, is a thoroughly practical and effective
way of working. However, one should never forget the basic aim of one's
studies. That aim is, of course, to master the foreign language. Once one
knows a foreign word and how it is used in the context of its own
language, there is no longer any need to be concerned with the word of
one's own language. Thus, for example, an English-speaker learning
Finnish, once she knows that 'cry' (weep) is 'itkea' in Finnish, should
forget 'cry' and think only of 'itkea.', together with its necessary inflexions.
She should 'think in Finnish', that is to say, connect 'itkea' directly in her
mind to the reality of crying.
Notes
1. The 'mini' idea is by no means new. Among its pioneers was the
Swedish explorer Sven Hedin, who from 1890 onwards systematically
learnt about 500 words in different languages during his travels in Asia.
He said himself that he at first used them 'all hopelessly wrong' but, as
time went by, better and better; the main thing for him was that he
could understand and make himself understood thanks to having
concentrated on the 500 most important words.
In recent times Mini lists have been compiled to promote the learning
of new national (official) languages, such as Catalan in Catalonia and
Tagalog (Filipino) in the Philippines. Now even theoretical linguists are
beginning to take an interest in Mini ideas - but they seem to believe
that they were invented in the U.S.A. In reality the first systematic
106
report on the Mini approach is to be found in EVG's book of 1977
(Gunnemark, 1977). He had put the first mini lists together in the
1960's, partly in the course of journeys in Europe and partly while
teaching immigrants in Sweden.
2. A taste of idioms in some languages other than English:
107
8
VOCABULARY 2. HOW TO LEARN MANY WORDS
§115 After the basic words be greedy for new words
Once you have got beyond the first stages it is very important, if you want
to become really good at the language, to be greedy for words. Never be
content with the vocabulary you have. Try to expand it constantly. There
are factors that tend to stop people learning new words which we discuss
in
122 and 141. The words you know are seldom
substitutes for the words you do not know.
After you have mastered the most basic words, children's books are one
of the best kinds of reading material for getting a really solid foundation
in both vocabulary and most other aspects of the language. So long, that
is, as you do not consider such reading beneath you and too boring.
Become really familiar with children's books, and you will become
familiar with the foundations of the language on which, as adults, native
speakers build the effortless and confident use of their mother tongue. At
the same time you will very likely get an insight into their culture. School
books on geography and history for ten to twelve-year-olds are equally
excellent material, and less off-putting for many adults than children's
fiction.
Aç ayi oynamaz
The hungry bear does not play
§116 You need the vocabulary you need!
When it comes to increasing vocabulary beyond the basic words, different
people clearly need different sorts of word and different numbers of
words for different purposes. There has been too much worry about
selecting the vocabulary that foreign-language learners need to learn. The
principle is very simple. You need the vocabulary you need! If you want
to read serious newspapers in the foreign language, you need the
vocabulary found in those serious newspapers. If you want to exchange
ideas on growing lemons, you will need far fewer words, but they will
have to be agricultural ones, many of them words that most foreigners
will never need. Thus the words you need to know will, as it were, choose
themselves.1
We advise specialists in any field not to waste their time and money on
courses for 'special', or 'specific', purposes. Whatever your field, you can
almost certainly learn the relevant technical vocabulary and usage in the
foreign language far more quickly and efficiently than a non-expert native
108
speaker, since you already know about the things the writers are
discussing. If you are an engineer from Brazil, for instance, you will be
able to master the English of engineering many times quicker than AG
could, as he would have to take courses in mathematics, physics and
engineering before he could have anything more than the foggiest idea of
what it was all about. What you must make sure you have mastered before
you start reading the relevant specialist literature is what we might call
'the little words in between'. After that all you need is a good technical or
scientific dictionary, and you teach yourself the rest.
But the problem that is even more important than choosing the words
to learn is: How should you learn them?
§117 Dictionaries - too often the great enemies of wordlearning
Words are the essence of any language, far more than grammar is. Sadly,
people often have terrible trouble with them, and many never learn even
a quarter of the vocabulary they could if they went about it in the right
way.
Dictionaries are wonderful and fascinating things, and most students of
foreign languages would be lost without them. At the same time,
unfortunately, dictionaries have done untold harm. It may seem strange
to say so, but in practice it has probably been the dictionary more than
anything else that has stopped people knowing the foreign words they
would like to know.
Millions of language students are trapped in vicious circles. They
complain that they cannot understand what they read in the foreign
language because they do not know enough words. So they do not read
and they do not increase their vocabulary, and so they continue not to be
able to understand. Then perhaps someone tells them how important
reading is and persuades them to try again. So they sit down with their
dictionaries, and they look up every single word that is new to them, and
very often many words that are not new but that they 'want to be quite
sure about'. At the end of three hours they have got through half a page in
a book, or half a column in a newspaper. They do this for three or four
days, and then give up in despair, oppressed by the tediousness of it all.
They are convinced - quite correctly - that they do not know enough
words to understand ordinary books and newspapers. As a result their
vocabularies stay more or less the same size as they were, and they
complain that they are making no progress. They either become
permanently frustrated and depressed, or just give in and give up. And it
all happens because they have spent more time with the dictionary than
109
with the language itself.
AG has personally known hundreds of students who have had this
problem; many of them probably still have it. It is not possible to make
exact measurements of something like this, but it is a fair bet that at least
three quarters of all students of foreign languages suffer to some extent
from this difficulty. Many believe that every time they come to a new
word they must know 'exactly what it means', and so they turn constantly
to the dictionary to find out. This is doubly sad, because it not only slows
them up so terribly that they cannot do a tenth of the reading they ought
to do. It also in fact prevents them finding out 'exactly what the word
means'. There is the added danger for some that they are not satisfied till
they can think of the translation of the word in their own language. This
makes them waste even more time with the dictionary.
§118 What words are and what they are not
Before we discuss this problem and how you ought to learn words, it is
important to think about what they are and how they work. As we have
already pointed out, languages are not translations of other languages.
English does not exist in order to translate Russian, Chinese was not
invented for the purpose of translating English, and Spanish was not
called into being for the sake of people wanting to translate Chinese. The
child of German-speaking parents does not have to wait to understand a
new German word till she has translated it into Romanian. The very idea
is clearly absurd.
Yet millions of would-be learners of foreign languages approach
foreign words as though that is how they work, and this causes them a lot
of trouble. We showed in §§16-18 how one word in one language does not
correspond exactly to one word in another language, and how the same
word may have to be translated in different ways on different occasions,
depending on the context. When children learn their own language they
have no other language to translate their words into. Instead they have to
'translate' them into 'reality', into experience; for them all words mean
actual things or part of a situation, or ideas, never other words. All words
are in a context of life, and that is why children learn them so thoroughly
and so accurately. If you want to learn foreign words anything like as
thoroughly and accurately you will need to learn them in the same way,
that is, as meaning reality and experience, and in contexts, not as meaning
words in your own language.
§ 119 The great blessing of being a grown-up
If one suggests to people that they should learn foreign vocabulary in the
same way as they learned their own as children, many will protest that
110
that took so very long, and that they simply haven't got time to do it that
way.
It is quite true, of course, that children take many years to develop their
vocabulary. But adults can acquire a far larger vocabulary in a foreign
language, and far more quickly, than a child learning her own language,
for the reason that adults 'know' the world already, while children do not.
Before a child can grasp a new meaning she has to learn about the reality
that the new word refers to. She thus has to do two things for each new
meaning. Adults have to do only one. They already know the reality the
word refers to. All they have to do is recognise it. If a child of six is
presented with a newspaper article on politics, say, she will neither
understand it nor learn its vocabulary, however good a reader she is
otherwise, simply because she has no experience, either direct or indirect,
of the things the words are about. She will have to wait some years before
she can master such meanings.
Adults have an enormous advantage. They can get down straight away
to mastering the meanings of a foreign language, many of them far more
sophisticated than a native child could grasp. To sum up: a child has to
learn about the world and a language; an adult only has to learn about a
language.
§120 See and hear as many words as you can; learn true
meanings in 'living' contexts: newspapers, magazines,
books, the radio
As an adult, then, you have a task that can take you far less time than it
does a child. On the other hand, the child learns meanings very
efficiently, and we should consider how she does it. She does it by
hearing, and later perhaps by reading, hundreds of thousands of words.
In a normal day she hears hundreds, if not thousands of them. There are
many words that she hears over and over again. If they have meanings
she is ready for, she masters them very quickly. As far as you can, you
should do what the child does. Listen to and read hundreds of thousands
of words. If you do not read or listen to lots and lots of words, you cannot
expect to learn lots of words.
Today, for most people who are learning a foreign language the more
practical way to experience all those words is probably to read them
rather than to listen to them, at any rate at the beginning. When you listen
there will probably often be words you cannot catch, and there is the
further disadvantage that you have a very limited time to think about
possible meanings. In practice it has probably been the dictionary more
111
than anything else that has stopped people doing that reading.
If you have nothing that you particularly want to read about,
newspapers and magazines are probably best. Detective stories are also
excellent, if you like them. Translations of stories by writers like Agatha
Christie or Georges Simenon contain very useful vocabulary.
Once you have developed a bigger vocabulary, though, it is a good idea
to try to develop it even further by listening to the radio as well as
reading. You should listen to the radio in any case. You need to listen for
the purposes of both pronunciation and training yourself to understand
(§§183-186).
As with pronunciation, tapes are not nearly so useful as the radio.
Commercial tapes are a completely unnecessarily expensive way of
learning only a limited vocabulary. The radio is the biggest single
contribution to foreign-language learning since the invention of writing.
Or rather, it is potentially the biggest single contribution, because sadly it
is not used for learning languages anything like as much as it can be. (We
are naturally not talking about any language courses one may be able to
hear on the radio, but about the never-ending stream of language of
varying kinds that pours out of it.)
As we have emphasized before, it is only by observing a word in many
'living' contexts, as we have done in our own language, that we can
master its meaning. Most of the equivalents given in dictionaries are at
best approximations or pointers, and 'dead' approximations at that. We
should constantly remind ourselves that languages do not mean each
other; they refer directly to reality.
§121 Learning the words of our own language
By this time many readers are probably saying: 'This is all very well, but
what's the good of doing all this reading and listening if I don't know the
words, and can't understand? How am I actually going to learn
meanings?'
We need to think again about how children - and for that matter adults
- learn meanings. Let us imagine that you are forty years old and can
understand about 50,000 words in your own language. (That's a fairly
typical number for an 'educated' person. We are talking about 'passive'
vocabulary not the number of words a person uses 'actively' in speech
and writing.) How many of those 50,000 have you looked up in a
dictionary? How many have you had explained to you by your parents or
anybody else? Let us suppose that somebody explained four words a day
to you from the time you were two until you"were ten, and that since then
you have looked up one word in the dictionary every single day of your
112
life. Probably almost everybody knows that those are ridiculously
unrealistic figures. But even on that basis, and even assuming that the
explanations and the dictionary work were a hundred per cent effective,
you would still know less than 23,000 words, leaving over 27,000 to
account for. In practice most of us almost certainly get the meanings of far
less than a thousand words from dictionaries or explanations.
How did we learn the rest? And how is it we not only know exactly
what most of them mean (even if we occasionally get the wrong end of
the stick) but also know exactly how to use practically all the words of our
active vocabulary?
§122 Learning meanings from context
The answer is that we 'worked out' the meanings from the context, the
'real life' context, of what we were hearing or reading. (The 'extra' part of
the vocabulary of better 'educated' people is almost certainly acquired
mainly through reading.) This is exactly what you should do with a
foreign language. Remember that for a given number of words you read
as an adult in a foreign language you will learn more new words more
quickly than you did when you read the same number of words in your
own language as a child.
As children we probably worked out new meanings largely without
thinking about them consciously. This is what you should try to do as an
adult. The secret is to forget that you are studying a foreign language and
concentrate instead on the content - be curious about the story, the
argument, the description and nothing else. This is an added reason why
you should read or listen to language about things that interest you. If
you do, you will find it much easier to approach the problem of
vocabulary in the right way.
A great many people become mentally paralyzed when they are faced
with pieces of language containing a number of words they don't know.
Worrying about the language instead of about the 'story', their attitude is:
'How can I understand the sentence if I don't understand all the words?' If
you approach the problem like that you will indeed often not understand
anything at all. If children thought like that they would never learn any
words.
Don't use words to find out the meaning of sentences. Use sentences to find
out the meaning of words.
Naturally there are limits to this approach. Clearly if there are too many
unfamiliar words, you will be left in the dark. This is why children take a
long time to master their language. But if you find it difficult to accept the
way we are recommending you to learn words, we must ask you to
113
consider again how it is that children learn words so efficiently, even
though they do not have the advantage that adults have. (But see below,
§126.)
§123 Imagine blanks in the text
If or when you find you cannot grasp the meaning of unfamiliar words
with little or no conscious thought, you can use a method which is
probably in fact what both children and adults, without thinking about it,
use in their own language when they arrive at meanings. Pretend that the
word you cannot understand is a blank. Imagine what meaning it would
make sense to fill the blank with. This is often very easy to do. Many
people will have had the experience of having to try to read bad
handwriting in a letter in their own language. The mental process of
working out the meaning of an obscure word in a foreign language is the
same as the mental process of working out an indecipherable word in
your own language - if you can relax enough to see it that way. Once
again it is a matter of not getting into a panic of helplessness just because
you don't 'know' the word.
§124 Two sorts of context
Learning words through context is not only the best way to learn a
'passive' vocabulary but also the best way to learn an 'active' one. We
have already emphasized how words in different languages are very
seldom exact equivalents of each other. Each word is used in its own
special way in each language. For that reason, in order to truly master the
use of a word, you must observe it in context. This must be at least a
phrase, more often a complete sentence, and sometimes more than a
sentence.
Many words, actually, have two contexts. Each word has a context of a
'real life' situation, but very often also a context of other words (known in
linguistic jargon as 'collocations'). We have given some examples in §33.
Here are a few more. First, two pairs of contrasting situations, expressed
in English:
Could you bring those plates here?
Could you take these sandwiches into the other room?
Could you tell me where the nearest telephone box is?
This telephone box is out of order. How far is it to the next one?
And four examples of words that go with other words, in English, Italian
and Swedish:
1. They've scored a goal.
2. We had great fun. (NB both have and great with fun.)
3. She's married to a doctor.
114
4. She finally achieved her ambition.
1. (Italian) Hanno segnato una rete. ('marked a net')
2. (Swedish) Vi hade valdigt roligt. ('had hugely funnily')
3. (Italian) E sposata con un medico, ('married with')
4. (Swedish) Antligen uppfyllde hon sin ambition, ('fulfilled her
ambition')
There are even more narrowly restricted combinations of words, so
restricted that we might call them cliches, such as 'fully aware', but 'totally
unaware', etc.
§125 Favourite words
There is something else that you can only do if you increase your
vocabulary mainly through reading and listening. You will find, if you
observe keenly, that each language has its 'favourite' words.
Most, or at least a great many, languages have rough equivalents of
most meanings in other languages. For instance, other languages than
English have equivalents of the words based on 'any', and of 'any' itself,
and they have equivalents of the English '-ever' words - 'whenever',
'wherever', etc. Yet, in practice, other languages do not use their
equivalents of those words nearly so often as English-speakers use 'any'
and '-ever' words. English-speakers use them constantly.
There are also English words which have alternatives, such as
'particularly' instead of 'especially', and 'odd' instead of 'strange'. What is
very noticeable to anyone who listens a lot to non-native speakers of
English is how they almost never use 'particularly' or 'odd', while native
speakers of English possibly use these words considerably more often
than 'especially' and 'strange', particularly in speech. Many students of
English, including those at an advanced level, claim they have never even
heard of the word 'odd'. If you want to speak a foreign language really
naturally, you should keep your eyes and ears open, and perhaps, if you
are a 'list person', even make a list of 'favourite' words as you notice them.
§126 The disadvantage of being an adult
Adults, then, have the great advantage, where new words are concerned,
of knowing the world already. But they have the great disadvantage that
they cannot be in at the beginning, so to speak, of a foreign language. That
is to say, they cannot learn the very first words, the basic words, of a
language in the same way that children do. Small children live a life that
is concerned with basic concrete objects, basic sensations, basic emotions,
basic physical activities. These are what their parents talk to them about,
and the meanings of the words the parents use are demonstrated directly
to the children over and over again.
115
For adults it is very difficult - for most of them impossible - to
reproduce this situation. For that reason it is virtually impossible for them
to learn the meanings of the most basic words of a foreign language by
'working them out' from the context. They haven't got the context. So right
at the beginning of learning a new language you have to learn words
through translations into your own language, whether with the help of a
dictionary or in some other way.
§127 Memory aids
Various mental devices and tricks2 have been suggested for helping
language learners to remember the meanings of words. They are not
really to be recommended. In practice they only tend to put an extra
burden on the memory. They may very well work sometimes, in the sense
that with their help you do in fact remember particular words. But the
time you use up in working out and applying such aids to the memory
could have been used to remind yourself of many more words in a
natural way, that is, in a context. On the whole, resorting to memory aids
probably greatly slows down the process of learning vocabulary rather
than speeding it up.
It is a good principle in language learning generally that one should
avoid any technique that involves learning or remembering something
extra. Go directly to the language as soon as possible. Don't spend time
and energy on 'middle men'. They tend to be barriers, not short cuts. The
true shortest cut is to follow the real way of language, which, as we have
seen, is to associate the word directly with the reality it represents. (But
see also chapter 10, notes 6 and 8.)
§128 The dangers of the = sign
Another serious drawback of using these remembering devices is that
they tend to encourage the 'this word = that word' approach to learning a
language. For many individual words in themselves this does not matter.
It is probably pretty safe in most languages to put the equals sign between
the words for 'bread', 'brother' or 'buy', for instance.
But it may be surprising how quickly one comes up against difficulties.
Even what appear to be the most basic words can cause trouble. Take for
example what one needs in order to express 'bad' in Italian. Englishspeakers take it for granted that this is a kind of all-purpose idea
expressed by the most basic of words, the uncomplicated opposite of
'good'. Yet in Italian its idea is expressed by an indefinite number of
different words, according to context. ('Bad' in 'bad weather', 'bad bus
service' and 'bad food' would be expressed by at least three different
words or phrases in Italian, to take a mere three examples.)
116
§129 Prepositions
The single-word equivalent system of learning vocabulary is particularly
harmful in the way it usually stops students learning prepositions
properly. We gave some examples in §17 of how prepositions in different
languages do not correspond with each other. But nearly all learners of a
foreign language meet the basic prepositions right at the beginning of
their studies. They usually learn just one main meaning for each
preposition, and so it becomes embedded in the mind as having that
meaning in their own language. The damage is done, the habit cannot be
broken, however much they may later warn themselves about it, and
prepositions confuse them permanently.
§130 More haste, less speed
The key is to have the strength of mind to be patient. Most children
learning their own language, if they can choose what they read, and get
sensible advice, are not aware of having to be patient. Adults learning a
foreign language expect to learn much faster than children. The irony is
that they can, for the reason already explained, but so often don't because
they go about it the wrong way. If you are an adult, at the very beginning
you must expect to read a great deal that you do not understand. The
essential thing is not to give in to the temptation to turn to the dictionary.
Don't worry if you don't understand everything, don't worry even if you
understand less than half of what you read. The important thing is to
keep on reading as many words as you can. Read what interests you, and
concentrate on the content, not the language.
If you persevere, read the foreign language for three hours a day, on
average look up no more than two or three words a day (fewer if
possible), and don't worry about the bits you don't understand, you will
find that in a few weeks you have increased your vocabulary enormously.
At the beginning of those few weeks you will sometimes feel that you
understand almost nothing, and despair of ever understanding any more.
At the end you may be puzzled how you have done it, and feel you have
learned a large number of words without really noticing it - which is
exactly what we did as children, except that we took far longer. We must
repeat the simple principle: if people do not read or listen to lots of words,
they will not learn lots of words.
Con paciencia todo llega
A little patience goes a long way
§131 AG s personal failure and success at learning
vocabulary
AG reports: 'I learned the wrong way and the right way to do it when I
117
first went to Sweden. I still have the book, a volume of historical essays,
where the first thirty pages or so are full of the English translations I
found in the dictionary and pencilled in against every Swedish word I did
not know. After a few months I realized I was getting nowhere. 1
abandoned the book and the dictionary and started reading a fat Swedish
daily newspaper. Every day I read practically the whole paper apart from
the advertisements - and sometimes some of them too. Within about six
months I was able to understand without effort practically everything
written in Swedish that was not fiction or technical. A complete mastery
of the vocabulary of fiction took me somewhat longer.
'Almost forty years later I started to live periodically in Italy. I spent a
total of nearly four years there; I can now understand almost everything
in an Italian newspaper or magazine except the most elaborate writing. In
those four years I have looked up less than ten words in the ItalianEnglish dictionary, except for official vocabulary and the names of
animals and plants. I looked up official words when it was important to
understand them immediately for bureaucratic or legal purposes. Words
for animals and plants one often has to look up because the context more
often than not cannot help one to understand them. This applies to the
vocabulary of some fiction, but to a far lesser extent.
'I must, however, put my experience with Italian in perspective. When I
started to learn it I could already read non-fiction in both French and
Spanish without much difficulty, and to French- and Spanish-speakers a
great many Italian words are transparent. A large number of Italian
words are transparent to English-speakers as well.
'On the other hand I was very busy doing other things while I was in
Italy and did not do nearly as much reading of the local language as I had
done all those years earlier in Sweden. Instead of a whole newspaper a
day I read part of just one newspaper and most of a magazine each week.
Undoubtedly the many years of being involved with foreign-language
learning in one way or another had given me experience that enabled me
to learn vocabulary quicker than before.
'I ought also to record the fact that I have never in all my life written a
single note about the vocabulary of any language nor ever made a list,
however short, of equivalent words for any language. I regard it as a
waste of time, and have always wanted to get on instead with the real job
of observing the living foreign language as it is actually used. It seems to
me pointless to start writing one's own dictionary, when dictionaries as
good as anything one is likely to produce oneself already exist.'
§132 Notes and lists
118
However, many learners have a quite different approach and feel their
minds can't work properly if they don't write things down. If you believe
you cannot learn words without writing them down in some way, do at
least try to avoid making simple lists of one-word equivalents.
Always note down complete sentences, or, in longer sentences, at the
very least complete phrases. You then have records of real pieces of
language, examples of how words are actually used. It is also much better
normally not to write a translation in your own language. You should
avoid the translation approach whenever you can.
On the other hand, it does no harm if sometimes your example
sentences for a word you are interested in make general statements about
the word itself. Here, as an example, are the sort of sentences you should
try to get hold of and could usefully note down about the word 'borrow' if
you are somebody studying English as a foreign language. You will notice
that there are several sentences that do not contain the word 'borrow'
itself. That is because it is just as important to know the words and
expressions used 'around' 'borrow' as well.
One borrows things from people.
One lends things to people.
People borrow books from libraries.
They have borrower's cards.
The borrowers have to return (give back) the books after a certain
period.
This book is due back on the 20th.
May I borrow your pen?
Could I possibly borrow your car for the day?
Do you think I could possibly borrow this for a few days?
I'll return it (give it back) next week.
If you make notes in this way you will always be learning something
really useful. When it comes to using words in practice it is of limited
value just to know the meaning of a word in isolation. You need to know
how to express the other ideas that that word will inevitably be connected
to.
If, as with making polite requests in the case of 'borrow' above, it
involves including expressions that often occur in the context of other
words, that is all to the good. What is common should become familiar.
Notes like these are, incidentally, a good illustration of how important
it is to use
looseleaf notebooks. If you make your notes in bound notebooks you
cannot possibly organize them properly, and so they will remain
effectively useless.
119
Finally, even if you are a confirmed note writer, try just once not
making any notes for a few months, and instead read all that much more
of the foreign language itself in the time you would have spent on notes.
§133 Concentrate on one meaning at a time
On the other hand we strongly advise you not to try to learn all the
different meanings of a word at the same time. Words don't work in the
mind like that. Each different meaning of a word belongs in its own
special context, and it is in each special context that it is natural to
remember it. If you look up a word such as the French 'porter', even in a
small dictionary you may well find over ten different meanings. If you try
to remember them all at once, even in a context, you will probably only
become confused. In our own language we do not remember the different
uses of a word in that way. There are often uses that native speakers do
not know, and yet that does not in any way affect their mastery of the
others. With a foreign language, as with your own, you should be patient
and just wait for each different meaning of a word to present itself in its
own natural context.
Notes
1. Various attempts have been made to discover how often each word of a
language occurs within the community that uses the language. The
results of these word-frequency counts naturally depend on the basis
on which they are made. The results can be grotesque, particularly
when only the words in literary texts are counted. According to one
count of English words, 'ere' is a far more common word than
'meaningless'. To make a truly 'scientific' count of the frequency of
words in a language one would have to count samples of four
categories of word: not only words spoken and written, but also those
heard and read. One would then have to calculate the proportion of
each in the life of actual communities. But even if one could make such
a count it would be useless as the basis for choosing a vocabulary for
most individuals, each in their particular personal situation.
2. An English-speaking student of Spanish, for example, might decide to
remember that 'vaca' means 'cow' by reminding himself that cows have
a vacant look. A student of Turkish could adopt an even more tortuous
procedure for remembering the meaning of 'bos': 'bos' reminds him that
the Latin for an ox is 'bos' (genitive 'bovis'); oxen have vacant looks, so
'bos' means 'empty'. It is a different matter for a student of English, say,
to remember that 'lie' and 'rise', as opposed to 'lay' and 'raise', are the
intransitive pair, because they have 'i' in their pronunciation. Here one
is reducing information to a simple pattern.
120
9
VOCABULARY 3. DICTIONARIES
§ 134 Choosing a dictionary
Bilingual dictionaries can be divided into three main categories according
to the number of entries they contain:
The word lists in learning packs can be useful, but you should become
familiar with using dictionaries as soon as possible - to start with, pocket
dictionaries of a few thousand words. Such a pocket dictionary should
contain both 8,000-10,000 words into the foreign language, and 8,00010,000 words from the foreign language into the first language. With a
dictionary of this kind in one's pocket one can cope with most everyday
situations abroad. Preferably, one should also have a suitable phrase book
at hand. (The teacher of a course in Italian, for example, should therefore
recommend a suitable pocket dictionary from and into Italian as early as
the first or second lesson.)
What is surprising is how many people travel abroad without pocket
dictionaries even journalists on reporting assignments. There are many
countries where not all the inhabitants can understand English, and in the
Slav countries, for example, the English spoken is often incomprehensible.
In due course one also has to get oneself a 'reading' dictionary. It should
contain at least 30,000 words, preferably up to 50,000.
In literature one can come across words that do not belong even to the
50,000 most common ones. At this stage a 'giant' dictionary can be useful,
but generally speaking one has no need of such large dictionaries.
The number of words is of course not the decisive factor determining a
dictionary's usefulness. The Dictionary of spoken Russian (Dover
Publications, New York, 1958 etc.) is an example of a dictionary EVG has
found extremely useful, even though strictly speaking it has too few
words - about 4,000 English-Russian and about 7,700 Russian-English. But
it has nearly 600 pages and is packed with excellent examples.
For teaching purposes it is clearly suitable to use dictionaries that are
even smaller than those mentioned above. These small dictionaries can
also be used for teaching oneself. Two examples of such books that EVG
has himself are the Irish-English An Mionfhoclóir Caighdeánach ('The little
standard dictionary') with about 5,000 words and the Irish-English
Classified Wordbook with about 3,000 words.
121
From about 2,000 words downwards we are not really talking about
dictionaries but about word lists. For the purpose of both learning and
teaching EVG has divided them into the three categories described in §94:
1 MINILEX A = 400-500 words; 2 MINILEX A + MINILEX B = 400-500 +
400-600 words; 3 MIDILEX = about 2,000 words, including MINILEX A +
B.
See also Appendix 6: The Intercontinental Dictionary Series
§135 Good and bad dictionaries
The size of a dictionary is naturally not the only criterion you should
consider when choosing a dictionary. One needs a dictionary that tells
one what one needs to know; that will vary from person to person. What
is essential is to know what you personally do need. (One snag of pocket
dictionaries is that very often they do not have all the necessary words for
food, or for dishes in restaurants.)
A great problem one is up against, when choosing a dictionary, is that it
is very difficult to judge reliably how good a dictionary is by looking at it
for ten minutes in a bookshop. It is often only after one has used a
dictionary for a while that one begins to discover its defects. If you can,
get advice from people who know about dictionaries of the language
concerned; but make sure that they are themselves guided by the right
principles.
One important principle can be seen from the following three examples
taken from the English-Italian section of a medium-sized 'two-way'
dictionary of those languages. They illustrate what a dictionary should
not be like. It includes usage that students will not need until a very
advanced stage, if ever, and omits expressions that most students will
need at quite early stages.
Under (a), the dictionary gives the Italian for (b), but not for (c).
Also, a dictionary must show what words are used together with the head
word. For instance, if you are an Italian-speaker looking up the English
for 'scusare' or 'perdonare', and you find among others the word 'forgive',
the dictionary should give you 'forgive (sb. for sth.; sb. for doing)'. ('sb.'
would stand for 'somebody', 'sth.' for 'something', and 'doing' for a verb in
the '-ing' form.)
If it is a dictionary for students of French, it should tell you for each
122
verb whether it is followed by 'a' or 'de' before an infinitive: that, for
instance, 'cesser' ('stop' or 'cease') is followed by 'de' ('cesser de pleurer' 'to stop crying'). (And of course, if you are studying English, your
dictionary must tell you how to use 'stop'.) If you are learning Swedish
and want to know how to say 'I like eating', your dictionary should not
only tell you that 'like' can be translated with 'tycka om', but also that it is
followed in such a case by 'att': 'jag tycker om att äta'. And so on.
Another general principle is that the more good examples a dictionary
has of how the words are used, the better it is. A dictionary without
examples may be good enough for someone who only wants it for holiday
travelling; but anyone with any ambitions in the language should find a
dictionary with examples. As a rule, dictionary publishers should not
sacrifice the space needed for examples in favour of a larger number of
entries.
However, you should beware of monolingual dictionaries that claim to
be the latest in scientific lexicography because they are based on a huge
'corpus' of millions of words scanned by computer. (A well-known
example is the Cobuild English dictionary.) These computer collections
are almost entirely of sentences and phrases found in written texts. The
result is that not only are many of the examples quoted in the dictionary
completely untypical of the real everyday use of the words, which is
mainly found in speech; they have also been taken out of their broader
context in newspaper articles, novels etc., which makes it even harder for
the dictionary user to understand how the words are used.
§136 Dictionaries - which way round?
When AG first became interested in foreign languages he often heard
people say that it is perfectly all right for English-speakers to use FrenchEnglish dictionaries as much as they like, but that they should be very
wary of using English-French dictionaries. In other words, it was all right
to use dictionaries from the foreign language into one's own, but not
dictionaries the other way round. He entirely accepted this principle. The
grounds for it were that when one uses an 'own-to-foreign' dictionary, the
chances are that one will not know how to use the foreign words one
finds.
That danger certainly exists. 'However, I now think the opposite of
what I used to. It has already been explained why you should use the
'foreign-to-own' dictionary as little as possible. But when you want to put
something into the foreign language, you cannot 'work out' what the
words must be. You either know them or you do not. The dictionary is the
only solution if you have ideas to express that you do not know how to
123
express.'
But you must certainly be on your guard. Try to avoid using a word
that you do not recognize, or at least, if you do use it, be aware that you
are very likely making a mistake. It is a good idea, in fact, if you are in
any doubt, to 'check back' in the opposite direction by looking up the
foreign word you have chosen in a foreign-to-own dictionary.
On the other hand you may recognize a great many words, when you
find them in the own-to-foreign dictionary, that you could not have
thought of by yourself. As we have already pointed out, passive
vocabulary is nearly always far bigger than active. You may learn a great
deal, particularly when you plan what to say with the help of an own-toforeign language dictionary.
§137 Dictionaries and translation
AG comments: 'The only times I use a 'foreign-to-own' dictionary a lot are
when I am doing translation work. I do not use the dictionary to find out
what the foreign words mean. I do not consider people have any business
to be translating if they have to use a dictionary more than very
occasionally in order to understand. I use the dictionary to remind myself
of the possible words in my own language. For a competent translator
(into his own language) it is always and only his own language that
presents the real problems. He understands the sense of the original
perfectly - but how should he express it in the language he is translating
into?'
§138 Monolingual or bilingual dictionaries?
It has been the orthodox view for a very long time now that more
advanced students of foreign languages should only use monolingual
dictionaries in the language concerned (i.e. if you study English you
should use an English-English dictionary, if Russian, a Russian-Russian
dictionary, and so on). Indeed, it is customary in language teaching circles
to go even further and insist that one should begin to use monolingual
dictionaries as soon as possible; from then on they are preferable to
bilingual dictionaries. Thus, for example, according to this view, a
dictionary which contains only French is better than a one- or two-volume
dictionary with French-English and English-French.
It seems to be a principle that many, perhaps most, language teachers
take for granted, something that is beyond question, so much so that there
is virtually no debate on the issue. On the rare occasions when anybody
bothers to explain why monolingual dictionaries are so superior, the
argument seems to be that they make students think in the foreign
language instead of immediately turning the foreign words into
124
equivalents in their own language.
§139 There are very few true synonyms
It has already been explained why it is a bad idea to think in terms of
equivalents in your own language. But what is an even worse idea is to
translate a word into another word in the same language. The whole
'point' of a word is that it does not mean anything but itself. Practically
every word is unique.
Words may often overlap with each other in their objective, practical
effect, as in:
He started/began to read.
I've made/done the beds.
You'll have to change/alter your figures.
There are no cats apart from/except mine.
But their meanings remain different, and for that reason the objective and
practical effect is very often different too, when the context changes, as for
instance in:
He started /began(?) the car.
I've made/done the kitchen floor.
You'll have to change/alter your dress.
There are twenty-six cats apart from/except mine, ('except' makes no
sense in the last sentence.)1
So never try to find out how words are the same. Find out how they are different!
Never try to learn alternative words. For example, if we imagine you
are learning English, do not think about what the words 'face', 'confront'
and 'oppose' might have in common, never attempt to connect them to
each other in your mind. Connect each one, instead, to the ideas to which
it naturally belongs; one builds up understanding of how words are used
from being alert to the contexts they fit into.
He must face-his-problems-a lone.
Simply confront-the-boss-with-the-evidence.
She will oppose-the-motion.
Then, when you feel you really need an alternative, you will be able to
judge which word is the right one from your knowledge of how the
words are truly used, and where they fit naturally. If you learn like that
you are unlikely to think of replacing the three words above with each
other.
§140 How monolingual dictionaries mislead
Monolingual dictionaries give the impression that the opposite of all this
is true. They give definitions (see below, §143), and describe words in
terms of each other, tell us that this word means the same as that word.
125
Over the years AG has noted down examples of mistakes and
misunderstandings that have resulted from using one of the most wellknown monolingual English dictionaries produced for foreign students.
Here are just a few of them. The words in brackets are what the writers
really meant. AG was able to establish exactly what was happening
because in each case the writers were reporting on something they had
read in English.
She died after a long disease (illness).
If people criticize our handling of our children, we bubble over (seethe).
My wife said nothing, in spite of my incompetence, until lastly (finally)
I dropped the spare wheel on her foot.
They considered (thought of) a genuinely British solution to the
problem. 18th century furniture is rather breakable (fragile).
Luckily things could be worse. The monolingual dictionary often turned
up in rows on the desks in front of a new group of AG's students, but he
noticed, even if he hadn't had the heart to tell them they had wasted their
money, that at the end of the term most of these thick tomes still had their
pristine, unfingered shine.
§141 The temptation to resist new words
Unfortunately, though, it is what one might call the 'monolingual'
philosophy that does so much harm, even when monolingual dictionaries
are not actually used. It not only encourages a completely false idea of the
nature of language, and misleads students about the meaning of
thousands of words; it also encourages the great reluctance of so many
students to adopt new words.
Naturally if one accuses them of such an attitude, most will deny it. Of
course they want to learn new words, they assure us with complete
sincerity. But their actions belie their protestations. Led to believe - and
only too willing to believe - that the new word means the same as a good
old safe familiar word, students will stick to the familiar one, and won't
bother with the new one. It will often be as if they had never read or
heard it, and they will persevere with the old one in all sorts of contexts
where it won't do at all.
§142 The trap of thesauruses
The only thing worse than a monolingual dictionary is a thesaurus. The
native speaker sifts the 'synonyms' she finds in a thesaurus, and discards
most - or even all - of them. She is able to do this precisely because she
already knows exactly what they mean and can accept or reject
accordingly. If she is not sure of the meaning and use of a word, she does
not dream of using it. A foreign student cannot possibly discriminate in
126
this way.
§143 The trouble with definitions
To try to learn foreign words by learning definitions (in the foreign
language) is as big a mistake as to try to learn them by learning
'synonyms'. We do not in effect learn the words of our own or any other
language through explanations and definitions. We understand a word
and master its use when we can make a direct association with the 'reality'
it refers to, whether that reality is a thing or action or quality or an
abstract idea or anything else. In a sense the word is the association; there
is no interpreting link between the word and what it means.
When we hear a word in our own language we do not stop and ask
ourselves what the definition of that word is, in order to understand it.
Nor, when we want to use a word, do we find the right one by deciding
on a definition and then remembering the word attached to that
definition.
It is worth considering here that when we judge that a definition of a
word, in a dictionary or elsewhere, is a good one, we can only do so
because we already know the meaning in a quite different, precise way that
has nothing to do with definition. We do not tell ourselves that a
definition is a good one because it is similar to a definition we have heard
before. Equally, one can only produce one's own definition of a word if
one first knows it in some other way.
But a foreign student cannot possibly be led by a definition to a proper
apprehension of a word she does not know. A definition, far from being a
quick path to mastery of a word, is a barrier between the word and the
reality it belongs to. It is an extra and misleading burden on the memory,
and goes right against the psychology of the way we experience words in
practice. Mastery of a word is a matter of apprehending it - directly, in a
flash.
§144 The false logic of monolingual dictionaries
What exactly is this 'thinking' we are supposed to do in the foreign
language when we use a monolingual dictionary? It is very unclear. At
best it can only be thinking about the words of the definition, which is not
what we need to be thinking about at all. The definition is in a foreign
language, too, which can only increase the student's confusion, conscious
or unconscious. Nor is there anything to stop an English-speaker, say,
'thinking in English' about a French definition in a French monolingual
dictionary.
Whatever the thinking is, it is certainly not the sole kind of 'thinking in
the foreign language' that is either possible or relevant: that linking of a
127
word directly to a reality. And what sort of definitions are we talking
about? Here are three examples taken from the same dictionary as above
that bring out the failure of the monolingual approach particularly
clearly:
blast - strong, sudden rush of wind
gust - sudden, violent rush of wind
dangle - hang or swing loosely
floppy - hanging down loosely
sarcasm - bitter remarks intended to wound the feelings
taunt - remark intended to hurt sb's feelings
Let us also look at a monolingual dictionary compiled in accordance
with the
recommendations on vocabulary of the Council of Europe, namely
the New basic
dictionary, published by Macmillan-Lensing. There we find among
other definitions:
In an English-French dictionary, on the other hand, we get a direct and far
more exact answer:
§145 How to use bilingual dictionaries
If you are studying a foreign language, you need a way of arriving in
your mind at the reality the foreign words refer to as directly, quickly and
accurately as possible. If you have to use a dictionary, you should always
therefore use a bilingual dictionary. The word in your own language will
immediately summon up the idea of a particular reality; there will be no
barriers in the way.
But there are two things you must always do, two fundamental
principles for using a bilingual dictionary. (Let us assume you are
reading, not listening, although the principles remain the same.)
In the dictionary you will nearly always find several meanings in your
own language for the one word you are looking up. You should go
128
straight back to the foreign text and first see which meaning fits into the
reality the text describes.2
Then you should forget the word in your own language. Instead you
should concentrate solely on the context of the foreign language. You
have now discovered the reality which that language is talking about;
observe - consciously or unconsciously (see §§167-175) - how it expresses
it. In this way you will learn the exact meaning of the foreign words, just
as the native speakers have done.
Perhaps to understand the principle better, imagine you come to a little
river, a stream. The bank you are standing on is a sentence in the foreign
language. You want to cross to the opposite bank, which is the meaning of
the sentence. The stream is too wide to step across - an unknown word.
But in the middle of the stream there is a stepping stone, the dictionary
translation of the troublesome word. With the help of the stepping stone
you step over to the other side. Now you are where you wanted to be you understand the whole sentence, including the use of the new word.
That is all you need. At this point you do not lean back to pick the
stepping stone out of the stream and carry its weight around with you for
the rest of your life. It has served its purpose and you can ignore it.
You should never forget that basic truth, that languages are not
translations of each other. This means quite often that although the
dictionary suggests many words in your own language as an equivalent
of the foreign word you have looked up, none of them would be suitable
as a translation for the context you have before you. But unless you are
making a formal translation for someone, that does not matter at all. What
is important is that you should understand the reality the foreign
language is referring to. The dictionary will usually give enough
indications for you to be able to do that.
But finally, never forget that the dictionary should always be a last
resort. Don't let it dominate you and steal from you the precious time you
should be spending with the language itself.
Notes
1. The objective and practical 'effect' is not the whole of the meaning of a
word or phrase. An essential part of any piece of language is what
people associate with it and the angle that it makes them look at tilings
from. A very clear-cut example of this is seen in: 'I saw a kangaroo' / 'I
have seen a kangaroo'. These two statements may well refer to exactly
the same 'objective and practical' event. Yet their meanings are quite
different, and it would be clearly 'wrong' to use the one if you meant
the other. See Gethin, 1990, pp.5-6,157-169, for a longer discussion of
129
this theme.
Differences of meaning are by no means always so obvious, though.
This often leads many native speakers of a language to deny that there
are differences between words, even though they will almost invariably
show that they unconsciously appreciate those differences by the way
they use the words. 'a lot of and 'lots of might be thought to mean
exactly the same. Yet I doubt whether any native English-speaker
would complain by saying: 'You were making lots of noise last night!'
Part of a meaning is people's feelings about it.
Not even 'nobody' and 'no-one' mean the same. The expression is 'He's
just a nobody', not 'He's just a no-one'.
Again, 'gramophone' and .record player' may refer to the same physical
object. But, because of their varying associations, they do not mean
exactly the same.
It is not possible, either, to establish a clear line between meaning and
style. Style is merely at one end of the range which covers both the
objective and practical on one hand, and, on the other, association. Style
is concerned little with the fact, and much with feeling about the fact;
but it is still meaning.
2. Many thousands of common words in most languages have more than
one sense. If you are not used to learning a foreign language and using
a dictionary, be very careful to choose the right one, the sense that fits
the context. Usually this is obvious - even if you are paying only
moderate attention to what you are doing. But it is frightening what
even paid translators can do if they are careless or incompetent . A nice
example is what the professional translator working on an engineering
report did when he came to the phrase 'hydraulic ram'. He translated it
into words that meant 'water goat'.
130
10
GRAMMAR
§ 146 What grammar is - don't be frightened of it!
The word 'grammar' frightens a lot of people. They think grammar is
something far more difficult than those simple things, words. When it is
called 'syntax' or 'structures', a lot of people probably get even more
frightened. (See Appendix 7: Grammatical terms.)
There are two reasons for not getting worked up about grammar. One
is that it is usually not as important as individual words for getting a
practical grasp of a foreign language. You could know any number of
grammar 'rules' in the abstract, but obviously wouldn't be able to say or
understand anything if you didn't know the meanings of any words. You
can usually get a long way for practical purposes with comparatively little
grammar if you know a fair number of words.
The other reason is that grammar is not some formidable abstract
system. It is strange how most people have been persuaded that it is,
because in practice most of the grammar of a foreign language has to be
explained to students in terms of meaning.
There are what we might call 'general' meanings. The words 'asked',
'kissed' and 'saw' all have the same 'general' meaning of an 'action', and
they all have another general meaning: they are all about the past. That is
grammar. Those words also have quite different individual or 'specific'
meanings: they each mean a different sort of action. That is vocabulary.
A very large part of the grammar of a language is the way smaller
meanings are combined to make bigger meanings. 'I want' and 'go to bed'
are combined to make 'I want to go to bed'.
Just as with the use of individual words, you must always be prepared
for the foreign language to work differently from your own, so you must
expect the grammar of foreign languages often to work quite differently
from your own. Very often a language has types of 'general' meanings
that another does not, and vice-versa. For example, some languages, such
as English and Japanese, can say things like 'I like walking' as well as ' I
like to walk'. Many languages do not have both these types of expression.
§147 The small part of grammar that is not meaning
The only grammar that is not meaning is:
1. A few systems of word form, like gender in some languages (e.g. 'le',
'la' in French, 'der', 'die', 'das' in German, etc.), which have lost any
practical link with meaning that they might once have had. (Plurals, on
the other hand, are clearly meaning, and cases are usually linked to
131
meaning as well.)
2. The order of words. Word order, in fact, is obviously often meaning
too. (E.g. 'The dog licked the cat' as opposed to 'The cat licked the dog.')
But often it is not, as when German, for example, puts subject and verb
the other way round:
Such a change of word order is purely a convention which is in no way
made necessary by meaning - even though it is triggered by a certain sort
of meaning, in this case an adverb ('Dann').
§148 What grammatical logic is and isn't
It is useful to know what the main grammatical terms (adverb, noun,
subject, object etc.) mean, because they can sometimes be used to explain
quickly and clearly the logic of a sentence. (See Appendix 7.) But
grammatical analysis has in itself no value. The purpose of language is to
express meaning, and so once meaning is clear there is no point in making
an analysis of it. After all, we cannot make any grammatical analysis
unless we understand the meaning first.
Furthermore, the logic of sentences is not based on some sort of abstract
system. It is based on the logic of meaning, what one might call 'life logic'.
The total meaning of a sentence depends on the combination of all the
different particular meanings, both 'general' and 'specific', that make it up.
For example, 'When Bill comes, we'll eat' describes a perfectly normal
course of events. But 'When Bill washes the car we'll go for a drive in it'
means some very wet, difficult and peculiar simultaneous activities, liable
to test the skill and patience of all concerned, even though the same
combination of Present tense in the first clause followed by a 'will' in the
second is used in both cases. The variation in meaning of this same
Present + 'will' expression is caused solely by the use in one sentence of
'come' and in the other of 'wash', because these two verbs have different
types of meaning.
§149 There is no clear distinction between grammar
and vocabulary
There is a tendency to put far too many things into the category of
grammar. It is indeed not possible to draw a precise borderline between
grammar and vocabulary. An example of the vagueness of the distinction
is Italian verb endings. Most people would probably call them part of
Italian grammar. Yet they are specific individual meanings. Despite this it
is probably a good idea to organize them systematically systematize the
meanings. Examples of this are given in §§165-166. We could perhaps say
132
that grammar is the aspect of a language that we can systematize and
make generalizations about.
That which has to be learned 'separately', one word at a time, is not
truly grammar. A grammar textbook should not be used, as is so often the
case, as a dumping ground for all sorts of things that have no business to
be there. In some grammar books, for instance, one finds long lists of
adverbs which properly belong to simple word-learning. (On the other
hand, it is quite right to explain the position of adverbs in the syntax
section of a grammar book.) Prepositions, conjunctions, and numbers are
often allowed to take up too much space in grammar books. By and large
it is only when prepositions govern different cases that they need special
mention in grammars. In the same way, pronouns ought to be learned as
individual words to a greater extent than now.
However, certain pronouns (varying from language to language)
belong to grammar, and must be learned in sentences, that is to say, in
natural contexts. This applies, for example, to the equivalents of 'me',
'him', 'her' and 'it' in French and Italian. (After the 'crawl' stage the socalled pronominal adverbs are important, but most students of French
and Italian tend to forget them: 'en' and 'y' in French, and 'ne', 'ci' and 'vi'
in Italian.)
The relative emphasis that you need to give to grammar and
vocabulary will depend to a large extent on the particular language you
are learning. A language like Italian, and, even more, one like Turkish,
demands that a lot of attention should be given to what is conventionally
called grammar, as in such languages it is so crucial to the most simple
and basic meaning.
§150 How important is grammar?
There are different practical ways in which you can approach the learning
of grammar. Which one you choose should depend, at least partly, on
what you want to do with the foreign language.
Moreover, how much grammar one needs to know varies from
language to language. You should not learn too little grammar, but you
should not learn too much either. You should aim at just the right amount
of grammar for the level of proficiency in speaking, reading or writing
that you want to achieve.
The importance of a knowledge of grammar is often exaggerated. One
does not learn to speak or write a foreign language by swotting away at
grammar. Mistakes in grammar do not usually lead to confusion and
misunderstandings to the same extent as flaws in one's pronunciation or
the wrong choice of words. It is knowing the words, rather than knowing
133
the grammar, that is at the very heart of learning a foreign language. One
can 'crawl' read or 'crawl' speak Russian, for example, without mastering
a whole lot of inflexions.
On the other hand you should not underestimate the importance of
grammar to the point where you think it is always all right just to talk
away without worrying about it. As a rule it is necessary to study it more
or less systematically, even when a language has few inflexions and its
syntax is relatively simple. When a language is rich in different forms, as
German and Russian are, for instance, you have to get at least the most
important verb endings right if what you say is not to be pure gibberish.
English grammar, too, contains much that needs attention - otherwise it
can become pidgin English.
Even to read a language one needs to know a fair amount of grammar,
among other things the common verb forms, particularly those of
irregular verbs. One can of course constantly look up the different forms
in a grammar book or dictionary instead of learning them by heart, but in
the long run this proves to be a waste of time and effort.
In order to be able to write one needs greater grammatical accuracy
than for speaking. The grammatical endings become mumblings in
German, Russian, Swedish and many other languages when one speaks at
the normal speed, but when one writes the moment of truth arrives: the
inflexions must be absolutely correct. Syntax, too, imposes demands in
writing of a quite different order from those in speaking - not least in
English.
EVG and AG favour different ways of learning grammar. EVG prefers
to think of it as divided into stages, as described in the next section.
§151 Learning grammar: EVG's approach
'It is useful to distinguish between four types of grammar book,
corresponding to four levels of grammatical knowledge. It is important
for beginners to get a general view as soon as possible and know what
grammar they should learn for the different levels. The first two types
below can be called 'learning' grammars; the other two are reference
grammars.
134
'The best way to train yourself in 'crawl' and 'mini' grammar is through
conversation. In the course of these you make notes, check points in the
grammar book, and so on. This sort of training by means of conversation
plus notes is particularly important when the language is rich in different
forms, as for example Finnish, German, Icelandic and Russian.
'Bound notebooks are the graveyards of knowledge (inflexions,
examples etc.). Use loose leaves instead, and organize them in plastic files
that you can have handy whenever you need them.1
'When one is talking or writing the most important thing - but also the
most difficult is usually to inflect the verbs correctly. Be especially careful
not to make mistakes with the tenses! It can cause considerable confusion
if one says 'ich gehe' (I go/I'm going) in German instead of 'ich ging' (I
went) or 'kirjoitan' (I write/I'm writing/I shall write) in Finnish when one
means 'kirjoitin' (I wrote).
'Beginners who have the opportunity to travel abroad to study a
language ought first to lay the foundations at home by learning a small
number of forms ('crawl' grammar, or a little more). You can get a secure
command of these by means of everyday conversation in the country
concerned. Thus you do not need to cram a whole lot of grammar into
yourself in advance, but can limit yourself to what one has to know by
heart in order to speak well enough to get by. You can learn additional
grammar in due course later.
'It is of course true that as a rule you ought to learn grammatical forms
'in context'. But you will find the best contexts in the course of natural
everyday conversations in the country in question. At home it can be
quickest and most effective to learn each form by itself, without any
135
context. It is a different matter if you have plenty of time, or rather if you
take the time.'
§152 Learning grammar: AG's approach
'There are two reasons why you might decide to pay careful attention to
grammar at the beginning of your studies in a new language. Grammar
meanings are comparatively limited in number, and are mostly of a basic
kind, precisely because they are 'general' in the sense explained above, so
it is sensible to get at least a pretty thorough overview of them first,
whatever your ambitions in the language.
'Grammar is also very important if you want to speak and write the
language really accurately. If you do not attend to it carefully from the
beginning, there is a risk that you will get into bad habits that you have
great difficulty getting rid of later.
'I categorise grammar books somewhat differently from EVG. There
seem to be two kinds of grammar book you can choose from: a 'pure'
grammar, probably intended mainly as a work of reference; or a 'course'
book. There are advantages and disadvantages in both.
'A reference grammar will in almost all cases be more complete and
systematic. It is also unlikely to contain the distractions, entertainments,
and superfluous matter that fashionable teaching ideas or commercial
consideratons seem to impose on so many modern course books. This in
turn will often mean that the reference grammar will be more accurate
and contain fewer mistakes. Unfortunately however, at least as far as
grammars of English as a foreign language are concerned, even the
reference grammars contain many mistakes, and some are not practical,
and it would be surprising if this wasn't true of many grammars of other
languages as well.2
'Many course books have three great advantages over reference
grammars. They provide a vocabulary which is increased from chapter to
chapter; you can start off straight away with some simple sentences; and
they have exercises. But the whole 'course' approach to learning foreign
languages has serious basic defects. The most fundamental defect is that
course books are based on the premise that the course can do the
necessary work. It can't. Only students can. But let us look at some more
immediate defects.
'Grammar in real life is not, in the main, divided up into parts of
varying importance, some of which should be learned before others.
There are doubtless some rather sophisticated forms of expression within
grammars that one can leave aside, permanently or at any rate for the first
several months. But most parts of grammar are of more or less equal
136
importance. So one should not put off wondering about ways of
expressing the future, for example, simply because the future does not
come until week nine of a course. Possibly there is some kind of 'natural'
order in which one learns the elements of one's own language. That is
irrelevant if one is learning a second language, since one 'knows the
world' already and one needs the main body of the grammar all together
and at once.3
'Since we live in time, it is obviously not possible to achieve this
literally. Nevertheless, I have not 'given' a course, or gone through a
course book with a class, for almost three decades. I would urge you, just
as I have urged students, to read through by yourself the grammar or
course book you are using. Make sure you understand everything
thoroughly, and of course, if it is possible, ask somebody knowledgeable
about anything you do not understand.
'But the really important thing is that you should do it fast, in a matter
of days rather than weeks, and that you should not try to learn anything
by heart at this stage. I also suggest that it may be quite a good idea not to
do any exercises this first time through.4
'Then you should quickly go through the whole book again. And again;
and again. The second or third time through you could begin to learn a
few things by heart, but only things that are in a sense 'superficial', only
clear and undoubted facts, like verb forms or pronoun positions or
adjective endings (see below, §§165-166).
'But don't do anything that is going to make you get bogged down at
some particular point. If you do get stuck, the same thing may happen to
you as happens to many people: they get bored and tired, and if they are
studying alone they give up (though sometimes not admitting this to
themselves), and if they are attending classes they may continue to attend
but think they'll leave it all to the teacher, which is effectively giving up
just the same.
'Each time time you go through the book you will with any luck pass
quickly over more and more pages because you recognise familiar
problems and are able to say to yourself 'Ah, yes, I remember that's
something I must watch out for, and I can go on to the next point.' In
other words, you use the book first to give you an overview and tell you
what the problems are, and then to remind yourself of those problems;
and naturally you also use it to discover the answers to the problems.
Your familiarity with the book makes it quicker for you to get to the page
where the answer is.'
§153 Indexes are essential in grammar or course books
137
However, an index is basic to any book that gives information about a
language. A language book without an index is a disgrace, even though
there are some otherwise useful books that do not have them. An index is
not just an essential tool of reference. By constantly using it, an
inexperienced language student learns a great deal by that process alone
about the problems of the language he is studying.
If you have a course book without an index which is quite good
otherwise, it is a very good idea to make your own really detailed index
for it. It is easy to do this with small slips of paper (which you can finally
type out as a list) if you do not want to use index or catalogue cards,
which are very expensive. You will obviously make entries for all the
different topics (Past tense; Questions; etc., etc.); for individual words you
should have references in both the foreign language and your own. When
your index is complete you will not only have something essential for
your further studies; you will have learned a lot about the language in the
process.
§154 The weaknesses of courses
The absence of an index in a language book is an expression of one the
biggest mistakes at the heart of the 'course' approach.5 That is the
assumption that when a student has 'done' a section of a course he will
have 'mastered' it if he is working hard and studying properly. Nothing
could be further from reality. The vast majority of language students
master only a tiny proportion of all course material. That is to say, they
remember very little of it, and they apply even less. Most have forgotten
in week six most of what they learned in week one. Certainly, over a
period of years many students learn a certain amount and are able to apply
some of it, by dint of sheer repetition. But what a boring and inefficient
use of time and resources!6
§155 False and real tests of progress
The true test of a student's learning is later. Not right now as he 'does'
part of a course. Nor tomorrow, nor even next week. The only really
useful test for him is in six months or a year, or more. Then, if he does
well, it will be because he has become thoroughly familiar with the
problems of grammar and developed the habit of observing vocabulary.
This is where so many exercises and tests (see Appendix 10: Tests and
exercises) in language teaching fall down, because they are directed only
to the specific points that the student has just been studying. The student
is thus warned what the problem is, and has had the most crucial bit done
for him in advance. Language in real life is not like that. In real life all
sorts of different problems come at one all at once, from many different
138
directions, and do not announce what they are beforehand.
There are two fundamental and connected defects in the way exercises
are often used today. The student's performance in these exercises does
not give any indication of the real extent of his mastery of even the
specific points in question (let alone of his progress in the language in
general); and the procedure stops the student training himself in the two
essentials: recognising problems (see §197), and actively observing the
language for himself whenever he comes into contact with it.
Exercises on specific points just covered have the valuable but limited
function of showing the student that he has indeed grasped the point. In
most cases four or five items are probably all that are needed, and the
answers should be right there too, immediately available on the same or
the next page.
But students may do twenty exercises on a specific point and get them
all right and thus create an illusion of progress. Less than a week later
most will find that they cannot get right even fifty per cent of exercises on
that same specific point if they do not recognise the point and go over the
grammatical explanation again. Off their guard and unprompted, they
will probably simply fall back into the ways and traps suggested by their
own language - even if they remember anything at all.
§156 The need for general exercises
The only really significant and useful exercises or tests are general ones
where many different grammatical points, or problems of vocabulary, are
jumbled up together and 'hidden' as far as possible, so that the student
isn't warned and doesn't know what each problem is about unless he has
kept it in mind. His foremost task is deciding what the problems are.
If you can get hold of such general exercises, you will find that trying to
do them will keep the problems constantly in the front of your mind. It
does not matter if at first you don't know the answer to them. You simply
look up the point in your grammar book using the index supplied or the
one you have been forced to make for yourself. In this way you will
absorb the grammar much more quickly and painlessly, and above all
much more efficiently and permanently, than if you try to learn it
laboriously by heart, spending days or even weeks over each section in
turn.
§157 Doing exercises
Unless you have an irresistable urge to put things on paper the whole
time, it is best not to write the exercises out - whether they are general
ones, or on specific points. That is a terrible waste of time. Just do them
carefully in your head - and look up the answers straight away for each
139
one in turn to see if you have got it right. (It is as bad for a course book
not to have answers to its exercises - in the same volume - as it is not to have
an index.)
Once more, you should go through the exercises in the book as fast as
possible - and then you should do them again - and again. Quite a good
plan is to mark in pencil (in the key, not the exercise) all the numbers you
get wrong in some way. Then, as you repeat the exercises you can check
how fast you are improving. You can rub the pencil mark out against each
number that you now get right.
There is only one case in which it would be better to write the exercises
out, and that is if you tend to be careless and fail to establish clearly in
your head what you would have written if you had been writing. You
must make sure you had every detail right. There is no point in cheating
yourself and saying to yourself each time you look in the key 'Oh yes!
That's just what I was going to say!', if it wasn't. But avoid writing if at all
possible. You'll make progress literally two or three times faster if you
can.
§158 Observe grammar in action!
Even the most cleverly 'hidden' exercises, however, cannot imitate
language in real life. As soon as you can, you should start observing the
language in 'live' action by reading and listening. In other parts of the
book we have suggested the sorts of written and spoken material that are
good for this purpose, and in chapter 11 we demonstrate a way of reading
in order to observe grammar in action. Try not to put off this kind of
activity any longer than you have to. There is plenty of simple yet
'unsimplified' written material you can start with at an early stage. It is
only when you start to study 'living' texts and conversations regularly
that you will begin to master the grammar properly.
A good grammar book or course book is essentially a reference book,
one that you return to over and over again in order to get the answers to
your questions. But it is you who must discover the questions you need to
ask, by in the first place constantly asking yourself questions about what
you read and hear: 'Why is it this tense here? Why is it that word there?
Why is it this ending here? Why is it that article there?' One cannot
emphasize too strongly that your studies are not complete when you have
'done' a course book. That is merely the introduction. The main part is
only just beginning - and that is one of the reasons why it is a bad mistake
to spend a lot of time on a course book.
There are several reasons why it is important to see grammar in action
in many and different contexts. There is a danger that if you just stick to
140
your course or grammar book you will get stuck with a rigid abstract idea
of grammar as a set of lifeless and arbitrary rules. Most grammar is a set
of principles of meaning that need to be adapted realistically to ever
varying contexts. You will not only forget the grammar, you will never
truly grasp it, if you do not apply it.
§159 Making the grammar a natural part of you
People who master the grammar of a foreign language in a thorough,
practical way do not do so because they remember all the rules in the
book so well. That cannot be the reason, if only because there are many
mistakes in virtually every grammar book (certainly in grammars of
English) and serious gaps as well in course books. One has to think about
the grammar at the beginning. But gradually, by constantly 'practising' it
by reading and hearing it, one can get to the point where one gets it right
without thinking about any rule.
Indeed, one probably becomes proficient precisely because one has
escaped from misleading formalities and entered naturally into the spirit
of the foreign language. A good illustration of this is perhaps the use of
the articles ('the' and 'a' in English). There is quite a lot of variation in their
use between the languages that have them. Yet there are many people
who use them with unfailing accuracy in a foreign language. It is certainly
not because they are remembering a mass of formal rules. It is because
through 'living' with the articles they have acquired a direct sense of the
principles of their meaning, just as native speakers have done.
At the beginning of one's studies one needs formal grammar to draw
one's attention to problems. Later, if one has trained enough, one throws
away the crutches.
Bir tecrube bin nasihata bedeldir
Better than to learn is to become experienced
§160 Mistakes in books on grammar
Even when grammarians produce practical and instructive books, rather
than jargon-obscured abstractions, they often offer, on one hand, vague
comments that are useless to readers looking for clear guidance, and, on
the other, categoric statements that are seriously misleading.
But it is not surprising that grammarians make so many mistakes. Since
grammar is mainly meaning, it is impossible to describe it completely
accurately. One cannot properly describe the meaning of words with
words. The only true account of a grammar is the grammar itself!
Nevertheless, the writers of practical grammars could do better than
they generally do. A basic mistake they often make is to confuse the
meaning of an expression itself with the real life situation in which it is
141
often used. They naturally select examples that suit their argument. One
should not blame them particularly for that. We are all bound to do the
same. But they should cast their net wider and more imaginatively in
search of the ways it is possible to use expressions.
In English grammar, for instance, it has long been stated that the
Present Perfect Continuous means an action that is still continuing in the
present.71 suspect this false statement (contradicted by sentences like
'What have you been doing this morning?') has been made so often
because when someone says something like 'It's been raining for ten hours
without stopping', it usually is still raining. Some grammarians who
realize that there is something wrong with the statement modify it by
saying that this verb form means the action is still continuing or has only
just finished. It is one of those vague pronouncements of little use to
students - how recent is 'just'? How recent is the shooting in 'I hear they
have been shooting prisoners'? In any case, the statement is contradicted
by sentences such as: 'Have you ever been lying down before when
you've had one of these dizzy attacks?' - 'Well, yes, but that was thirty
years ago.' In making such a statement they forget what they have very
possibly - or at least should have - already said themselves elsewhere in
their book: the Present Perfect Simple indicates a past action from the
point of view of the present. But that is true of both forms of the Present
Perfect - Continuous as well as Simple.
§161 Missing the essence of grammar
You may think it strange that we have devoted so much space to what
you may consider a minor detail. But not only are there many other
details that grarnmarians get wrong; more seriously, their distorted
picture of grammar makes them miss the essence of much of the grammar
they expound. The more practical ones among them realize that it would
be silly not to explain most grammar in terms of meaning. But at the same
time they do not dare go the whole way and openly look for the basic
meanings of grammar, and openly call them meanings.
This leads them to compromise, and the result is often very
unsatisfactory. They end up, not with the simple principles of meaning
that are often discoverable, and much easier to grasp and remember, but
with a mass of arbitrary piecemeal statements and lists, and make matters
worse by insisting on continuing to call these rules. (See Appendix 8.)
In the present case this means that they fail to establish the essential
meaning of '-ing' and what distinguishes it from other forms, which is
that it emphasizes the action itself, rather than the fact, accomplishment,
result etc. of the action. It is necessary to understand this to be able to use
142
the '-ing' form properly.
§162 Study the special characteristics of each particular
foreign grammar
The '-ing' form is just one example of a characteristic part of a language, in
this case English. When you study the grammar of any foreign language,
you should concentrate on the parts that are different from your own
language. Unfortunately, many foreign-language learners go to one
extreme or the other.
Once more the English '-ing' serves as an example. It is perhaps the
most outstanding characteristic of English grammar. Either - more
commonly - students almost entirely neglect it, possibly very often
because it has not been explained properly to them; or they recognise that
'-ing' is especially English and greatly overdo its use, again very likely
because they have not been shown how to use it correctly. So although
adults need to study foreign grammars formally at the beginning, the
failings of grammar and course books are another important reason for
observing grammar in action.
§163 Grammar examples
There is a seeming contradiction here, however. For understanding
grammatical explanations, examples made up by the grammarian are by
far the best, since they are chosen precisely in order to illustrate the point
concerned. (As we have seen above, often misleadingly so.) If they are
good examples, many will be taken from speech, which is very important.
Except when you find realistic modem dialogue, you may not always
find a wide enough range of grammatical examples in your reading. And
'literary' examples are usually a disaster. They give a completely false
impression of practical modern grammar and usage. There are
unfortunately countries where examples from literature are used so much
that many even of those responsible for teaching a foreign language never
truly master it themselves.
§164 Planning the grammar of what you say in advance
Finally, as regards training yourself in grammar - as well as vocabulary you should, whenever you have the chance, plan in advance what you are
going to say in the foreign language. This will make you think about the
problems, instead of rushing in heedlessly. Just talking without thought
means for many people that they will go on making the same mistakes for
ever. (See §§43,187,196-200.)
The other way in which you can practise your grammar is of course by
writing (see §§191-192).
143
§165 Making your own grammar charts
AG writes: 'I have already emphasized how little I write down in the
course of my own language learning, and I recommend you to be equally
sparing with paper if you can. There is one exception. I have always liked,
when I begin a new language, to work out my own 'schemes' or charts of
certain aspects of the grammar. In this way I can get an overview of the
facts, and with any luck turn the information into fewer and simpler
principles that are easier to remember.
'It does not matter if your scheme is in fact less succinct than the
original, although obviously it is nice if you can simplify accurately. Your
scheme will be very useful to you even if you are the only person who
thinks it is more logical and simpler than the way it was explained to you
in your book. And by the very process of working it out you will have
learned an enormous amount. Do not expect to arrive at your final
version in one step. You will very likely have to go through as many as
three or four drafts with paper and pencil (or colour pens), compressing
and tightening at each stage.
'On pp 120-121 are two schemes I worked out when I learned Italian.
My originals are much clearer than they appear in black and white print,
as I did them in different coloured inks. It should be understood that I am
not presenting these charts as a means by which readers can more easily
learn a part of Italian grammar, although those who already know some
Italian can probably work out what is going on. The charts are a sort of
private shorthand for my own personal use if I need to remind myself
about Italian verbs or pronouns; and their construction helped greatly to
make my understanding of the grammatical facts much simpler and
clearer.'8
§166 Using other systematic arrangements of grammar
Furthermore, do not despise rhyming jingles, and other time-honoured
tricks for remembering things. There is for instance no more effective way
of remembering which German prepositions govern the dative or the
accusative than to reel off or chant
an, auf, hinter, in,
neben, über, unter, vor und zwischen.
144
145
Notes
1. AG would be temperamentally and practically incapable of making
notes etc. during conversation. But he agrees wholly with EVG that it is
essential to use looseleaf rather than bound notebooks.
2. There are a number of basic criteria that a useful grammar for students
of a foreign language ought to satisfy.
1. Even if not 100% correct, it should at least not often be seriously
misleading.
2. It should always have practical relevance.
146
3. It must deal usefully with all the key grammatical problems.
4. It must be written in language that any reasonably literate person
untrained in linguistic jargon can follow.
Unfortunately, where grammars of English are concerned, the most
prestigious of them, Quirk el al.'s grammar published in 1985, does not
meet any of these requirements. (Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G. &
Svartvik, J., 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language,
Longman.)
AG has collaborated on two books of English grammar. The first, first
published in 1967, received a lot of admiration from students and
others who used it, and getting on for 80,000 copies were sold, but it
did not cover the most elementary grammar of the language. (Cook,
J.L., Gethin, A. & Mitchell, K., 1967, 2nd edn. 1980. A new way to
proficiency in English, Blackwell.) The other (Cook, J.L., Gethin, A. &
Unsworth, B., 1981. The student's book of English, Blackwell) deals with a
far larger number of grammatical points but has less extended
explanations. Unfortunately again, both are now out of print.
But in any case, if there is a good grammar in your own language of the
language you are studying, it is far better to use that. It is only when
you know a language really well and can understand the explanations
without difficulty that it is worth using a grammar written in the same
language.
3. The parts of grammar are mostly equally important in the sense, for
instance, that plurals are as important as articles; that the past tense both form and use - is as important as the present; that word order, if it
differs significantly from that of one's own language, needs as much
attention as cases, and so on. 'Exceptions' are not 'a part' of grammar in
the sense used here, and nor are fine details - they are simply just that:
details within the parts.
One of the great advantages of starting off with a general survey of the
grammar of a language is that it should show you precisely those few
parts of it that you do not need to pay attention to, at any rate to begin
with. The beginner can ignore any 'usage' that he discovers is in
practice little used in the contemporary language. The Italian
subjunctive, for example, is used less and less, and hardly at all in
speech, so you can at least leave it until you feel the urge to make your
Italian really sophisticated, while in English, examples of the sort of
grammatical expressions that students can ignore for practical purposes
are 'Seldom have I seen him so calm' and 'Angry though he was, he did not
show it'. It is never absolutely necessary to use such expressions.
(Unfortunately, though, they are often necessary for examination
147
purposes.) But there is an essential condition for being able to
distinguish the unimportant parts of a grammar: your grammar book
must either leave them out altogether, or tell you plainly that they are
unimportant.
4. AG says that he never marks any passages in a language book, and the
only time he writes in one is when he needs to add a note on information
that the book lacks.
If you feel you must mark certain parts in the book because you
consider them particularly important - in spite of the very doubtful
usefulness of the procedure - please accept advice on two practical
points.
Do not mark the book by underlining the whole of every line you want
to draw your attention to. That is a fearful waste of time. Just put a
vertical line down the margin opposite the lines concerned.
Secondly, restrain yourself! If you mark as much as only a third of the
book, there must surely arise some doubt as to whether it was worth
marking anything at all. AG has unfortunately known many students
who have underlined more than two-thirds of all the lines in their
grammar books! Instead of marking your book it is really much better
to go through the whole book again.
5. Mario Rinvolucri (a native English-speaker) has a long and wide
experience of teaching English as a foreign language, advising teachers,
and thinking profoundly about the problems of language learning. He
makes serious criticisms of coursebooks on several counts. Here is AG's
edited version of the points he made in the February 1993 issue of the
EFL Gazette.
1 In themselves coursebooks:
a) present simplified language that students cannot use in real life
b) impose large pieces of language on students and do not give them
enough opportunity to write their own
c) deceive teachers and students into thinking you can teach a language in
separate sections one after the other
d) offer students a false sense of security, making them feel thay have
covered this and that area - students gain real security by getting hold of
language for themselves, not by having weakly gone through the
motions.
e) lead students into making certain mistakes systernatically, like the
over-use of the present continuous by Germans
2 Coursebooks create a certain culture which tends to make teachers:
a) work like a conveyor-belt
b) lazy
148
c) not respond to the particular needs of their students as they arise
d) not encourage students to co-operate in building up their knowledge
e) get trapped in a routine
0 become very bored as they go on doing the same thing year after year
g) rely on the book instead of on their own knowledge about the language
(in the case of native speakers) and their own knowledge of the language
(in the case of non-native-speaking teachers).
h) obedient to a fixed authority from outside
3 Coursebooks encourage students to:
a) accept a long series of lessons, each one exactly the same as the one
before
b) accept as true vague half-rules, especially in grammar
c) rely on whatever lifeless information is fed into them and demand little
of themselves
d) allow a distant and 'unreal' coursebook writer to stand between them
and their teacher and between them and their class-mates
4 The very existence of coursebooks as one of the most important foundations of
language teaching encourages schools to:
a) 'promise each student a copy of the sacred object'
b) expect teachers to use coursebooks as the core of their teaching
5 Commercially successful coursebooks, together with dictionaries and
exam crammer books, make a vast amount of money for their
publishers. If even just a small proportion of teachers and institutions
agreed with Rinvolucri's criticisms sufficiently to act accordingly, 'the
coursebook market leaders would very soon take action to ward off the
financial threat.
'A free exchange of ideas is fine, providing it does not endanger the
laying capacity of golden geese. How much longer will these stifling
geese mother us and smother us?'
Rinvolucri seems to AG entirely right on every point, with the possible
exception of 1 b): 'I believe students of a language should never be
discouraged from observing as much as possible of it as it is actually
produced by native speakers. But this particular point is typical of
Rinvolucri's immensely sympathetic and humane approach to language
teaching.'
6. Some learners may feel that the key to remembering the forms of
expression in the foreign language, particularly the grammatical forms,
is constant and concentrated repetition - drills, in other words. But drills
have serious disadvantages.
One of the most basic is that they do not tell one when to use each
particular formula one has learnt . It does not help one much to have
149
learned patterns of language so well that one can produce them by
automatic reflex action if one does not know which reflex to have
where. Speaking is a deliberate, thinking action. One has to decide
which words to use. One can only learn when to use which words in a
foreign language by constantly observing and thinking about meanings
in ever varying contexts, seeing how meanings can combine to produce
broader meanings. This is precisely what drills - the reciting of patterns
without a context - tend to stop one doing. Indeed, the words of drilled
patterns risk becoming meaningless, mere blocks in an abstract
arrangement in a vacuum. This is probably why most people find drills
horribly boring.
For drills to be at all effective they have to be comparatively limited in
number and have a lot of time spent on them. That limits the variety
and flexibility of the language one can learn, and it takes time away
from that essential process of observing the foreign language in context.
The way to learn the basic forms of expression is to see and hear them
often in use, and when you find you have forgotten some form you
refer back to your grammar book. It is much more fun, and rewarding,
to get on with things! But constant awareness is the essential key.
7. Even recent grammars still at the very least make the mistake of stating
that the meaning of the Present Perfect Continuous is bound up with
time in some way. An admirable exception, the only book in print that
AG knows that has got it right, is Sylvia Chalker's Current English
grammar (Chalker, S. 1984/92. Macmillan).
8. Some readers may consider that this contradicts what was said in §127
about not inserting 'middle men' between oneself and what one needs
to remember. In fact one is doing the opposite of that when one makes a
grammar chart. One is cutting out a lot of piecemeal information which
takes up a lot of space both on the page and in one's brain, and
organizing meanings and word orders etc. in a concise way. Charts are
the information itself, in a clear, simple, unabstract form that you
cannot get any other way. One could perhaps say that in making a chart
one is grasping a whole system of meaning 'in one', so to speak. Using
devices for learning vocabulary (cards, mnemonics etc.), on the other
hand, slows things down, because there is no 'system in one' to grasp,
and so anything extra is an extra barrier in time and thought.
150
11
READING TO OBSERVE
§167 Intensive reading
We have discussed the way you can increase your vocabulary by reading
as much as possible in the foreign language, and using the dictionary as
little as possible. This is what we can call 'quantity' reading. For most
people it is probably the most important sort of reading and also the most
interesting.
But it is in the first place a way of learning passive vocabulary. Most
people have to come across a word or an expression many times more in
order to be able to use it correctly themselves (active vocabulary) than
they do in order to understand it when they see it again in their reading.
This is true, at least, of most words. And it is by no means only the
complicated or rare words that this applies to. Very often students of
foreign languages forget or use wrongly simple words that they have
often seen in their reading.
To increase both your active vocabulary and your mastery of grammar,
altogether to make your use of the foreign language more correct, you can
do what we can call 'intensive' reading. This chapter is a demonstration of
this sort of reading. It is a very concentrated form of the 'noticing' or
observing that is really the beginning, middle and end of all language
learning.
§168 A sample passage for intensive reading
We treat the passage below as if it was a piece being studied by someone
learning English as a foreign language. But the same process and
principles can be applied to written material in any foreign language.
If you are not a native English-speaker we suggest that you first read
through the passage and then try to answer the questions that follow
without looking at the passage again. Where there is a blank ( ), try to
think of the missing word. (Not all the questions are connected to the
story in the passage.)
Early one afternoon last week I went for a walk in the park. It was the
sort of autumn day I like. The wind was blowing the leaves off the
trees, and making the ones that had already fallen dance along the
ground. But the air was mild, and I sat down on the bench to enjoy
the soft golden colours for a while. As I sat there I felt there was
something rather exciting, rather than sad, about autumn, something
full of promise.
I hadn't been there long when an old lady came past with a dog on
151
a lead. I think it must have been about the biggest dog I have ever
seen. I have an idea it was an Irish wolfhound. Even at that stage I
got the impression that the dog was taking the old lady for a walk
rather than the other way round.
Well, they went by, and I sat on my bench a bit longer, and then I
got up and went off in the direction of the pond. Suddenly I heard
what sounded like feeble little cries for help; I ran along the path,
and, coming round a corner, I found the old lady standing looking
very worried, and without her dog.
'Oh dear, oh dear!' she said. 'I wonder if you could possibly help
me catch my dog. I let him off his lead and now he's chasing the
ducks.'
The dog was racing round and round the pond after the ducks,
who were quacking away in a terrible state. 1 could see he was really
playing, and wasn't in fact going to do any harm to the ducks. But the
old lady was obviously very upset, so I rushed off to do what she
asked. I had been rather good at running at school. But the dog was
very much better at it than I was. As soon as I got anywhere near
him, he dodged past me and bounded off joyously in the opposite
direction. This went on for some time, and I was just about to give
up, when he made a mistake. He jumped into the water after the
ducks. I think the water must have been deeper than he expected,
because he hesitated for a moment. It was my chance. I seized him by
the collar.
He clearly thought this was even more fun than chasing ducks. He
jumped out of the pond, put his paws up on my shoulders and
playfully knocked me down on the ground. We rolled together on
the grass. His fur was dripping wet and full of mud, and soon the
water and the mud were all over me as well. He was enjoying himself
tremendously and now I was the one who was trying to escape.
I ran off desperately, with the dog running after me and trying to
jump on me the whole time. When we got to the old lady I think she
thought I had actually caught him for her. Anyway, she thanked me
profusely, and I struggled off home to change my clothes.
All the same, I felt rather a heroine.
§169 A test on how well you observed the passage
152
§170 What you could learn from the passage
Let us now look to see what a student could learn from this passage.
Naturally how much a student would learn depends on his level of
English. The passage is written in simple language and so may not
provide very much that is new to really advanced students. On the other
hand, the style is semi-colloquial and everyday, and precisely for that
reason there may be students who discover unexpectedly large gaps in
their knowledge.
However, the criterion you should apply to this, or any other material,
in order to see what you can learn from it, is a very simple one. Ask
yourself: 'If I had been writing this, would I have been able to put it the
same way?' In what follows we shall draw attention to many points, from
elementary to advanced, that students tend to miss. Even so, we pass over
without comment a lot of the vocabulary. This too you should notice in its
context.
153
Paragraph 1
Sentence 1. We start off, in the very first words of the story, with a
154
perfect illustration of the difference between passive and active
vocabulary. Practically all non-native English-speakers reading this book
will understand the first sentence of the passage without any difficulty at
all. But can they all answer Question 1 correctly? You might be surprised
at the very large proportion of students of English who cannot. There is
more than one way of expressing the idea. But in any case, many get the
word order wrong, or use a preposition where there should not be one, or
use the wrong preposition. The moral of this is that understanding is the
first and most basic thing you have to do when you are studying a foreign
language, but is only the beginning.
There is so much more to do if you want to be able to say that you
'know' the language.
--- Note how the past tense (both simple and continuous forms) is used
throughout the passage to express narrative, but note too where, for one
reason or another, other tenses are used. --- Notice the expression 'go for a
walk'. --- Students who speak languages without articles should notice
'THE park'. 'Article-less' students who have any difficulty with articles
should always ask themselves, at each noun they come across, why there
is, or is not, an article with it, and why it is the sort of article it is (definite
or indefinite). So here, for example, what does the writer's choice of 'the'
rather than 'a' signify?
Sentence 2. The typical English use of a noun (here 'autumn') as an
adjective. --- No relative pronoun necessary with the clause 'I like'.
Sentence 3. How and why the past continuous is used ('was blowing').
Note how and why the past continuous is used in other parts of the
passage too. (Paragraph 2, Sentence 4; Paragraph 5, Sentences 1 (2
occurrences), 2; Paragraph 6, Sentence 5 (2 occurrences).)
--- The leaves were being blown 'off the trees. --- When we get to 'making',
note that it is governed by 'was' earlier in the sentence; students often
miss the places were continuous ('-ing') forms must logically be
continued. --- The use of 'the ones'. --- The use of the past perfect 'had' (see
also Paragraph 2, Sentence 1, and Paragraph 7, Sentence 2). --- The
infinitive 'dance' without the infinitive particle 'to' after 'make'. --- 'along',
a much neglected preposition, is the right word here.
Sentence 4. 'mild' is the right adjective with 'air' here. --- 'sit down on' a
bench, chair etc. --- ...'for a while' --- 'Benches' are what one finds in parks.
Sentence 5. 'As', a very 'English' conjunction that is badly neglected by
students of English. (See the comment below, §174.) --- Note that the
simple past ('sat'}, not the past continuous, is used with 'as' in this
particular context. ---The expression 'there is/was' etc. something' +
adjective + 'about' + noun or ' -ing'. ---Two quite different uses of 'rather'.
155
Notice particularly 'rather than'. (See also Paragraph 2, Sentence 4.) --'full of, not 'full with'. --- The uncountable 'promise', with a different
meaning from 'a promise'.
Paragraph 2.
Sentence 1. Note 'long' (the affirmative would have been 'a long time'). -- Distinguish between 'past' and 'passed'. --- Dogs are put 'on' leads, and
'leads' are what one puts them on.
Sentence 2. 'must have been --- The rather colloquial use of 'about'. --The use of the present perfect 'have...seen'. ---'ever', not 'never', and its
position.
Sentence 3. The expression ' I have an idea that'... --- Always a capital
first letter for words of nationality.
Sentence 4. English-speakers like to use 'even'. --- 'at' with 'stage'. --- One
'gets' impressions. --- Past continuous again. --- 'rather than' again. --- The
expression 'the other way round'.
Paragraph 3.
Sentence 1. The very English 'well'. --- People go 'by'. --- Note not only
where the past continuous is used but where it is not used! (The fact that
my sitting on the bench was 'continuous' does not mean the continuous
form should be used.) --- The use of the colloquial 'bit'. --- The very
English 'then', much neglected by students of English and much overused
by English-speaking children. --- 'got up' (from what?). --- The very
idiomatic ('go') 'off. --- The preposition 'in' with 'direction' - and 'of
afterwards!
Sentence 2. Here the use of 'what' as a relative is correct (which it is
often not), with its sense of 'the thing which'. --- Note 'sounded': this very
English use of 'sound', 'look', 'smell' and 'feel' has no equivalent in some
languages. --- 'like', not 'as', here. --- A cry 'for' help. --- 'along' again. --Parks have 'paths'. (And, 'article-less' students please think about why the
article is 'the' and not 'a'.) --- Note the '-ing' form in 'coming'. --- One goes
'round' corners. --- The use of 'find' (somebody, something) do'ing'
something, and the perfectly natural English double (repeated) '-ing'.
(Even triple or quadruple 'ing's are possible.)
Paragraph 4.
Sentence 1. A typical double exclamation an old lady in trouble might
make.
Sentence 2. Note the whole of one of the rather elaborate, very English
ways of making a polite request.
Sentence 3. 'let a dog off a lead'. --- Note when the present continuous is
used - or not used.
156
Paragraph 5.
Sentence 1. Past continuous again. --- 'after' used to express the 'chasing'
idea. --- Note the idiomatic use of 'away' to suggest intense activity. --'state', not 'condition', for this meaning.
Sentence 2. 'could see' --- Past continuous again. --- The use of 'going to'
to express 'inevitability', in this case inevitability in the past, and negative.
--- 'do harm to'. --- The very English negative with 'any'.
Sentence 3. 'upset', a very 'English' word. --- 'off again. --- Relative 'what'
again.
Sentence 4. Past perfect again. --- 'good', 'bad' etc. 'at' (doing) something,
here the verb-noun 'running', and in the next sentence simply with the
pronoun 'it'. --- 'at school' without an article.
Sentence 5. 'very much' + comparative adjective (or adverb). --- 'than'
with a comparative adjective or adverb. --- 'than I was' or 'than me'.
Sentence 6. 'As soon as...'. --- The use of 'get' in this context. --- The very
English 'anywhere near' - and note 'near', not 'nearby'. --- Note the verbs
'dodge' and 'bound', very appropriate to the context. --- 'off again. --- 'in'
with 'direction' again, but also notice 'opposite' this time.
Sentence 7. 'go on', an idiomatic expression similar in meaning to
'continue' but by no means exactly the same. --- 'for' to express duration in
time (not 'during'). --- The expression 'some time'. --- The very English
'just'. --- 'about to' do something. --- The expression 'give up'. --- The verb
with 'mistake' is 'make'.
Sentence 8. 'after' of the 'chasing' kind again.
Sentence 9. 'must have been' again, 'than' with a comparative again. --'for' expressing time-duration again.
Sentence 11. The use of 'by' with 'seize' and 'collar', as in 'He took me by
the arm' etc.
Paragraph 6
Sentence 1. 'even' again. --- The English favourite word 'fun'; note it is a
noun. --- Comparative 'than' again. --- The basically important verb-noun,
here in the form of 'chasing'.
Sentence 2. The preposition 'out of. --- Dogs have 'paws'. --- Personal
possessives ('his' and 'my' here), not articles, with parts of the body. --Note the typically English way prepositions, or 'prepositional' adverbs
('up' and 'down' in this case) and prepositions, are used together, as here
with 'up on' and 'down on'.
Sentence 4. Dogs have 'fur'. --- Wet can be 'dripping' wet. --- 'full of
again. --- 'all over' is a common idiomatic phrase. --- Notice how 'as well'
is often used in preference to 'also' and 'too'.
157
Sentence 5. Two more past continuous verbs. --- Note the English
meaning of the semi-colloquial 'tremendously'; and the typical use of 'the
one'.
Paragraph 7
Sentence 1. 'off yet again. --- Note the very English usage of 'with' +
noun + '-ing' ('with the dog running... trying'). --- The 'chasing' sense of
'after' again.
Sentence 2. Note the very important use of 'get' here. --- 'actually' used
in its peculiarly English way.
Sentence 3. A typical colloquial use of 'anyway'. --- One can thank
somebody 'profusely'. --- Our old friend 'off. --- 'home' used without a
preposition when movement is meant. --- Possessive 'my' with clothes.
Paragraph 8
Notice the expression 'all the same'. --- 'felt' (see 'sound' etc.. Paragraph
3). --- Finally, the words and their order in 'rather a heroine'.
Many readers, both native and non-native English-speakers, may feel
that many of the points we have drawn attention to are obvious and
unnecessary. But in practice a great deal that seems obvious when one
reads and understands it is often not obvious at all when one tries to
produce it oneself.
§171 Work you can do yourself, with anything written,
at any time
You will not find such a concentration of important points in most pieces
of language. The passage above is not an 'average' passage in that respect.
But you can do the sort of thing we have done with it with almost any
piece of written text. In other words, it is a sort of intensive learning that
you can do wherever you can get hold of newspapers, magazines or
books in the language you are studying.
You can and should do this sort of intensive work whenever you feel
that you are acquiring an active knowledge of the language too slowly.
For some people frequent conscious concentration of this kind may even
be essential if they want to get into the habit of using the words and
phrases that are most typical of the language. After all, finding a
particular piece of usage in just one passage cannot tell you that it is a
common one.
Nor is it in fact sufficient if a teacher tells you, in connection with a
single passage, 'that's a very common expression'. You have to notice for
yourself that it is frequent by noticing it frequently in many contexts!
§172 Learn the technique you can apply indefinitely
158
It is essential that you should be able to do this work for yourself. If at
first you find it difficult to do, you may decide you need a teacher to show
you how, and to give you practice in it. But make sure the teacher herself
knows how to do it! And, above all, however confident you are in the
teacher's skill, never leave everything to her and be content with merely
going through the texts that you study with her. That would be falling
into the old trap of relying on teachers instead of yourself to do the work.
It is quite wrong to think any teacher or institution is going to give you a
complete course that will cover all you need.
All a teacher can or need do, apart from answering your questions, is
show you a technique you can then apply yourself indefinitely. She should be
able to do this in three sessions at the most.
Nor should you ask the teacher to set you 'homework'. At the most,
again, you should only need to ask, perhaps, for advice on the most
fruitful type of material to study. If you want to be regularly told exactly
what to study, you are not learning in the right way.
§173 Useful material for intensive reading
Newspapers and magazines are a particularly practical source of material
to study intensively. You can cut pieces out of them and keep them in a
loose-leaf folder. Devise whatever system you prefer to mark the points
you notice. Whatever you do, don't waste precious time copying out the
text or even parts of it.
Apart from matters like tense, the most important things to mark are
the links between words or between words and contexts. The way of
marking the text shown above is the way AG likes to do it.
§174 Ask questions about what you read!
Finally, people who do this intensive study with the curiosity that is
essential to it will find they often want to ask the question 'why?' about
the grammar and usage they observe. The ideal way to do things is
probably first to make a note of all your queries as they occur to you, and
then, when you have collected a fair number, consult your teacher - or
'language guide' - and get the answers from her.
This is where teachers show whether they are really any good or not.
No amount of training in pedagogic theory or practice is going to help
them here if it has not taught them how to think for themselves about the
way the language works and how to explain it correctly and clearly. Don't
be too impressed by paper qualifications.
There is an excellent example above (§170, paragraph 1, sentence 5) of
the more difficult sort of question that you could ask teachers in order to
see if they really know what they are talking about. What is the difference
159
between 'while' and 'as'? If you get a vague sort of answer - perhaps, for
instance, that it is something to do with style - then you will know that
they don't really know. However, we don't want to encourage anybody to
be cruel. As things are at present, because there is often the wrong
emphasis in the training of language teachers, it could be a cruel question.
There are probably many teachers, and not least teachers who are native
English-speakers, who could not give the right answer. (All the same,
they ought to know, because 'as' is such an important and idiosyncratic
English word.)
Mit Fragen lernt man
By questions one learns
§175 The answers to the questions in §169
1. Early one afternoon
2. blow the leaves off them.
3. As
4. something about
5. on
6. taking than the other way round
7. along round looking
8. She let him off his lead.
9. (He wasn't going to) do any harm (to them).
10. upset
11. off what
12. good at at
13. got anywhere bounded in opposite
14. by
15. fun
16. paws
17. his fur.
18. the one
19. actually
20. profusely
§176 Observing with the help of computers
If powerful enough systems can be developed, computers could be very
useful for showing language learners how to observe. Instead of 'courses',
students need a constant stream of examples of the language they are
studying. A computer system would perhaps at the very beginning do the
observing work for them. It would point out all the things that students
should notice in a particular text - the use of a tense, of a particular
preposition (and how the smallest words are often the most important to
160
observe), how the language expresses 'she is seven'.... But very soon the
system would offer texts and invite the student to say what was
noteworthy, and, where appropriate, to offer an explanation or comment.
When the student had finished her own suggestions, the system would
draw attention to important points she had missed. Ultimately we need a
system that can handle any text from outside that is shown to it. That is to
say, a system to which a learner can take any piece of the language and
ask: Have I noticed all the important points? And what is the reason,
which I do not understand, for this or that particular usage in this
particular context?
There already exist programs which go some way along this path. But
any system will be basically unsatisfactory if it still fails to do the really
essential thing: train students to discover for themselves. What is needed
is a program that gets right away from the old conventional emphasis on
immediate memory, and, even more important, abandons the widespread
mistaken premise that the right sort of pedagogy and material can teach
the student all she needs to know, at least up to a certain level. But it
cannot or rather, when it can, that level is a very low and unambitious
one. No course can show anybody more than a small fraction of what
there is to learn even up to quite a modest level. And what is required
here is not more systems providing tests or even exercises, but something
that will improve the learning process. (But see Appendix 10: Tests and
exercises.)
A learner needs to immerse herself in a great amount of written and
spoken material if she is to learn as effectively and as much as she could.
So what she needs above all is the technique to teach herself. If she has
that, there is unlimited material at her disposal, and she can achieve far
higher levels of mastery. The suggestions above are for a system that
simply supplies examples of what students can do ad infinitum on their
own without the computer. No program that limits its effect to and by the
immediate material it supplies itself is doing what it could and should.
§ 177 Parallel texts are useful for beginners
Beginners have a rather different problem. They cannot 'observe' usefully
if their vocabulary in the foreign language is too small. Some of the best
material for them is parallel texts in the native and foreign languages.
These are the quickest way of supplying a lot of useful, often basic,
information in contexts. They are also the perfect opportunity for
constantly demonstrating that there is no word for word equivalence in
either grammar or vocabulary.
161
12
READING, LISTENING, SPEAKING AND WRITING
§178 Words are the foundation of knowing languages
One cannot successfully read, listen to - hear and understand -, speak or
write a foreign language without knowing words.
This simple truth may seem too obvious to mention. Yet it appears to be
a truth that is not so much neglected as obscured in much of today's
discussion of foreign-language teaching and learning.
We have already discussed at length the general problems of learning
words in the three chapters on Vocabulary (chapters 7, 8, and 9, §§89-145).
Here we want to comment on the four practical skills of language, and
make some suggestions for 'dealing with' words in the various different
ways necessary for mastering those skills.
§179 Being able to read is the most useful linguistic
skill for most people
Studies have shown that of those working in Swedish trade and industry
over 90% have a use for the ability to read various foreign languages, and
less than 10% for the ability to speak them. Similar figures can be quoted
for other sections of the community. Studies in Germany, among other
places, have confirmed that these circumstances have become general
throughout Europe and that the reading and writing culture is being
neglected. The one-sided concentration on speaking skills that prevails in
schools and on courses at present is thus debatable, to say the least.
When you begin to study a language you should if possible first learn
an 'active minimum' which includes: a pronunciation that is at the very
least comprehensible; sufficient grammar for simple conversation; at least
200 of the most important words by heart; at least 25 everyday
expressions by heart.
But after this it is by no means clear that the ability to speak should be
one's first aim. Instead of wasting time on what is often ineffective
training in speaking on a course, it can be much better to get down to
reading newspapers as soon as possible. The result may then be a genuine
ability to read, with the 'active minimum' mentioned above as the
foundation. In other words, one can both 'crawl' speak, and read
reasonably well at the very least.
One can usually learn to read a foreign language far more quickly than
learn to speak it. For reading it is quite enough to have a passive
knowledge of vocabulary and grammar (on top of the 'active minimum'
detailed above). Where grammar is concerned the saving in time is even
162
greater, particularly where the language in question has many inflexions,
such as German, Icelandic or Russian.
Unfortunately a widespread misapprehension has arisen that
communicating is the same thing as speaking. Even when it comes to the
language of tourism and leisure, this is by no means the case.
At least as regards languages that are difficult at the beginning we
should break away from the present sloppy thinking. There is no doubt
that the majority of those in Britain and Scandinavia, for example, who
start to study French in the hope that they will learn how to speak French
fail in this enterprise. If they instead concentrated on learning to read
French they would be able to learn to read quite well in one to two years
of studying at a 'normal' pace.
It usually takes at least 50% more time to begin to speak French
adequately. But it is above all how intensively one studies that makes the
difference. Apart from anything else, one has to learn far more by heart in
order to be able to speak. (See the discussion of easy and difficult
languages in chapter 20, §§240-244.)
These considerations apply to an even greater extent to Russian, since
Russian is at least twice as difficult as French. Outside the Slav countries
one seldom finds schools where the pupils learn to speak anything more
than 'tourist' Russian. On the other hand one can learn to read non-fiction
in Russian within one's own field of interest in the space of a year.
§180 Stop 'crawling' if you can 'walk'
Anybody studying a foreign language should as soon as possible put
aside course books, readers with simplified texts etc. and begin to read
proper books, periodicals, magazines and newspapers. Avoid reading
anything you feel is boring or pointless. This change to 'proper' reading is
not a very big one if the language in question is relatively easy. Ambitious
language learners - often people who already know several languages start to read non-fiction, periodicals and newspapers at a very early stage.
But many students of foreign languages feel they need help of various
kinds for some time, until they have a passive knowledge of sufficiently
many words. This is particularly true if the language in question is quite
difficult.
Simplified books, 'easy readers', as they are often called, are the most
obvious kind of aid in this respect. There are plenty of these available
today, especially in English. Many people use the Bible for improving
their reading. There is an almost word for word correspondence between
the English version and the Hindi and the Swahili versions, for example,
and the sentence structures tend to be very simple. Another advantage is
163
the limited vocabulary - there is a total of less than 10,000 different words
in the whole Bible.
There are serious dangers, though, in simplified texts. It is very easy for
them to become like crutches that the language learner is unwilling to
throw away. They tend to make life too comfortable for the reader, and if
a language student reads more than two or three of them, he will not be
stretched in the way that is absolutely essential if he is to increase his
vocabulary as quickly as he could. You should particularly beware of
specially prepared readers where obvious words are deliberately not used
because they don't happen to fit in with the predetermined list of words
that are considered suitable for the level concerned.
If you are frightened of moving on at an early stage to 'real' texts,
consider again the arguments put forward in §§117-123. In particular,
international news in newspapers does not usually cause comprehension
difficulties, since as a rule the reader is already aware of it and only needs
to look up a word here and there. It is relatively easy for language
students to understand articles on world current affairs and subjects they
are familiar with.
§181 Fiction or non-fiction?
It is as a rule much more difficult to read fiction than non-fiction in a
foreign language. To be able to read really easily one needs to know about
8,000 words if one is reading fiction, but only about 4,000 for reading nonfiction.
Translations of fiction tend to be easier than the originals. So if you are
studying Russian or Polish or Hungarian, say, it is a good idea first to
read a book that has been translated from English, for example, such as a
detective story.
When you visit a country whose language you are learning, you ought
to try to get hold of geography or history books for children aged ten
upwards. They are usually cheap, and easy to read. Through them one
can get useful information about the country concerned and about its
peoples and languages.
§182 Three essentials for making progress with your
reading1
1. Read a lot! Preferably at least 8 hours a week.
2. Read often! Preferably every day; at least 3 days a week.
3. Read for a long period! At least 2 months at a time.
§183 Listening
We have already suggested that at the beginning the quickest way to get
164
to know the words one needs for understanding is to read rather than
listen. But you should, all the same, listen to the foreign language a lot
from the start in order to master the pronunciation. And perhaps even
before you know a basic vocabulary you should start trying to understand
the spoken word. For learning to understand, as well as for
pronunciation, it can be quite useful at the beginning to listen to a tape
with an accompanying transcript. You can then check how the words you
see on the page actually sound.
But you should move on from pre-recorded tapes as soon as possible.
They do not train you in understanding real-life speech, partly precisely
because the transcript makes it far too easy for you to find out what the
speaker is saying, and partly because it is no real practice at all to hear the
same people saying the same things again and again. In real life a very
large part of the things one hears other people say are things one has
never heard before. Moreover, one cannot predict the order in which they
are going to say even the things that are the same. So you need practice in
listening to constantly new speech.
Clearly one of the best sorts of training in some ways is listening to
native speakers 'in the flesh' - preferably, of course, in the country
concerned. But this may be difficult to arrange; it also has the drawback
that it usually involves conversing with the people one is listening to.
Good practice as this is for speaking, it will probably mean that one
cannot concentrate on understanding to the extent one needs to.
Moreover, in the modern world of radio, films and television one needs a
greater variety of speech than one usually gets from conversation with
speakers of the foreign language in the early stages of one's studies.
Probably the best kind of talk to listen to, if it is available to you, is on
the radio. We have already pointed out the radio's advantages in §85. It is
better than television, because television allows anybody with the
slightest tendency to laziness to take the easy way out by following the
narrative through the pictures and largely ignoring the speech. The radio
forces the listener to concentrate on understanding the language.
§184 'It is easy to speak but difficult to understand' the ears must mature
One can adapt one's speech to one's own vocabulary, but when one listens
one has to adjust oneself to the vocabulary of the speaker. In a
conversation, therefore, one can speak with quite a limited number of
words, but one must be able to understand many more - or at least the
most important of them. Fortunately most native speakers that one meets
abroad make an effort to speak slowly and use simple words when they
165
become aware that one is a beginner.
How quickly people speak can play a decisive part in whether one
understands what they say. When one converses in a foreign language it
is more often the difficulty of understanding, not speaking, that drives
one to despair. 'At home', or on a course, too, a common complaint is
'They're speaking on the tape too fast', or 'The teacher just talks away
without bothering to find out how much we understand'. Being able to
understand thousands of words if they are written, or spoken slowly, is
no guarantee that even the majority of them are comprehensible in
normal speech.
But don't get depressed too soon if you feel it is taking you a very long
time to understand normal speech in the foreign language. Remember
first that some languages are more difficult than others to understand
until you get really used to them. Some languages are spoken more
clearly than others. (Not always the ones you would expect. Try listening
to rural Tuscan if you want to hear a supreme example of word
swallowing!) Some are on average spoken more quickly than others.
The solution to the problem is always the same. Practise listening as
much as you can. But you must concentrate hard when you listen. If you
tend to allow the words to simply wash over you because it needs a
constant effort to understand, you are unlikely to make much progress.
A simple tape recorder is very useful in the early stages for making
recordings that you can play back in short snatches as often as you like,
until you catch every single word. You can also use a portable machine to
record people you talk to yourself, if they have no objection. It does need
concentration, but it is worth it.
When you are learning a new language you may well feel you are not
making any progress at all in understanding the spoken word, although
you listen to the radio and television week after week. But then suddenly
one day it will be as if the ear plugs have fallen out of your ears: you will
hear and understand. Your ears have 'matured'. If you keep at it, you can
hardly avoid succeeding in the end.
The problems themselves, however, can vary from person to person.
AG is a striking example of this. He explains: 'I have got into a very bad
habit of having to turn all the sounds I hear in a foreign language into a
picture of their written form in my mind's eye. I have to see the words
before I can understand them. This is obviously a great disadvantage for
me, as it puts an extra step between the sounds and my understanding of
them - and that of course also takes more time. That in turn means that it
is difficult for me to understand a foreign language spoken quickly unless
I am very familiar with it and have a large passive vocabulary in it.
166
Unfortunately I think it is almost certainly impossible for me to break this
habit now. It should probably be regarded as a warning against making
reading the basis of one's learning of a foreign language if it is important
to become fluent in understanding the spoken language quickly. We have
suggested earlier that reading is probably the quickest way of gaining a
broad mastery of a foreign language, and we do believe that that is indeed
true for most people these days. But you should be aware of the possible
dangers.
'Strangely, this weakness of having to turn sounds into pictures of
words in my mind does not affect me in one way one would expect. It
does not appear to distract me from the sound of the words so that I
cannot acquire a good accent. I believe there are many people who have
the same problem without being aware of it. It is an interesting
phenomenon, because it proves that not everybody experiences language
in the same way. The majority of the humans who have existed have
probably been illiterate, and so cannot have 'seen' any words they heard.'
Ishi no ue nimo san-nen
Even a stone will get warm if you sit on it for three years
§185 Lip-reading; telephone conversations
Strangely, lip-reading is seldom mentioned as an aid in conversation in
foreign languages. Being able to read the movements of a speaker's lips is
on many occasions decisive for the ability to understand what a foreigner
is saying. Beginners ought to be given more information about lip-reading
than is now the case, and the opportunity for training in this 'auxiliary'
skill.
It is important for many people to be able to speak foreign languages on
the telephone. But telephone conversations are risky if one does not
understand the foreign language when it is spoken at the normal speed,
and without a TV-telephone one cannot lip-read or use the other signals
of face-to-face conversation. One can probably manage simple questions
and answers, but not any sort of complicated discussion.
§186 Grammar and listening can help each other
By listening carefully to the foreign language one can observe its
grammar in action. What may not be so obvious is that if one has a good
command of its basic grammar, and reminds oneself of it and applies it
alertly, one can often make listening and understanding much easier.
This is a process that native speakers themselves use constantly in at
least some languages; it would be surprising if they did not in most. They
167
certainly do in English. This can be seen from the fact that listeners rarely
mishear words, unless they are very unusual, or unexpected and not
indicated or confirmed in any way by the context. On the other hand they
do not grasp unusual or unfamiliar names nearly so accurately, even if
there is nothing un-English about them. The reason is that a name stands
in complete isolation. There is nothing around it to give a clue as to what
it might be.
But ordinary words are not only familiar in themselves in a way that
some names are not; they are also nearly all surrounded by other words
that often point to what they must be, even if the listener does not hear
them properly. This is naturally most true of common words. In spoken
English there are several important contractions and weak (unstressed)
forms that even native speakers would often not grasp if they did not
always have a natural awareness of grammar as well as idiom.
Examples of such contractions are 's, 're, 'd. Is a final 's' sound a verb or
a plural? The more one is alert to English grammar the easier it will be to
decide. And it won't be easy to follow 'their' and 'they're' or 'he'd have to'
and 'he'd had to' without applying grammatical knowledge in detail.
There are probably just as many problems that weak forms can cause if
the listener does not keep grammatical logic working. 'Are the...?' and
'Are there...?' often sound exactly the same in standard British English
(Received Pronunciation). So do 'most have' and 'most of, and 'the time'
and 'that I'm'.2
These are extreme examples. But there are a lot of other word
combinations which may be less ambiguous but which may still be very
confusing if the listener is not grammatically aware, as the first six words
of this sentence illustrate, if you imagine them spoken in a natural way.
In the Latin languages an equivalent of those features in English that
can make understanding depend on being aware of basic grammar is the
pronoun system. You will find it much easier to understand spoken
Spanish sentences accurately, for instance, if you are really familiar with
Spanish pronouns and the order in which they go when two or more are
used together. But to grammatically unalert students, pronouns in the
Latin languages can be just a meaningless jumble of sound.
At the same time, an awareness and constant self-reminding of the
most important features of pronunciation (in English those contractions
and weak forms, for instance see Appendix 1) will help a student to
observe and learn the grammar. So the knowledge of grammar and
pronunciation should be used to help each other.
But above all, of course, meaning should be used to help understanding
168
of meaning.
That is, use the context to understand parts of sentences you cannot
otherwise understand, in principle just as when you are reading.
§187 Stay at home to learn what to speak; go out to
practise speaking
We have already explained in §43 why students talking to each other in
the classroom is not a good way for them to learn to speak a foreign
language. We will only repeat here the point that you can only speak if
you already have something to speak. In itself talking teaches you
nothing.
The right place for learning what to speak is, in the first instance, at
home. That is even the best place for learning pronunciation if you can get
radio broadcasts in the language you are learning. It is at home (including
your temporary lodging if you are abroad studying the language) that
you can best prepare the pronunciation, the grammar, and, above all, the
words and phrases that you have to know in order to be able to say
anything. You should learn them at home; then you should go out and, if
you can, practise them ail with native speakers.
You will also have to have a minimum of self-confidence actually to
speak a foreign language. There are many beginners who feel inhibited
because they lack self-confidence and do not dare to start talking.
However, there is no reason to be afraid to speak if you have laid the right
foundations. Those foundations must be an active knowledge of words
and phrases. If you know the 'active minimum' of 200 of the most
important words and 25 phrases by heart, and enough grammar for
simple conversations, and can say it all with a comprehensible accent,
there is nothing to stop you beginning to speak effectively. It is naturally a
great advantage to have had a certain amount of practice in using the
words in sentences and in grasping slow speech, but even this cannot be
regarded as absolutely necessary for conversing in the foreign language.
Many teachers and students seem to think that reading is quite an
effective way of learning to speak. But reading is a passive skill and by
and large one does not learn to speak by reading books and magazines
and newspapers. Learning to speak makes greater demands on the
learner in almost every way than learning to read. One has to acquire an
active knowledge of words and phrases and train oneself to use them in
sentences. On the other hand reading can play a part as an auxiliary skill,
for the purpose of laying part of the foundations (where these are
common to the skills of both speaking and reading).
If you know in advance, before you go out, some of the things you want
169
to say to people, or that you will probably have to say, plan carefully
exactly how you are going to say them. If you don't already know how to,
find out from your books and other sources of information you have at
home. If there are things you can't find out, make a note of them and see if
you can find a kind native speaker who will tell you. Some countries are
better than others for finding people to talk to. There is no denying that
this is a problem that many language students justifiably complain of. But
asking people how you should use their language is one of the best ways
of all of getting into conversation with them. It will have to be a place
where they really hate strangers very much for there not to be many
people who are very happy to help.
But if you do not think carefully about at least some problems before
you set off on your talking expeditions, and if you do not think carefully
about problems - not necessarily the same ones - when you get home
again, you will learn to talk far more slowly than you should. As always,
it is your own inquisitive interest in the language that will make you learn
it fastest and most effectively.
If you are already good enough at the language to be able to
understand without too much difficulty, and the situation is not such that
you have to worry about other things, do your best to listen in detail to
how the native speaker says something. Then repeat it to her with the
adjustment necessary to fit it into the conversation. It may be hard work.
But such alertness will reward you greatly. Then, when you practise, just
as you should try to read only about things that interest you, so you
should converse only about realities, not engage in artificial exchanges set
up by a teacher. If you can do it - and probably many more can than they
themselves believe - just throw yourself into the language in the country
concerned. And remember: there is nothing wrong with what one might
call the 'fearless' inaccurate approach it you don't mind.
If you are not interested in reading, just listen (and talk), and ask
questions about your listening. Some people undoubtedly understand the
spoken word more easily than the written.
§188 Adapt what you say to your vocabulary!
By learning the most important things first and adjusting what you say to
fit the active vocabulary you have learnt, you will be able to say a
considerable amount in the foreign language. What is decisive is how you
use the words, not how many words you know. The same person can
operate at different levels with different languages, yet speak them all
well or quite well. An English-speaker, for instance, might have several
thousand French words at her disposal, a couple of thousand Italian
170
words, a few hundred words of German, and so on.
EVG reports: 'In the course of a visit to Hungary and Romania in 1968 I
'spoke' Hungarian with the aid of 150-200 words and expressions; I had
learnt enough actively to be able to manage. But during the same journey I
never succeeded in really getting going with speaking Romanian,
although I knew thousands of words - the problem was that in this case
my knowledge was only passive.
Verbum sat sapienti
A wise man needs few words
§189 Writing - the extended arm of speech
The foremost aim in learning a foreign language is unlikely to be to write
it. Nevertheless, in many countries it is often important to be able to write
well in English, and sometimes in other languages too. In any case, it is
good to be able to 'crawl' write - at least simple phrases and sentences on
picture postcards, for example.
We can think of writing ideally as the 'extended arm of speech'. A
person well-practised in speaking easily, naturally and correctly in the
language in question is in a good position to write it well too. The more
words and phrases one knows by heart, the quicker, more confidently
and better one will write. So when one writes one should always do it on
the foundations of one's active knowledge of polite everyday speech.
§190 It can take a long time to learn to write a foreign
language
It usually takes much longer to learn to write a language more or less
correctly than to learn to speak it. A significant difference in principle
between the ability to write and the ability to speak is that writing
requires greater accuracy and variation, at any rate beyond the 'crawl' and
'mini' stages. Thus it is necessary to know more words, including
alternative expressions. Furthermore, a broader and more precise
knowledge of grammar is needed, and sentences have to be built up with
considerably more care. However, there are languages - French is an
example - which some people find easier to learn to write than to speak.
Writing can be extremely useful as part of the learning process. One can
reinforce and revise things learnt in other ways. It is one of the most
reliable ways of discovering gaps in one's knowledge overlooked by
oneself or by teachers.
EVG believes that the most effective sort of writing training for
beginners is to translate from one's own language into the foreign
language. AG, too, strongly supports the use of translation in various
ways, but thinks the translation of whole passages into the foreign
171
language has serious disadvantages, which he explains in Appendix 10:
Tests and exercises. But in any case, it is essential to have a key or a guide
(teacher) to check your translation with.
After the beginner's stage there is little doubt that the most effective,
useful and rewarding way of practising writing for most people is to
write letters. Even at this later stage, though, it is important to get a
competent person to check your letters from time to time to make sure
you are not endlessly repeating the same mistakes.
§191 Always think carefully about your writing; don't
repeat mistakes
We explain in §196 how in practice people do not usually learn from their
mistakes. Unless you are writing something in the foreign language
which has absolutely got to catch the next post, which goes in twenty
minutes, always try to make quite sure that everything you write is right.
Try to avoid making any mistakes at all. Do this even if you are 'only'
practising.
This may seem strange advice. But if you think about it realistically,
you have to ask what you are achieving if you just slap down the first
thing that comes into your head very likely a translation of your own
language - whenever you come up against an obstacle. If you work like
that, you are certainly not practising anything. What are you practising if
you don't know whether what you are writing down is correct or not?
If you adopt the principle recommended here, you will learn much
more much faster than if you don't. Just as you should learn from
planning in advance things that you are going to say, so you should learn
from finding out about things you don't know how to write.
If you do not have a language guide (teacher), and you cannot make
sure that a particular part of what you are writing is correct, mark it in
some way. You thus assure yourself that you were aware of a problem
nevertheless, and you remind yourself that it is something you must find
out about when you find a better source of information.
If you do have a language guide, mark it just the same - to assure her
that you were alert and thoughtful at the time you wrote it, not just
trundling on like a robot.
See further §§196-198 and 201
Besser zweimal fragen als einmal irrgehen
Better to ask twice than go astray once
§192 Keep all your old written work - for you and for
your language guide
Always, if you can, keep everything you have written in the foreign
172
language. This is in the first place for yourself, so that you can see what
mistakes you made in the past and see how you are progressing. If you
have a language guide (teacher) it is for her as well, so that she too can see
your old mistakes and your progress.
Your guide needs constantly to look back at your old work. This
perhaps is the one case where it is best not to use loose leaves, but to do
all the writing your guide is going to see (but not your notes!) in a bound
exercise book. Then all your writings are together, and there is much less
risk of any of them being lost. If you are not fortunate enough to have a
private teacher or guide, but attend classes, you can then hand in
everything together in a convenient form.
If she does not ask for your old compositions, for example, each time
you give her a new one to correct, your teacher is not doing her job
properly. Naturally you do not necessarily have to show her absolutely
everything you have ever written. But she should at least see all the
compositions you have written during your current series of lessons with
her. It is a good idea to write only on every other line of a lined exercise
book, and only on every other page. In this way your teacher has plenty
of room to make corrections and comments. (See §§202-204.)
Notes
1. EVG describes below how he 'has competed with himself, and forced
himself to work persistently and as quickly and effectively as possible
when he has taught himself to read foreign languages. It is a disciplined
method which AG would find too rigid, time-wasting, and lacking in
spontaneity for it to be effective for him, but you may find it serves you
very well.
A. Time each page! Make a daily note of how many pages of a book you
read in an hour. Set 5 pages per hour as your first great goal (= 10-15
minutes per page). In the beginning each page can take two hours or
more, but gradually you will bring the time down to an hour, half an
hour, and so on.
B. Set goals that are difficult to achieve! If you give yourself the task of
managing 10 pages per hour, for example, instead of 5 (your normal
achievement), you will be forced to work more concentratedly. You will
look words up more quickly and will not make unnecessary notes.
Your reading will become 'extensive', and you will concentrate on key
words and content.
C. Count the number of unknown words per page! If the percentage of
unknown words does not gradually decrease (for instance, from 10 out
of 250, i.e. 4%, down to 5, i.e. 2%) it is time to check, first, that you have
173
mastered a basic vocabulary of at least 3,000 words, and, secondly, that
you are learning important new words properly (by making notes and
by repetition).
(For the number of words one needs to know for different levels of
reading ability, and for the percentage of the written vocabulary made
up by a given number of words, see §§250-251.)
2. An intriguing example of how this process of understanding depending
on grammatical knowledge can be reversed is the way some less
'literate' native English-speakers write 'should of done' instead of
'should have done'. These two phrases sound exactly the same, and so
some English-speakers, unconsciously aware of weak forms, have
modified a little piece of English grammar. See Gethin, 1990, pp.146-47,
for a discussion of the significance of this phenomenon.
174
13
MISTAKES
§193 How important are mistakes?
Many writers on the subject of learning foreign languages will tell you
that you should not worry about making mistakes. This is always right if
they mean that you should never feel you have committed some terrible
crime, or are a very stupid person, if you make mistakes. But in all other
ways it depends on what you are trying to do.
If you only want to use your foreign language for practical purposes,
such as travelling, it will normally not matter much even if you make a lot
of mistakes. It may not matter even if you use a foreign language in your
daily work, though that will depend very much on what sort of work you
do. But simple mistakes can of course cause difficulties even for travellers.
AG has had personal experience of this: 'My wife and I once had to stay
overnight in a little place in the Swiss Alps when we discovered there
were no more trains going anywhere that day. That was all simply
because earlier in the day I had asked someone a question in my limited
German, which I had not practised for many years, and had said 'already'
- 'schon' - when I really meant 'soon' - 'bald'. (We also discovered it was a
lovely place to be stranded in, but that is another story.)
'Again, and much more recently, I was talking to a restaurant owner in
a troubled part of the world who I knew had lost his restaurant in another
town in the region and had had to start up again from scratch. So I was
dismayed when he then told me that he would have to 'move out' soon. It
was some time before I realized he meant that he was preparing to move
outside for the summer season.'
§194 Grammar mistakes
However, when people advise you not to worry about mistakes they are
probably thinking above all of grammar. The examples given in the
section above were simply of people choosing the wrong word. For
travelling and work, mistakes in grammar do not usually matter much,
but even grammar mistakes can have serious results. If AG's German
grammar had been better on the Swiss railway he would probably not
have been misunderstood, in spite of his mistake in vocabulary. AG's
wife, whose native language has neither articles nor plurals, caused
confusion on one occasion by talking about 'the whole meal', when she
really meant 'wholemeal' (as in wholemeal bread), and on another,
festive, occasion by announcing she was giving some 'flour' - rather than
'flowers' - to an elderly friend. 'What on earth for?!' people asked. In the
175
first case she used the article when she should not have, although more
often, of course, people with languages without articles leave them out
when they should put them in. But the point is that in any case there may
be misunderstandings if a person has not mastered the grammar.
§195 The importance of mistakes varies according to
your purpose
However, in spite of the possibilities of misunderstandings arising from
mistakes, it is worth repeating that for many people, perhaps even the
majority, it does not as a rule really matter if they often make mistakes,
and they are nothing to be ashamed of. One cannot emphasize too often
that the question of whether mistakes matter, like so much else in the
study of a foreign language, depends both on what you want it for, and
on your personal ambitions in it. If you are keen to achieve a high
standard in the language you plan to study, to speak it correctly as well as
fluently, perhaps even perfectly or near perfectly, then mistakes obviously
matter very much indeed.
§196 Decide not to make mistakes
The real problem with mistakes is psychological. Usually when people
say mistakes do not matter they mean, most of all, that making mistakes
does not stop you learning well. You will learn, they tell you, through
your mistakes.
Unfortunately, for most people, this is not true. In real life it doesn't
work like that. AG has corrected the English, in writing or speech, of
thousands of students from many different parts of the world, at levels of
English varying from that of beginners to advanced. Sadly, almost none of
all those students learned effectively from their mistakes. A great many
went on constantly making the same mistakes, however many times they
were corrected; a very large proportion of students will make exactly the
same mistake again within half a minute of being corrected, if they have
the opportunity. Even those who do in the end stop repeating their
mistakes very often need to make the same error some thirty, forty or fifty
times before they finally put it right. This is obviously a very inefficient as
well as frustrating way of working - it cannot be a satisfactory way of
trying to learn!
The problem is again a problem of attitude. Believing you will learn
from your mistakes is one of the ways of relying on others instead of on
yourself which are so harmful; it is one of those ways of expecting others
to do the work, when you should be doing it yourself. That making
mistakes does not matter is a strange idea if one thinks about it logically
and realistically. It is a very negative approach and must mean that the
176
student will take a careless attitude to studying the language.
If you want to master the language really well and quickly, your
attitude should instead be, from the very beginning, that you are
determined not to make mistakes. You will of course almost certainly
make some mistakes all the same, and when you do you should naturally
not be miserable about it. Above all, though, you must not give up your
determination not to make mistakes. If you keep up your determination,
there will be two good results: you will in fact make very few mistakes;
and when you do make mistakes you will be able to stop making those
particular mistakes very soon.
When you are determined not to make mistakes you will think before
you write or speak. Then, if you are not certain exactly what you ought to
say to express your ideas. you will find out what the right thing to write or
say is. In this way you will learn a great deal about the language, and
much more quickly than if you don't mind about mistakes. As you get
better at the language in this way, you will find you no longer need to
think about the points you were not sure about before. You will get them
right automatically.
Thought lights one's way
§197 The problem is remembering the problem
But if you do not care about making mistakes, you will miss or take a
much longer time to get hold of most of the knowledge that the
inquisitive finding-out approach would give you. And even if you finally
have the knowledge, you will very probably go on repeating some
mistakes nevertheless. AG knows non-native-English-speaking university
teachers and professors of English who know practically all that it is
important to know about the grammar of English, but who make the
same one or two grammar mistakes again and again and again. If one
pointed the mistake out to them, they would probably say, 'How terrible!',
and be very shocked at themselves, because they know about that
particular point of grammar very well. What is happening is this: They
have not forgotten the correct grammar. They have forgotten about the
problem connected with that particular part of the grammar.
Apart from simply not remembering, or forgetting to remind
themselves of the correct language, the most common sort of mistake that
people make is to translate the grammar or vocabulary of their own
language directly into the foreign language. They tend to assume that the
177
foreign language works the same way as their own. Whenever you are
not sure how something is expressed in the foreign language, it is a very
good principle to assume that the foreign language does it in a different
way from your own. It does not matter if you find out that the two
languages do in fact work the same way. Whether they work the same
way or not, you have thought about a problem and found something out.
So where mistakes are concerned there is a very practical truth that you
should always keep in mind. Most people believe that the biggest
problem, at least in grammar, is remembering rules, remembering the
answers to grammatical questions. In practice this is not so. We can
express the real situation by a sort of slogan or maxim:
Remembering the answer to the problem is not the problem.
The problem is remembering the problem.
§198 Make a note of your 'favourite' mistakes
If AG's university teacher friends would only remember that, they would
very soon stop repeating their 'favourite' mistakes. When you make a
mistake it does not in practice help to say, 'How bad! I must study the
grammar or usage again and learn it by heart.' Or, if you have made
mistakes in a composition you have written, it will not help much just to
go through it with a teacher and have the mistakes pointed out to you (or
what is far more likely to happen, have the teacher more or less
conscientiously correct your composition at home by himself and hand it
back to you). You must of course know what mistakes you have made,
and you must understand them. But that is only the beginning. It does not
matter at all, at this stage, if you cannot remember the exact grammar or
usage. The essential thing is to make a note in some way of the problem,
even if it is only a mental note. There are detailed suggestions on the
practical technique for doing this in §§262 and 287. But make sure you
keep the problems in mind. Whenever you arrive at one of them, decide
whether you know the answer to the problem or not. If you know the
answer, fine. But don't think you will always get that point right in future.
You only got it right this time because you remembered that there was a
problem for you there. You will almost certainly get it wrong next time if
you do not remember the problem next time.
If you decide you do not know the answer to the problem, you find out
what the answer is. You can look it up in a book, or in your notes if you
have made any about it, or in your earlier writings in the language; or, if
you are talking to a native speaker, you can ask. If you do this every time
you come to one of your problems, you will very quickly learn the right
grammar or usage without having to do the nasty boring work of learning
178
it by heart; furthermore, you will learn it really deeply, and finally the
correct language will become part of you, and you will get it right every
time without thinking about it.
You should use the same methods, of course, for the mistakes that you
do continue to make. If you follow this advice really systematically you
will almost certainly find that you learn much more quickly.
Except when you are preparing for an exam (see §287), - and assuming
you are the sort of person who likes to make written notes - organize your
mistakes and their corrections in a looseleaf notebook. (Never write on the
back of the page.) You should put in here everything that you find
particularly difficult in the way of grammar, choice of words , spelling
etc. If you go through this collection of special points from time to time,
and particularly when you are about to do a new piece of writing, you
will avoid repeating your mistakes. (Many people prefer these days to use
computers or word processors for storing their notes.)
Your notes might look something like this:
§199 Can one avoid making mistakes even if one does
not have a teacher or guide to help one?
Can one avoid making mistakes even if one does not have a teacher or
guide to help one? We think the answer is 'yes', although it is more
179
difficult; or at least one can avoid making many mistakes. The secret is to
be very careful to do what has already been recommended: always
assume, if you are not certain you already know what to say, that the
foreign language works differently from your own. As always, if you
don't know how, find out!
§200 Being corrected when you speak
Students of foreign languages sometimes complain that teachers or others
do not correct them when they speak and make mistakes. If the people
who do not correct you are native speakers but not teachers, try to be
understanding. They may have very honourable or practical reasons for
not correcting you. They may feel it is rude to do so, or that it would be
arrogant to take your teacher's place. Or they may feel - very often rightly,
perhaps - that it would break up the conversation too much. On the whole
it is probably better not to ask people to correct you, unless of course you
know them very well. Otherwise you can never be sure that you will not
embarrass them in some way. (Asking people questions about their
language is quite another matter.)
Moreover, the same arguments apply that were put forward in §196.
Most students, unfortunately, including those who ask to be corrected,
take little or no notice of the corrections. Once more the tendency is to rely
too much on other people, instead of doing the work themselves.
Experience shows that most of the people who really do learn from being
corrected are the sort of people who make very few mistakes in the first
place, and who ask beforehand 'Is it right to say it like this?' or 'How should
I say that?' In other words, they are aware of the problems in advance.
They know when they don't know.
AG reports: 'As a teacher I have always conscientiously corrected the
mistakes that students have made in speaking. But it has always been a
rather depressing process for me, as I know that probably well over
ninety per cent of them will make exactly the same mistake the next time
they get the chance. I am really happy to correct students only when I
know they are the sort of people who are constantly asking their teachers
questions.'
§201 Being corrected when you write
Correction of your written language is a completely different matter. You
should always try to get this done. It should be for most people the most
efficient way of finding out for certain whether they are using the foreign
language accurately and naturally. The best person to do the correcting is
a native speaker who is also a teacher; unfortunately it is of course very
often not possible to find such a person.
180
§202 Choosing the right person to correct your
mistakes
You can naturally always ask people who are not teachers to correct your
writing for you. But you should be on your guard. However kind and
intelligent and well-educated people may be, they can make statements
about their own language that are not true. It may seem strange that this
is so. But it often happens, sometimes because they have not thought
consciously about how their language works, and sometimes because
they have unrealistic ideas about language, and think one ought to speak
or write in a certain way which is not the way they actually speak or write
themselves, and may not be the way other native speakers speak in
practice either.
§203 How much should a corrector correct?
How much should a corrector correct? 'In my opinion,' says AG,
'everything that is the slightest wrong or unidiomatic should be corrected
down to the smallest detail.
'One can hear the argument 'At this stage it is not necessary to correct
that and that sort of mistake. It will only confuse the student if you correct
too much. It is better to get the basics right first. Then we can deal with
the more difficult stuff later.'
'The trouble with this approach is that what is considered unimportant
at one stage becomes important at the next stage, and absolutely essential
at the stage after that. Yet on the way the student has been allowed to get
into the habit of writing what is wrong, while believing the whole time
that it is right. Correctors who only correct some mistakes are deceiving
students, unless they tell them what they are doing. I would be extremely
worried if my corrector told me that some of my mistakes were not being
corrected. I would start wondering the whole time whether what I had
written was right or wrong; I would not be able to forget that what one
person would consider important another might not; and I would ask
myself how much language I was continually using incorrectly that I
would later find it very difficult to start using correctly.'
§204 How conscientious is the correcting?
There is another problem connected with correcting. Not all correctors
correct equally conscientiously. This is a very difficult problem, and
before one condemns the more careless correctors, one should consider
the reasons there may be for their carelessness.
They may, of course, simply be lazy or ignorant, or both. There is no
excuse for this, but unfortunately there are some teachers of this sort
around, and it is not always easy for their students to spot them. People
181
who are lazy, or don't know enough about the language, or about how to
correct, should never take on correcting work for a foreign-language
student.
Good correctors not only put right what is wrong. They also explain how
and why it is wrong. There is obviously little point in making a correction
if it does not show what to do the next time the student wants to express a
similar idea. This often involves a great deal of work. Very often teachers
just do not have enough time to do complete corrections. They may react
to this situation by not asking their students to practise writing as much
as they should. Or they only correct what they consider the worst
mistakes. Or they correct everything that is wrong, but give few
explanations, or none at all.
AG writes: ' I have myself always been a conscientious corrector. After
a year or two of experience I was able to correct students' writing much
more quickly than when I started, because I did not have to think so much
about how to explain the mistakes. Even so, I don't think I was ever able
to correct in an hour more than five 150-word compositions by middlestage students of English. Very often the work was far slower than that.
(The writing of more advanced students tends to be quicker to correct. On
the other hand such students tend to write more, and sometimes their
language needs longer explanations.)
'I was only able to correct as thoroughly as I did because I was nearly
always lucky and privileged. The classes for whose compositions I was
responsible seldom contained more than fifteen students, often fewer, and
I was seldom responsible for more than two such classes at the same time.
Nevertheless, there were other things written by the students to attend to,
so even at the best of times I had many hours of concentrated homework.
'My own personal experience, as well as what I have heard, suggests to
me that most foreign-language teachers are not as lucky as I have been.
Many of them do not have enlightened employers, or are unable to enjoy
the comparative luxury of free-lance work. Their employers demand from
them far too many hours of teaching of too many students in an ever
larger world-wide industry (at least as regards English) that often puts
commerce and image before true effectiveness and service. If these
teachers did their correcting properly, one would only be able to describe
their work as sweated-labour, and they would have practically no leisure
at all.'
§205 Correcting mistakes is very boring
There is one other important reason why corrections are sometimes not
done properly. They are horribly boring to do.
182
Every student is, like everyone else, a unique human being, and so
students are constantly interesting to any teacher who is interested in
people. Unfortunately students' mistakes are not at all unique. Most of
them are depressingly the same. (With a little experience one can work
out the nationality of students from the mistakes they make!) You can
imagine how soul-destroying it must be to have to deal with exactly the
same problems, write exactly the same sort of explanation, over and over
again for twenty years or more. AG no longer does any teaching, and
often greatly misses it. But there are just two things he is very glad to
have escaped: getting up every day knowing he has to go off to follow a
strict timetable; and that terrible correcting, the interminable tedium of
the hours spent in solitude dealing with students' mistakes.
There are in principle two solutions to the problem. One is already a
practical solution for some people, but not for all; the other is
unfortunately only a future and perhaps uncertain possibility, not a
present one.
§206 Possible correcting methods: by private teacher
Of the ways to have your written work corrected that are possible at the
moment, easily the best is to get a teacher to go through it with you in
private sesssions. This is the best method from every point of view. If you
do not at once fully understand a mistake or your teacher's explanation,
you can immediately ask any questions you like, and your teacher should
be able to answer immediately in a way that is just right for you
personally. Most competent teachers will greatly prefer this method. They
do not have to spend long hours alone doing boring writing work, they
can make sure that the student is thinking seriously about the problem,
that their correcting is really effective, and they can enjoy the student's
company in the process.
§207 Corrections need in the end to be in your head,
not on pieces of paper!
Different people like to study in different ways, but a method AG often
suggests to private students is that they should not write down the
correction of a mistake during the session when they discuss it. Instead,
he asks them to write it later, perhaps the next day. In this way they may
make themselves concentrate more efficiently. Very often people who
always write the 'answer' down do not take enough trouble to put it
firmly into their heads; they have the feeling - conscious or unconscious that everything is fine, because the information is nice and safe on paper.
This is often a bad mistake. In the end language knowledge is only useful
in your head, not on a piece of paper.
183
§208 Possible correcting methods: by computer
One day, we can hope, most of the work, or at any rate all the routine
repetitive work, of correcting can be taken over by computers. This would
almost certainly encourage language students to become more
responsible for their mistakes. At the same time it would free teachers
from the most tedious part of their work and allow them to concentrate
on the most important tasks of all: showing students how to learn for
themselves and answering their questions.
More than half the mistakes language students make are usually
predictable, and so presumably a computer system is, in principle at least,
ideal for picking them up. It would presumably be a good deal more
difficult for the system to explain the mistake in each unique context, but
let us hope that too will eventually be possible.2
However, such a wonderful labour- and tedium-saving device would
make matters worse, not better, if it performed its correcting work in the
same way as unfortunately most conscientious language teachers still do
today, unless we are mistaken. Most students do not benefit by having
each mistake they make immediately pointed out and explained to them.
They tend to make exactly the same mistake again the next time the
opportunity arises, or if not next time, four weeks hence. As we have
pointed out, the most important truth to be recognised about all
grammatical problems, and a great many problems of word use as well, is
that the real problem is remembering the problem.
Computers surely offer a marvellous opportunity for providing a
system of correction which is truly effective, but which human teachers of
classes would in practice never have the time to apply. Such a system
would work something like this:
Let us take the use of the past and present perfect tenses in English as
an illustration. The system might, the first time it caught the student
making a mistake with these tenses, tell him:
'You have made a past/present perfect tense mistake in line x.'
If the student did not immediately understand by himself how he had
gone wrong, he would still have to find out for himself, preferably from
the system's own store of grammar explanations. It could presumably be
arranged that the system would not respond to any question 'What is
wrong with this particular sentence of mine?' until the student had
consulted the general grammar.
In the next composition (say) in which the student made the same
mistake, the system would reveal only that there was a tense mistake (not
what sort of tense mistake) in line x.
184
The next time it might draw attention to a tense mistake in paragraph x;
then to a mistake in line x; and finally merely to a mistake in paragraph x.
At each successive stage the restrictions preventing the student
obtaining a direct answer to any question about what was wrong would
be increased. It is not difficult for the student to work in this way, because
he is continually being reminded what his own particular problem is and being made to remind himself.
The system should go an essential step further by mentally jogging the
student's elbow as he writes material in the first place.
'You are using 'suggest' - bleep! - what happened last time you used
that word? How is it used in English?'
The student should be able to disarm the bleep by indicating in
advance that he was aware of the problem.
The sort of procedure just described is one important way in which one
can apply the fundamental principle we have continually emphasized
earlier - that language students should think of and do things for
themselves. It also trains the student to direct his attention to the area
where it is needed at any given moment, in contrast to the 'course'
approach.
Notes
1. There is a school of thought which says that students of foreign
languages should never be encouraged to commit to paper anything
that is wrong, on the grounds that they are inviting themselves to
remember what is incorrect rather than what is correct. This is to be
wholly unrealistic. The vast majority of language students will anyway
make what one might call 'classic' mistakes, as well as their own
personal mistakes, even if they do not write any notes at all. Once more
we have to come back to the reality that the greatest problem is
remembering the problem. It is pure practical sense to remind oneself of
the dangers.
2. There are difficulties, however, that computers may never be able to
overcome. They can already cope perfectly easily with 'overt'
distinctions like that between the incorrect 'He are' and the correct
usage 'He is'. But will they ever be able to distinguish the far more
intangible difference in meaning between 'as' and 'while', or 'going to'
and 'will', and pick up any incorrect uses of such words? Perhaps even
more difficult for any 'intelligent' system to spot would be distinctions
in meaning that depend on context, such as the different meanings of
the English '-ing' form, which can vary between sentences which are
grammatically identical.
185
14
A SUMMARY OF PRINCIPLES OF GOOD LANGUAGE
LEARNING
§209 The foundations of foreign-language learning
1. Concentrate in terms of time. Study regularly and don't fritter away
your efforts in furious spurts at long intervals, or small 'doses' over a
long period.
2. Concentrate in terms of work. Concentrate on only one foreign
language at a time. Concentrate on difficult words, difficult phrases,
difficult grammar.
3. Remember that knowing words is the very basis of being able to
understand, read, speak and write. Learn them in contexts, if possible in
a country where the language is spoken daily.
4. First learn the basics, an 'active minimum'.
5. Learn the basics thoroughly, by repeating and practising.
6. Learn to understand by listening a lot; to speak by listening and
speaking a lot; to read by reading a lot; and to write by writing a lot.
7. Try not to make the same mistake twice.
8. Teach others, whenever you have the chance. Talking to other people
about their interests and problems as regards one or several languages,
or language learning in general, consolidates one's knowledge. 'We
learn by teaching.' (Voltaire: 'It is your intelligent questions I want - not
your witty answers.')
Chi altri insegna, se stesso ammaestra
Teaching others, one teaches oneself
§210 Good attitudes to learning languages
You will learn better if you:
1. Have realistic long-term and short-term goals, and keep to them.
2. Learn in a way you know is well-organized and rational.
3. Know that what you are learning is necessary, and that you are
learning the most important things first.
4. Know that you will always get both profit and pleasure out of what you
learn.
5. Have a general feeling of assurance and self-confidence.
'Gravity and jollity walk well in harmony.' (Old Swedish saying.)
§211 The art of NOT learning languages
A. 'Diseases'
1. The 'passive' disease. Studying 'passively' what ought to be studied
186
'actively', and not learning an 'active minimum' first.
2. The failing-to-ask-quest ions disease. Not being aware of what one doesn't
know or understand, and not asking teachers or other advisers about it.
3. The grammar disease. Swotting at unnecessary grammar instead of
learning 'crawl' grammar or 'mini' grammar.
4. The 'interest-word' disease. Being too concerned with unnecessary
'interest-words' instead of concentrating on central words and central
phrases.
5. The fine words disease. Using 'fine' (literary) words instead of simple
everyday words. One symptom of this disease is a ridiculous jargon,
such as 'communicate' instead of 'talk'.
6. The 'synonym'disease. Trying to learn as many 'synonyms' as possible
instead of practising the use of everyday central words.
B. Mistakes and defects
1. Too slow a pace. Crawling although one ought to be walking or
running. (Small 'doses' over a long period.)
2. Too hectic a pace. Trying to run when one ought to be walking or
crawling. (Very common where intensive courses are concerned.)
3. Not using sensible practical methods, such as not using looseleaf
notebooks instead of bound exercise books, or not using a typewriter or
word processor instead of writing in longhand.
4. Not knowing how to use dictionaries properly.
5. Not obtaining an overall view of the language at an early stage.
(Particularly important when the language in question is one that is
difficult at the beginning.)
6. Lacking the necessary time sense - for instance, not having the slightest
idea how long it may take to learn to speak a certain language reasonably
well.
7. Lacking a general insight into how a language should be learned and
what is required to attain a certain level.
8. Learning according to the dogma of salvation by chatter
('communicative competence') and other official dogmas that have led
to the spread of the 'art of not learning languages'.
187
PART II
FACTS ABOUT LANGUAGES
Erik V. Gunnemark
188
15
THE WORLD'S MOST IMPORTANT LANGUAGES
§212 The 'big' languages
From an international point of view there are six great 'communication
languages' that one should learn first:
Hindi and Urdu are communication languages for more than 500 million
people in southern Asia, but do not have true international status. Higher
on the list of languages that should be given priority are the following
three:
*A home language is a language spoken regularly in the home, in
preference to other languages.
A knowledge of the classical languages Latin, Greek and Sanskrit is
both useful and a source of pleasure. A knowledge of the vocabulary of
Latin makes it much easier to master its daughter languages Italian,
Spanish, French etc., as well as other European languages, especially
English, since such a large part of their vocabularies is based on Latin.
A knowledge of Greek and Sanskrit can be useful in the same way. In
addition to the 14 languages mentioned above there are of course many
other languages that are worth studying (see Gunnemark, 1992(a)).
§213 English, German and French
The position of English as the number one world language is
indisputable. In countries where English is not the dominant mother
tongue and language of everyday use, it is therefore the language that
people normally learn first, at school, on courses, and on their own.
German is the home language of nearly 100 million people, and the
189
official language of about the same number. Fewer people speak French
as a home language (barely 70 million), but it is far more important as an
official language (about 250 million).
As an international language German cannot compete with French. For
a career in the administration of the European Union a knowledge of
French is essential, but naturally both English and German occupy an
extremely important position there.
190
16
HOW MANY WORDS ARE THERE?
§214 The numbers of words in modern languages;
compound words
The full vocabulary of the languages of today's industrial nations is
staggeringly large. Each contains more than 10 million words. The vast
majority of these words are international. In the fields of technology and
science new words are constantly being created; the vocabularies of
chemistry and electronics alone now each contain more than one million
terms.
However, when we speak of the vocabulary of a language we mean in
the first place the general vocabulary, including only the 'everyday'
technical and scientific terms. This vocabulary extends today to at least
200,000 words in the languages of the developed world.
In the Germanic languages, such as German and Swedish, the number
of different words is considerably larger than in the Latin languages, such
as French and Italian, because one-word compounds (i.e. new single
words created by combining two or more 'old' words) are far more
common. English, which may be described as a Germanic language with a
very strong Latin influence, occupies a kind of half-way position in this
respect, as the following examples of comparisons with Swedish and
French show:
The general vocabulary of English can be reckoned at 400,000 to 500,000
words and is probably 50% to 100% larger than that of, for example,
French or Swedish. The reason for the extra words in English is that it has
two sets of words, i.e. a Germanic vocabulary, and a vocabulary of Latin
origin acquired mainly through French. In everyday speech, however, at
least three quarters of the words used in English are of Germanic origin.
§215 Ancient vocabularies
191
The total number of different words in the ancient literature that has been
preserved is in
(There are a vast number of compound words in Sanskrit, the classical
language of India.)
§216 Active vocabularies in dialects
The number of words recorded in speaking vocabularies (used 'actively
and accurately'):
The figures above may seem unbelievably high in view of the fact that
cultivated Europeans do not normally use actively more than 10,000 to
20,000 words in their respective mother tongues. However, various
observations confirming these sorts of figures have been made elsewhere
since 1950, for instance in the province of Bohuslan (Sweden) by Arne
Gadd, and the valley of Surnadal, south-west of Trondheim (Norway) by
Ola J. Holten.
§217 Polysynthetic and agglutinative languages
In polysynthetic languages such as Greenlandic one cannot talk of 'words'
in the European sense. There word and sentence are identical concepts.
Such 'words' can be extraordinarily long as a result of adding one suffix
after another to the stem. Nor does the term 'word' have the same
significance in agglutinative languages (including the Finno-Ugric
languages and Turkish) as it does in European languages. On the basis of
a Greenlandic stem one can form an infinite number of words; a Lappish
stem can sometimes be the basis of hundreds. (Examples of very long
words are given in §244.)
192
17
TRANSPARENT LANGUAGES
§218 What we mean by 'transparent words'
Even if one has never seen or heard them before, one can often work out
what words of a foreign language mean if they are similar to words in
one's own language. When one becomes aware of the constantly recurring
patterns in a language, one can recognize further similar words. In this
book we use the word 'transparent' to describe foreign languages that
have many such words. Naturally a language that is transparent to
speakers of one language may not be transparent to speakers of another.
Portuguese, for instance, is very transparent to a Spanish-speaker, but has
very limited transparency for a speaker of Russian, and is hardly
transparent at all to a Turkish-speaker.
The more transparent a language is, the easier it is to learn. This is a
general and rather self-evident rule. We know that already in the ancient
world people made use of 'transparency' quite systematically as for
example between Semitic languages. In later times 'transparent words'
have been a guiding principle for Italians studying Latin, for Russians
learning other Slavonic languages, and so on. On the other hand, in some
western countries 'transparency' has been largely neglected in the
teaching of languages.
There can be dangers lying in wait in words which appear to be
transparent but are in fact not (see §238). But these dangers are very
minor compared to the immense advantage that transparency in a foreign
language can give to learners.
§219 Transparency as an aid to reading and speaking
Transparent words are in the first place important for one's passive
vocabulary, that is to say, they make it much easier for one to read the
foreign language. But once one has recognized them in one's reading they
can also be very useful for one's active vocabulary, that is, for when one
speaks and writes. The step is not a big one.
It is a good idea to get hold of, or to put together for oneself, lists of
transparent words, in particular when the language is highly transparent.
In this way one can learn more quickly which equivalents in both writing
and sound constantly recur and one will be able to take advantage of the
'transparency' more systematically.
As the first foreign language you learn it is a good idea to choose one
that is fairly transparent, unless you urgently need to know one that is
not.
193
§220 Some examples of transparent words
Below are some examples of transparent words in a group of west
European languages, seen especially from an English-speaker's point of
view. They are discussed in some detail because it is striking how so
many students seem to find it hard to see the connection of a word in a
foreign language with one in their own if it is not spelled or pronounced
in exactly or almost exactly the same way.
This can be a crucial stage for foreign-language learners. If they do not
see the similarities, the foreign language becomes so much more difficult
and daunting for them and they become discouraged. On the other hand,
if they can easily spot the transparent words of a language, they not only
find it far less difficult to learn and remember, but also become confident
about learning further languages, even if those languages are not as
transparent as the first.
For 'nation', apart from the capital letter at the beginning of the German
word (all German nouns begin with a capital), the spelling is exactly the
same in four languages, although the pronunciation is different in all six.
But if you are learning Spanish or Italian you should note as soon as
possible exactly in what way the word is different and that there is a
regular pattern for all three words just as there is in all the other
languages. Thus for 'concentration' the same four languages, and for
'administration' three of those languages, have the '-tion' ending, while
Spanish and Italian repeat their '-ción' and '-zione' endings.
With 'concentration' we see another pattern developing. The two
Germanic languages German and Swedish use 'k' in the place of the 'c'
that English and the Latin languages use for 'con'. Furthermore, German
turns the second 'c' into a 'z'. You may also have noticed another
variation. The Italian word for 'administration' has no 'd'. Instead of 'dm'
there is 'mm'. Again you should keep your eyes open (and, where it
applies, your ears too) and find out quickly if these are common or
invariable patterns, for clearly if they are, it is going to be much easier for
you to recognize and so understand that type of word.
With 'administration', though, we have a difficulty. The German
equivalent is not transparent at all - not, at least, to an English-speaker or
a speaker of any of the Latin languages. But to a Swedish-speaker it
194
would be transparent, since a Swedish word with a meaning similar to
'administration', and used far more often, is 'förvaltning', which in sound
is even more like 'Verwaltung' than it is in spelling.
It tends to be abstract words in the Latin languages that are transparent
to English-speakers. In the Germanic languages the transparent words
tend to represent the physical world.
You will need to become aware of the patterns within the foreign
language itself, but also to observe the patterns of how it varies from your
own and other languages. Always be aware that there are such patterns
and you will soon be absorbing them without thinking.
It is true, as we shall see in §§238-239, that there are traps waiting for
the unwary in the form of 'false friends' and that these can lead to the
making of ridiculous mistakes, and can occasionally lead to serious
practical difficulties. But such things are one of the little quirks that often
make studying languages fun, and there is no greater mistake than not to
make use of all the transparent words in a foreign language you can.
Many people are put off learning foreign languages because they feel
that all foreign words must be impossible to understand (at least without
looking up every single one in the dictionary) simply because they are
foreign. Below are two sentences in Italian. If you are an English-speaker,
we think that even if you have never read a word of Italian in your life
before, but know that
195
and if you know that Italian adjectives often come after the nouns they
qualify, then you shouldn't have much trouble working out the meaning
of the two sentences, on condition you use your imagination a bit, and
take away or add a few letters here and there to make the words look
English. There is just one 'false friend' waiting for you. That's where you
must use some realism as well as your imagination.
L'assemblea nazionale ha deciso di sospendere 1'immunita
parlamentare dell'exministro della sanita pubblica. E stato
accusato di corruzione e di incitamento all'omicidio.
(The English translation, if you need it, is in the note at the end of the
chapter.)
§221 'Transparent' speech
Sometimes it is the spelling that is recognizable between the languages, as
with 'arm' in three languages here, or it is the pronunciation, as with
'house' and 'ice' the German 'Haus' and 'Eis' sound very nearly exactly the
same as the English words. You will not find many pairs of words where
both spelling and sound coincide. Nor will you find many words, like
'arm', whose spelling is so satisfyingly identical.
But as a rule transparent words will be recognized first through
196
reading. The sounds are more often than not very different, so recognizing
words similar to your own when they are in the form of spoken sounds is
usually more difficult. Faroese and Icelanders, for example, do not
understand each other straight away if they are not familiar with each
other's language. They must speak slowly to each other to begin with - in
spite of the fact that the languages are over 90% transparent to each other.
The transparency of speech is very much a matter of practice. When a
Swedish-speaker goes to Iceland, the language is at first totally
incomprehensible to him. But after two or three weeks he understands
quite a lot. When you get used to the relationship between sound and
spelling in the new language, and become aware that there are patterns
linking the sounds between the two languages, as well as the patterns
linking the written forms, you will probably recognize many words
through their sound too. It simply takes a bit longer.
§222 More patterns linking languages
In English-German-Swedish, 'mouse-Maus-mus' and 'louse-Laus-lus', as
well as 'house-Haus-hus', are a good illustration of the links between
languages. There are examples in the table above of the patterns between
the Latin languages too.
With 'fall' there is an example of how you need to know the patterns of
infinitive endings. In German nearly all verbs end in '-en', and most
Swedish verbs end in '-a', so we can say that 'fall' is effectively spelled
(though not pronounced) exactly the same in all three languages.
In cases like 'stupid' you have to use your imagination, but with the
help of a context it shouldn't be too hard to see the link with 'dumb' (as
used in American English, and quite often in British English as well).
Here are a few more examples of patterns of equivalents in English and
German:
Note, however, that there are quite a number of exceptions to these
patterns.
§223 Examples of the degrees of transparency between
various languages
The classifications below are based on the 'transparency research' I
197
conducted over a period of about twenty years. They were normally
calculated from a basic vocabulary of about 2,000 words.
For reasons of space it is not possible to provide a commentary on the
figures. Despite this, they should be of interest to many readers.
Allowance must be made for wide variations, since the nature of texts can
vary enormously. The information applies in the first place to 'average'
texts, but even within those, transparency can vary by 10% and
sometimes by up to 20%. The only cases where one can be fairly certain
that there will never be more than insignificant variations are where the
transparency is over 90%.
Highly educated speakers usually consider the transparency to be
greater than do those with less formal education.
198
199
§224 Stepping-stone languages
The usefulness of transparent words does not stop at the direct links
between your own language and a foreign language. What we can call a
'stepping-stone' language can be used as a route to the learning of a third
language.
The usefulness of a stepping-stone language rests on the assumption
that the student knows it well enough to be able to use it as an effective
stepping-stone. How useful it is depends of course on how transparent
200
the third language is in relation to it.
A transparency of under 20% is of little value; medium transparency
(e.g. through German to English or vice-versa) can be a considerable help;
and at 70% (e.g. through German to Swedish, through Finnish to
Estonian, or through Russian to Czech) the transparency will be an
enormous advantage. When it exceeds 90% (e.g. Portuguese Spanish or
Gujarati - Hindi) anybody who knows the stepping-stone language can
effectively already read the third language, and learning to speak it
should not require any great length of time. English, thanks to its large
proportion of words of Latin origin, can even serve to some extent as a
stepping-stone language for those who wish to learn Italian, for example.
(The transparency of the basic Italian vocabulary to English is about 35%,
and for the wider vocabulary much greater.)
§225 Lists of non-transparent words
If one is learning a language with a transparency of over 90% - that is to
say, one easily recognizes more than 1,800 of the first 2,000 words - it is a
good idea to make up a list of the remainder, the words that are not
transparent, and learn them systematically.
Note. The national assembly has decided to suspend the parliamentary
immunity of the ex-Minister of Public Health. He has been accused of
corruption and incitement to murder.
201
18
INTERNATIONAL AND PURISTIC WORDS
§226 International words
As a result of modern technological and scientific development,
international words are becoming ever more common throughout the
world. The international words in western languages have for the most
part come from Greek and Latin, and from French and English. For a
word to deserve the description 'international' it should as a rule appear
in the following modern languages:
Most of the Latin languages - French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese,
Romanian etc.
Most of the Germanic languages, particularly in English, but
preferably also in
German, Danish etc.
Some of the Slavonic languages, such as Russian and Serbo-Croat
In the so-called puristic languages - as for example in Icelandic and
Finnish international words are avoided. (See below, §§231 and 236.)
§227 How many words are international?
In a basic vocabulary of 2,000 words, over 300 words, i.e. a good 15%, are
international in English, French, and Swedish, for example. Over 200
words in Russian and Serbo-Croat are international (over 10%), barely 100
in modern Greek (less than 5%), and less than 50 in Finnish (under 3%).
§228 All is not 'international' that looks it
The international word 'computer' has the same form in a number of
languages (beginning with a capital in German, like other German nouns:
'Computer'). Spanish has 'ordenador', French 'ordinateur', Danish usually
'datamat', Norwegian 'datamaskin', Swedish 'dator'.
One sometimes comes across international words in English that are
not universally used in other European languages. 'Station' (as in 'railway
station') is 'Bahnhof' in German and 'gare' in French. There is a word
'stántsiya' in Russian, but 'vokzál' is more commonly used. (This was
originally the name of the station at Vauxhall (Vokzal), an amusement
park outside St. Petersburg, in its turn named after Vauxhall Gardens in
south London.)
'Office' is indeed 'ufficio' in Italian and 'oficina' in Spanish, but it is
'kantoor' in Dutch, 'kontor' in Swedish, and 'kontóra' in Russian, while the
Germans say 'Büro', the French 'bureau', and the Portuguese 'escritório'.
'Students' or 'pupils' are 'elèves' in French, 'Schüler' in German, and
'leerlingen' in Dutch, while the Spanish usually say 'alumnos'. In the
202
United States 'students' is a general word for pupils at all stages.
§229 Loan words from eastern languages
We are so 'Eurocentric' in Europe that we all too easily forget that there
are other important languages, apart from Greek, Latin, French and
English, which have given words to other peoples. Arabic, Sanskrit and
Chinese, for instance, are important sources of ideas and loan words.
There are large numbers of Chinese loan words in Japanese, Korean
and Vietnamese, among other languages. Languages in India and
neighbouring countries have borrowed many words from Sanskrit, either
directly or via Hindi and Urdu. Arabic is an international language from
the Atlantic to the Pacific.
Persian has also played an important part in Asia as a provider of
words and ideas. In the 17th and 18th centuries it occupied a position
similar to that of French in Europe during the same period, and it was an
official language in British India right up until the 1840's.
Turkish has had great importance as a link between Arabic and Persian
on one hand and European languages on the other. Especially in the
Balkan languages and in Hungarian there are many Turkish loan words
of Arabic and Persian origin.
§230 The international word 'hooligan'
In 1992 Johannes Hedberg (Gothenburg) put forward the hypothesis that
this word is not English or Irish - as is usually maintained - but of eastern
origin. He pointed out that 'hooligan' came to Sweden from Russia via
Finland.
After a thorough investigation, Pent Nurmekund (Tartu, Estonia),
known as the greatest polyglot of our time, has confirmed the hypothesis
that 'hooligan' is not European from the beginning. He has gone beyond
the Russian language: 'Russian-speakers sometimes associate 'chuligan'
with 'chulit' (blame, revile), but I believe the word has come from the Far
East.'
Pent Nurmekund has found similar words among Turkic peoples in
Central Asia (e.g. Uzbeks and Uygurs) and even among Chinese
(Wulaihan), Koreans (Murvehan) and Japanese (Buraikan). For various
reasons, however, it is most probable that a Mongolian or Tungus word
has been the basis of the Russian word 'chuligán'. In Mongolian
'chulaghan' is used of thieves, in various Tungus languages 'chulacha'
means 'thief and 'hulun (chulun)' 'layabout'.
From time to time in the past Russian adopted words from Asian
languages, but there has scarcely been any 'export' of words eastwards.
We can thus assume that the word 'hooligan' has spread from the Far
203
East, first to the Russian Tsarist empire, including Finland, and then to
Western Europe.
§231 Puristic words instead of international words
'Purism' is the name given to the attempt to purge foreign words from a
language. It was particularly widespread during the 19th century in
connection with the national romantic movement. In Scandinavia
(Denmark, Norway, Sweden) puristic ideas can scarcely make any
headway today. But they are still very much alive as regards Icelandic,
Faroese, modern Greek, and the Finno-Ugric languages Finnish, Estonian,
Lappish and Hungarian.
Outside Europe the western international words are avoided in many
languages. Often the very structure of the language puts insurmountable
obstacles in the way, as in Arabic and Chinese. On the other hand Arabic
words play an important part in the Islamic cultural orbit, Sanskrit words
in the Indian sub-continent, and Chinese words in the Far East and
Indochina.
People studying a puristic language such as Finnish or Greek come up
against the extra obstacle that international words are largely lacking in
its speaking vocabulary and general reading vocabulary. Equally, but the
other way round, when somebody who only speaks a puristic language
wants to learn a non-puristic language they may find the international
words just as foreign to them as the 'native' ones. Here 'educated' learners
with a considerable knowledge of international words get a head start
over less well-informed learners.
§232 Free entry for foreign words into English
The English language has adopted words from all sorts of sources, often
without any change in the spelling. Purism has left only insignificant
traces. They are usually only evident in very old words, such as 'gospel'
(Old English 'godspel'= good news) or 'Whit Sunday' (white Sunday).
English has borrowed a considerable number of words from the
neighbouring Celtic languages. Among these 'whisky' and 'slogan' are
particularly well known internationally. 'Whisky' comes from 'uisge
beatha', which in Scottish Gaelic means the same as the Latin 'aqua vitae'
and the French 'eau de vie', that is to say, 'water of life'. 'Slogan' has its
origin in the Gaelic 'sluagh ghairm', 'folk cry', or 'battle cry'.
Many words have come from France. 'Bouquet', 'cafe', 'depot' and
'fiancé(e)' are among those added to the language in more recent times.
English has taken several words from German, including 'dachshund',
'kitsch', 'lebensraum', 'leitmotif, 'schadenfreude', 'wanderlust' and
'Zeitgeist', and the linguistic terms 'ablaut' and 'umlaut'.
204
§233 German is no longer puristic
Purism was pushed quite far in Imperial Germany, and when the Nazis
took power in 1933 it was believed that the campaign would be stepped
up in earnest. In the beginning it certainly seemed so - among other things
the old German names of the months were revived, such as 'Hornung'
(February), 'Ernting' (August) and 'Scheiding' (September). But the purists
got no support from Hitler, and at the beginning of the 1940's Nazi
Germany even went over from the Gothic to the common European form
of type.
Since 1945 German has borrowed from English in the same way as so
many other languages. In daily speech words like 'Telefon', 'Telex' and
'Lift' are used in place of the old terms 'Fernsprecher', 'Fernschreiber' and
'Fahrstuhl' ('Aufzug').
On the other hand, many puristic words have been kept, such as
'Bahnsteig' (platform), 'Fahrkarte' (ticket), 'Schaffner' (conductor),
'Tatsache' (fact) and 'Umwelt' (surroundings, milieu). 'Rundfunk' is still
the usual word for 'radio'; 'television' is called 'Fernsehen', 'helicopter'
'Hubschrauber', and 'drug addict' as a rule 'Rauschgif tsüch tiger'.
§234 Purism in the Slavonic languages
The Slavonic languages present an irregular picture. The most important
of them, Russian, has a large percentage of international words, and
Serbo-Croat likewise.
Czech is perhaps the most puristic of the Slavonic languages. Examples
are:
Sometimes international words are used side by side with native words for example, 'fotbal' as well as 'kopana'.
§235 Modern Greek is puristic but at the same time
international
Modern Greek is in principle puristic, but the equivalents of international
words often consist of 'international building blocks' - words or prefixes
that are quite well known in the rest of the western world. Here are a few
examples.
205
Innumerable international words, scientific words above all, are now
formed from Greek 'building blocks'.
§236 Four examples of Finnish and Icelandic purism
§237 International and puristic names of the months
In most European languages the names of the months are derived from
the Latin names and are thus international. Some languages in Europe,
however, have their own native names, as for instance Finnish (but not
Estonian, Lappish or Hungarian), Polish and Czech (but not Slovak),
Croatian (but not Serbian), Ukrainian and Byelorussian (but not Russian),
and Lithuanian (but not Latvian).
Here are the Croatian names:
206
19
FALSE FRIENDS AND UNRELIABLE FRIENDS
§238 False friends
We have seen how a foreign language may contain 'transparent' words
that can be very good friends. Among the transparent words, however,
there sometimes lurk 'false friends' as well. (In French 'faux amis', in
German 'falsche Freunde'.) They look or sound as if they must mean the
same as words in other languages, but in fact they do not. They are
responsible for untold mistranslations and misunderstandings.
A classic example is the English 'actual'. The corresponding word in
practically all other European languages (French 'actuel', Italian 'attuale',
German 'aktuell' etc.) refers to time and has the sense of 'current' or
'present'. 'Actual' is usually 'veritable' or 'reel' in French, 'wirklich' in
German, and so on. The French 'actuellement' and its equivalent in other
languages means 'now' or 'at present', not 'actually'.
Here are further examples of false friends, starting with some between
French and English.
"Eventuel' can even sometimes be translated as 'any', e.g. 'Complaints, if
any,...' or 'Any complaints...'.
Most of the words in Spanish and Italian corresponding to the French
words above are false friends as well.
Here are some further examples from those two languages:
207
And a sample of false friends from some other languages gives us:
It is not only when you compare a foreign language with your own
language that you can get caught out by false friends. As we have seen, a
foreign language that you already know can be a great help in learning a
third language, as for instance from English through Spanish to
Portuguese. However, there are also false friends between Spanish and
Portuguese, such as:
§239 Unreliable friends
There are also a number of words that sometimes behave as true friends
but cannot always be relied on. We have already seen the example of
'dumb', where a trap is in fact waiting for English-speakers, who may
208
think German 'dumm' and Swedish 'dum' mean inability to speak, which
they do not, and for German- and Swedish-speakers, who may think
'dumb' has only one sense: 'stupid'. (Inability to speak is expressed in
German by 'stumm' and in Swedish by 'stum'.)
Here are some more examples:
209
20
EASY AND DIFFICULT LANGUAGES
§240 What makes a language difficult
The degree of difficulty of a language depends in principle on the
similarities and dissimilarities in relation to the mother tongue in the
following areas:
vocabulary
grammar
pronunciation
script
As a rule it is the vocabulary that determines how easy or difficult a
language is; grammar, pronunciation or script are rarely so decisive.
Highly 'transparent' languages are nearly always easy; those with a low
degree of transparency tend to be difficult.
§241 Judging whether a language is easy or difficult
Languages are generally regarded as easy or difficult according to how
difficult people find them to learn at the beginning. By this criterion
English is almost certainly the easiest European language for those whose
mother tongue is not a European one.
For speakers of Danish, Norwegian and Swedish, however, German
and Dutch rather than English are the easiest languages to learn. This is
on account of:
(1) the high degree of transparency (about 70%) between the respective
basic vocabularies; (2) much easier pronunciation and spelling; (3) at the
'crawl' stage only 'crawl' grammar or no grammar at all is necessary for
speakers of these Scandinavian languages to make themselves understood
in German or Dutch. On the other hand, for speakers of the Latin
languages English is easier.
It is difficult to say which languages are easiest for English-speakers.
Among those who have tried two or more languages opinion seems to be
divided. Many would say that French is easier than German, but others
would say the reverse. In fact, Spanish is probably easier than either for
those who start out from English.
Among the major European languages, Russian must be judged really
difficult at the beginning, unless one already knows some other Slavonic
language.
Even more difficult at the beginning is Arabic. As a practical rule of
thumb one can probably say that Russian is twice as difficult as French for
English-speakers, and Arabic twice as difficult as Russian.
210
However, it is important to distinguish between speaking ability and
reading ability when one discusses how difficult a language is. French, for
instance, is comparatively difficult at the beginning from the point of
view of speaking; reading it is appreciably easier.
When one can 'crawl' read or 'crawl' speak a language after a short time
one is sometimes led into thinking that it is an easy language although in
reality it is not shortly afterwards great difficulties arise. After ten weeks I
thought I knew Finnish; after ten years I realized that I would never be
able to learn Finnish properly.
§242 Which are the difficult languages?
To judge by the advertisements one sees for all manner of courses, one
can learn most foreign languages quickly and easily. The reality is very
different. A large number of languages are extremely difficult for most
people.
Chinese and Japanese are among the most troublesome where reading
and writing are concerned, partly on account of the script. (But Japanesespeakers can read quite a lot of Chinese writing, since they partly use
Chinese characters.) It is impossible, however, to establish objectively
which languages are most difficult to learn to speak. In Europe, though, it
is generally agreed that Basque is the 'worst'. (As proof of this the Basques
themselves relate how a well-known polyglot, namely the Devil, lived in
their country for seven years without being able to learn more than 'bai'
(yes) and 'ez' (no).)
Other difficult languages in Europe, except when one's own language
belongs to the same group - and they are not invariably easy even then are the Baltic languages (Lithuanian and Latvian) and the Finno-Ugric
languages (Finnish, Estonian, Lappish, Hungarian etc.), as well as Greek,
Albanian and Maltese (originally an Arabic dialect). Also all the Slavonic
languages if one does not know one of them already.
All these languages need to be learned intensively if one is to achieve
any tangible results within a reasonable space of time. This also applies to
the Celtic languages, with what for the rest of us are their bizarre changes
in initial consonants. On top of this, where Irish and Scottish Gaelic are
concerned, is the 'historical' spelling with its totally different modern
pronunciation. Thus, for example, the Irish words 'athair' (father) and
'saol' (life) sound roughly like 'air' and 'seal'.
Finnish has a reputation as being particularly difficult to learn, but this
is in fact not wholly deserved. The vocabulary is difficult because the
transparency Finnish-English is very low. But it is comparatively easy at
the beginning as regards pronunciation and spelling, and although one
211
has to learn a considerable number of inflexions to be able to speak, one
doesn't need to know many of them in order to read.
§243 Easy and difficult words to learn: the importance
of spelling
It is a clear principle that words are much easier to learn in languages
with consistent spelling that follows the pronunciation. There is almost
'perfect' spelling in, for example, Finnish, Turkish, Croatian, Serbian and
Bulgarian (in the Cyrillic alphabet in the case of the two last). Norwegian,
Italian and Hungarian are also popular among language students because
of the way their spelling corresponds to the sounds.
Among the major languages Spanish has the best spelling system. One
of its great advantages is that accents are placed over all syllables that are
stressed irregularly.
English, Irish, Icelandic, Faroese and Tibetan have extreme forms of
'historical' spelling, with the result that there are wide divergences
between spelling and modern pronunciation. French, Romanian, Danish
and Swedish are other examples of languages with historical spelling.
English and Russian are important languages that are troublesome
because of their irregular stress. It is important to stress words correctly
from the start. Otherwise you may mispronounce words for the rest of
your life, however good you become at the language in other respects.
The radio is probably the best source of information on stress.
§244 Long words
There is no doubt that very long words can be difficult to learn. Such
words appear in agglutinative languages like Finnish, Hungarian and
Turkish. Here are two classic examples.
Turkish: 'sevistirilemediklerinden' - 'because they could not be
persuaded to love each other'. This was said of the quarrel between the
Turks and the Russians that led to the Crimean War in 1853.
Hungarian: 'A legeslegmegengesztelhetetlenebbeknek' - 'To the most
unreasonable of them all'. The Austro-Hungarian emperor Franz Joseph is
claimed to have given this name to a Hungarian warship in Fiume after a
row with its officers.
In the Germanic languages too it is easy to form long compound words.
The following German word is said to have been used officially in
imperial Germany:
'Artillerieunteroffizierswitwensterbekasse' - 'Funeral fund for widows
of non-commissioned officers in the artillery'
But many of the longest words are deliberately made up and are not
used in practice. The world record, set by Aristophanes about 2,400 years
212
ago in one of his comedies, is a description of a recipe consisting of 171
letters in a single word. (See H.J.Storig, 1987, pp.106-07.)
213
21
HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE TO LEARN A
LANGUAGE?
§245 How long depends on organization and
concentration and on how difficult
We have pointed out that time is one of the most important factors in the
learning process but that the extent to which one can use it - what one
learns during a given period - is dependent on other factors and
circumstances. There can, for example, be very great variations between
different people in the tempo of their work and in its efficiency.
Organization and concentration have enormous significance.
Naturally one decisive factor is the particular languages one is learning
from and to. Somebody who only knows Finnish, for example, will find
English far more difficult than a Swedish-speaker; this is hardly
surprising, since the 'transparency' between English and Swedish is many
times greater than that between English and Finnish.
§246 Ignorance and wishful thinking
Nevertheless, the fact that the time it takes to learn a foreign language
depends on many other circumstances is no reason to leave the field free
for irresponsible statements, particularly in the advertising of cassette
courses etc.
In many parts of the world there are too few among those responsible
for the teaching of foreign languages who have any realistic idea of how
long it takes to learn them. Wishful thinking flourishes above all as
regards intensive courses. It is not unusual for the planning of language
teaching to be based on learning times that are only half of what is really
needed.
§247 Minimum times
It is high time the exaggerations and wishful thinking were replaced with
a more realistic approach. The times suggested in the table below can be
taken as a rough guide as to how long it takes to learn a language from
scratch up to a point where one can begin to speak it tolerably well and
understand at least slow speech. The times are reckoned on the basis of
intensive study at the rate of about 120 hours per month.
214
Without such intensive study it will take a great deal longer to reach the
same level of proficiency. Figures cannot be given, but we would suggest,
as a rule of thumb, at least three times as long. When one's studies are of a
more leisurely kind, the decisive factor that determines how soon one can
achieve a reasonable level of expression is how much opportunity one
gets to practise speaking.
But does it really take such a long time to learn a language? After all, in
the 70's Linguaphone promised that after 60 hours of listening and
imitating one would be able to speak any language one liked. Since then,
other 'institutes' have set new minimum records. According to PILL
(Programmed Instruction Language Learning) only 24 hours with their
cassettes are needed: you are supposed to be able to learn French,
German, Spanish, Italian or Russian while you are washing up or sitting
in a traffic jam.
The advertisements of such commercial enterprises should instead read
'...after 200300 hours for the easiest languages'. There are very few people
who can learn to speak the more difficult languages with the help of
cassettes alone - and in any case only after several hundred hours. Franco
Rossi (Milan) has extensive knowledge of cassette courses published
throughout the world, and has made an intensive study of learning
languages by this means. He estimates that of those who try to learn a
language such as Arabic with nothing but cassettes, without the help of a
teacher, 20% succeed at the most.
Language researchers at the universities have here a field of study
where their results and conclusions would be of immense value to the
general public. They could for instance examine the success or otherwise
of different types of language course according to the propaganda, and in
reality.
Practical linguistic science has a much higher status in Russia and other
parts of the former USSR than in most western countries. Professor
Eugene Czerniawski in Moscow and Professor Pent Nurmekund in Tartu
are examples of well-known practical scientists and polyglots. The former
is the originator of Czerniawski's law: 'When one learns a new language
one can in principle learn it in half the time that was needed for the
language within the same group - the Slavonic, for example - that one last
learnt.'
215
§248 How many words can one learn per week?
To state how many words one can - or should - learn per day is virtually
impossible. The shortest unit of time that is of any use in such calculations
is probably a week.
It should not be forgotten that there is an immense difference between
words of different kinds: some are easy to learn and others difficult.
Calculations of the time needed must be based on the non-transparent
words, and they are usually difficult to learn.
A realistic basis for time calculations is a maximum of 50 nontransparent words per week. Add to these the transparent words. In a
roughly half transparent language these might be around 50, and so the
total of non-transparent plus transparent words could be of the order of
100 per week.
Here we are talking only about active vocabulary, words that one learns
by heart. If one is content with passive vocabulary, that is, with words one
merely recognises the meaning of when one sees or hears them, it is not
impossible to learn up to around 120 non-transparent words, to which
one can add about the same number of transparent words in the case of a
half transparent language, that is to say, approximately 240 words per
week.
Naturally one can learn far more words in a comparatively transparent
language than in a language like Russian or Arabic. The figures
mentioned above are guides only in the sense that they indicate a realistic
upper limit for our capabilities. (Through intensive learning they could
however be considerably higher.)
Now and then one comes across assertions that it is possible to learn
(and remember!) more than 200 words per day - by means of the so-called
'suggestopedia' method. That is probably possible if one confines oneself
to international or other transparent words but those, after all, one in fact
knows in advance.
§249 How many hours of study: rules of thumb
216
('Mini-speak' = begin to speak reasonably well and understand slow or
fairly normal speech. 'Crawl-speak' = make oneself understood and be
able to understand all the really important things said to one, on the basis
of knowing a few hundred words and phrases.)
Concentrating one's studies in terms of time is of immense importance.
More concentrated teaching was once considered one of the most
necessary reforms in order to make language learning more effective.
Now there seems to be little interest in this within the teaching
establishment.
Rome was not built in a day
217
22
HOW MANY WORDS DOES ONE NEED TO KNOW?
§250 The percentage of the total spoken and total
written vocabulary of a language that is made up of a
given number of words
This means, for example, that when a person speaks 1,000 words, 500 of
them (i.e. 50%) are covered by only 40 different words (the 40 most
common words of the spoken language - see Appendix 9).
These percentage figures are only a rough guide that gives an idea of
the small number of words that are needed to cover a very large part of
the spoken vocabulary. By adapting what one says to the vocabulary one
knows, one can cover, from a practical point of view, 100% of everything
one wants to say with as little as, for instance, 400 or 800 different words.
Otherwise, 400 words may perhaps only cover about 80% of the spoken
vocabulary.
Thus, for example, 400 different words account for about 7,000 of all the
10,000 words on, say, forty pages of a book.
These percentage figures are once again only a rough guide, with room
for wide variation. It is not unusual, for example, for no more than 50
words to cover as many as the 80 in the table above (i.e. 50% of the
written vocabulary), while in other cases 150 words may be needed.
§251 From 400 to 100,000 words - different vocabularies
for different needs
See §34 for the distinction between 'active' and 'passive' vocabulary.
218
§252 Basic word lists: subjectivity
In any word list with more than 400-500 words it is impossible to avoid a
steadily increasing subjectivity, a 'personal approach'. Those who choose
the words are influenced by their background and their particular
experiences and opinions. When the vocabulary exceeds 1,000 words, as
much as a quarter of the words may be subjective choices. It is thus an
illusion to strive for complete objectivity - one has to content oneself with
'as much objectivity as possible' as a yardstick.
Over the years I have produced a number of word lists, especially
'crawl', or 'survival', lists of about 400 words, but also larger ones
containing some 2,000 words. Hundreds of words in the latter are
unquestionably subjective, but I have used every opportunity to increase
the lists' objectivity, partly through the study of word lists that have been
219
published in various countries. I have availed myself particularly of
American, British, German, French and Russian word frequency lists.
§253 The Dutch basic word list
In this connection a Dutch basic word list of about 3,300 words deserves
special mention: Vocabulaire de base néerlandais (De Sikkel, Antwerp, 1967).
It is strictly speaking a dictionary rather than a basic word list, since it
includes equivalent French words with examples of their use. The first
version came out as early as 1937, after three years' work which was
started in the Dutch East Indies. The book is now the foundation for an
outstandingly good course in Dutch for French-speakers: Op nieuwe wegen
('Along new ways') by A. de la Court and G. Vannes.
When the 'cultural section' of the Council of Europe began its work on
the so-called 'threshold' system in about 1970 it would have been the
natural thing to use this Dutch-French dictionary, constantly improved
over a thirty-year period of practical experience, as a starting point.
Unfortunately it was totally ignored, and the results of the Council of
Europe's work in this field have been correspondingly disappointing.
220
23
LANGUAGES WITH DIFFICULT PRONUNCIATION
§254 The pronunciation is often easier than you may
think
Many languages have a pronunciation that most outsiders think is very
difficult. Among such languages are Polish, Lappish and Arabic, and the
tone languages Vietnamese (six tones) and Chinese (four tones in the
standard language).
However, the spelling often misleads us - we believe that the
pronunciation is more difficult to master than it really is. One can soon
say the Czech sentence 'Strč prst skrz krk!' ('Put your finger on your
throat!') as fluently as 'Stroke his pretty crocodiles!', and Polish words like
'szczęscie' (happiness) and 'pszczola' (bee) do not require any lengthy
practice either.
Stress can be a big problem for beginners when it is variable and more
or less irregular. On top of everything else, a word's pronunciation may
change significantly if the stress shifts, as in English, Russian and
Romanian.
§255 Spelling and pronunciation in English
Perhaps the biggest difficulty presented by English pronunciation is its
irregularity, that is to say, the deviations from the spelling/pronunciation
patterns (rules of pronunciation) that can be established even for English
words. At least 90% of the 6,000 most common words have a regular
pronunciation, but only 80% of the most common 1,000. Perhaps 200
'irregular' words out of 1,000 doesn't sound very much, but remembering
their pronunciation can be a heavy burden for many beginners. One must
in any case learn the international phonetic alphabet from the very
beginning.
One of the most troublesome English pronunciation problems is
presented by words that have identical spelling but are pronounced
differently, e.g.:
(With the help of the key word 'red' in the jingle 'I read a red book about
Reading' one can remind oneself that both 'Reading' and 'read' (past
tense) are pronounced with the /e/ sound.)
221
Finally, five English words that are mispronounced in many, if not
most, parts of the world:
222
24
FEATURES OF GRAMMAR
§256 Accidence and syntax
Grammar is traditionally divided into two parts: accidence (or morphology the form of words), and syntax (the form of sentences). Syntax comprises
the rules for combining words in groups and sentences and for the use of
articles, cases, tenses etc., as well as rules for the order of words in
sentences.
There are languages with almost no accidence at all, that is to say, with
very few inflexions, but there is not really any language without syntax.
The grammar that beginners need to learn usually consists for the most
part of accidence. When we say that the grammar of English is easy but
that of Russian difficult we are referring to the accidence; the syntax of
both languages is quite complicated.
When people say they do not know the grammar of their language,
what they often mean is no more than that they do not know grammatical
terms. When one learns a foreign language it is advisable, often essential,
to know the main grammatical terms. (See Appendix 7: Grammatical
terms.)
§257 Languages with easy or difficult grammar
English is known for its easy grammar, that is to say, its uncomplicated
accidence, since it has few inflexions and only a small number of
exceptions. However, those who are not native English-speakers who
want to write English in a natural and idiomatic way must reckon with
various problems of syntax. People with grammar-rich languages
consider that all too often it lacks hard and fast rules; instead, they say,
there are only 'signposts', often of a vague nature.1
Chinese has even simpler accidence than English. It has syntax, though,
so the statement 'Chinese has no grammar' is incorrect. Already at the
beginner's stage it is necessary to know the positions of certain words in
relation to each other.
Vietnamese has no accidence either, in the proper sense of the term, but
it has a complicated syntax that places severe demands on both readers
and listeners. Other languages with non-existent accidence are Malay and
Indonesian. In these languages there is no definite or indefinite article,
and there are no endings to indicate plurals or possessives or different
tenses: 'saya makan' in Indonesian corresponds sometimes to the English
'I eat', sometimes to 'I ate' or 'I have eaten', and sometimes to 'I shall eat'.
The context, however, makes it practically always unnecessary to hesitate
223
as to which meaning is intended.
There are plenty of 'grammar-rich' languages full of inflexions. In
Europe German, Greek, Icelandic, and most Slavonic languages belong to
this category, among others. So too do Finno-Ugric languages such as
Estonian, Finnish, Hungarian and Lappish.
Nevertheless, it is the vocabulary, not the grammar, that requires most
time and effort when we are studying grammar-rich languages. For this
reason we should not believe statements like 'Finnish is difficult because
it has 15 cases'. Certain Finnish cases can cause difficulties, but the greater
part of its case system is no more complicated than the preposition system
in an Indo-European language (English, French, German, Swedish etc.).
Finnish vocabulary is a much greater problem: only 2%-3% of the 2,000
most common words are 'transparent' to English-speakers.
Note
1 AG comments: 'The belief that English grammar is vague, inconsistent,
illogical and full of exceptions is largely false. The mistake arises mainly
from the fact that a valid account which grasps enough of its essential
features is still not widely available. See §§160-161 and Appendix 8.'
224
25
ALPHABETS
§258 Unfamiliar alphabets - how difficult are they?
This section is written particularly from the point of view of those who
use the Latin alphabet for their own language.
Simply by learning the Greek or Russian Cyrillic alphabet one is taking
a big step forward from 'zero knowledge' in these languages.
Unfortunately there is a widespread misapprehension that they are so
difficult to learn that it is pointless to attempt it for those who do not need
to know these languages thoroughly. Journalists on assignment will
continue to report from Greece and countries which use the Cyrillic
alphabet that 'I could not read the signs because I don't know the
alphabet'...
As far as the Cyrillic alphabet is concerned, one needs at the most two
weeks to be able to recognize and 'read' even the letters that do not look
like the Latin ones. The Greek alphabet is even easier: no more than ten
letters look different, and of those, several, such as gamma
delta
pi
and sigma
will already be
familiar to reasonably cultivated people in Europe and the Americas. (It is
one of the mysteries of journalism that the people concerned don't even
take with them a slip of paper with the respective alphabets noted down
on it when they travel to such countries.)
There are difficulties of another kind, but they are by no means
insuperable. These are the problem of remembering where certain letters
come in the alphabet, and the problem of adapting one's visual and aural
memories to the new situation. When we begin to study a language with a
different script, the visual memory does not function in the way we are
used to - at least, it doesn't for me. (I recognize that the memory works in
different ways in different people when they are learning foreign
languages.) I can no longer 'see the words in front of me' (when I think of
them) but must 'hear them inside me' in order to be able to learn them. To
learn words and phrases in such languages effectively I have to, so to
speak, 'plug in' my aural memory on full power.
Of a completely different order of difficulty is the problem of learning,
say, the Arabic alphabet, or the Devanagari script (used in Hindi, Marathi,
Nepali and other Indie languages). (An account of different types of script
can be found in Gunnemark, 1992(a).) In such cases it is advisable to try to
225
find a competent person who can make sure one masters a sufficiently
unchildish, adult handwriting that is acceptable to native speakers of the
language in question. Few people are so talented that they can manage
this on their own.
Some languages are even more difficult to read or write. Chinese
writing, for example, consists of thousands of different 'characters', or
ideograms, each with its own individual meaning. This means that you
have to learn the language, or a great deal of it, before you can read it. The
same applies to Japanese. Although Japanese has its own alphabets (two
different ones, one being for foreign loan words) with letters that work in
the same way as Western scripts (they represent sounds), it also uses the
Chinese characters, mixed in with the Japanese letters. So you have to
learn at least several hundred of the characters before you can even begin
to read a Japanese newspaper, say. If you want to learn Chinese or
Japanese, then, it is probably best to start with the spoken languages.
There are books on them which transcribe the Chinese characters (and the
Japanese alphabets) into Latin script. In this way you can at least learn to
use the spoken language. Then, when you have mastered a good part of
that, you can start learning to read.
226
PART III
HOW TO PASS LANGUAGE EXAMINATIONS*
Amorey Gethin
*See also Appendix 10: Tests and exercises
§259 The tyranny of examinations and the need for
realism
Exams are hateful things. No truly civilized community would ever
subject anybody to such ordeals. There are not only the emotional effects
of fear of failure, and of failure itself - a collapse of self-confidence and a
miserable anxiety about one's ability to cope with the future; countless
millions of people's whole lives are decisively affected by how they do in
exams. Because exams play such a big part in modern society I want to
suggest some ways in which people could do better in exams in foreign
languages.
I have had exceptional success with the methods I recommend here in
coaching candidates for examinations in English as a foreign language.
Several private students who, after repeated failures, had been given up
as hopeless cases by private teachers and institutions alike have been able
to pass their exams by using these methods. The same methods have also
worked extremely well with whole classes. Of those who used them a
very much higher proportion than the average (sometimes as high as
95%) passed their examinations.
What has particularly gladdened me is that in my classes my advice has
helped many candidates who have been on the 'borderline' between
passing and failing. It is such students who need help most.
The key to success is to be realistic. One of the most common reasons
for people failing their language exams is that they aim too high- They
aim for perfection, and instead just make a terrible mess of everything.
Unfortunately it is often teachers who are responsible for this situation.
They try to get their students to achieve perfect or near-perfect answers,
and as often as not undermine the students' morale as well as failing to
show them the essential thing: a practical way of dealing with the
problems.
This may seem to some readers to contradict what we have said in
earlier sections of this book about aiming for perfection. But exam
candidates face an immediate practical problem, and preparing for an
exam and finding good enough answers to the questions one finds in the
exam papers themselves is in many important ways not the same as
227
learning a language.
There are many thousands of candidates with a good enough
knowledge of the foreign language to pass who have failed because they
have not prepared in the right way and because they have used the
wrong technique, or no technique at all, in the examination itself. But
there are also many students with less knowledge of the language who
have passed, through good preparation and good examination technique.
You may feel that what I am saying is that the best way to pass is by
using tricks. But that is not really so. What I am saying is that you can do
best by being systematic and self-disciplined. Below I first offer some
general advice. I then discuss in detail how to deal with various types of
test. The examples of exam questions that I use are for examinations in
English as a foreign language, but I believe most of my suggestions are
equally valid for exams in other foreign languages.
§260 General principles
This part of the book has not been written for those who, without much
difficulty, will get a top grade in their language examinations. They have
little or no need of the advice in it. All that such lucky people need do is
make sure they know exactly what sort of tests they are going to meet in
the exam papers and what the examiners expect of them.
Most candidates are in a very different situation. They know they will
not get the highest marks. The important question for them is simply,
'Can I pass?' If you are such a candidate, there are a number of simple
practical things you can do to get many more marks than you might
otherwise get.
Above everything else, though, there is a principle about language
examinations you should never forget: you must show the examiner only
what you know, never what you do not know.
For instance, in examinations where there is some sort of composition
work it is foolish for most candidates to try to write something that meets
perfectly all the demands the examiners make, especially in more
advanced level examinations. They will probably meet with catastrophe if
they do. It is much better for you if you can be realistic and use practical
methods to write good language, even if that language is not up to the
ideal standard the examiners are asking for from candidates they would
give the top grade.
To pass the examination you need:
1 the right preparation before the examination
2 the right technique during the examination itself
§261 Preparation
228
Before anything else you must obviously know in outline what is going to
be in the papers set for the examination. This is only the beginning. It is
essential to know too, in detail, exactly what type of language the
examiners will ask you to show you understand, what sort of subjects
they will probably ask you to write about, and what sort of grammatical
or vocabulary points they are likely to test you on.
Clearly you must be prepared for the sort of questions you will get and
clearly you must practise answering some of the same sort of questions.
Some teachers may have fine intellectual or practical ambitions on
behalf of their students and may resent the distractions of examinations.
They should always remember what a terrifying responsibility they have.
If you have teachers, you must insist that they do not give you things to
do that you do not have to do in the exam; that's a luxury you cannot
afford, and can be dangerous for candidates' confidence. Teachers and
candidates have to be thoroughly systematic, and make sure they are
really ready for all the problems they are liable to get .
But do not make the mistake that, unfortunately, so many students
make. Do not believe that doing hundreds, perhaps thousands, of test
questions, and discovering the answers, is the right way to prepare. Do
not believe that if you do 600 questions and answers you will be twice as
well prepared, will have learned twice as much, as if you do only 300.
Very often this sort of preparation just means going through automatic,
mechanical motions without thought; don't just say to yourself 'Ah! So
that's the answer, is it! Next question please!'
Ten thousand test questions will be useless to you unless you study the
method needed to answer, and the method needed to prepare. If you doubt
this, remind yourself of the fact that you will almost certainly never get
exactly the same question again. You should spend the time studying
how to be ready for questions you have never seen before. It is much
better to spend an hour thinking carefully about how to do five questions,
than to spend an hour doing fifty questions and answers without thinking
about them. The question a candidate should constantly ask is 'How?' In
this way you can build up confidence that you can deal with almost any
problem. If you decide to use the services of teachers to help you prepare
for your exam, make sure that they too concentrate on answering the
question 'How?'
This point about dealing with problems leads on to what is probably
the most important piece of advice I have to offer.
§262 Know your weak points!
You must learn about yourself. You must discover what your own special
229
needs are in the language concerned. There is no need to 'learn' the whole
of the foreign language 'equally', so to speak - spending equal time and
effort on each part. This is a waste. You should pick out what makes the
language different from your own and concentrate on those parts. And
then, above all, you should discover your own personal weak points in
the language, become aware of your own special problems, find out what
mistakes you most often make. Make a list of them.
You should practise doing the various sorts of work you will be asked
to do in the examination; in particular you should practise writing
compositions, if they form part of the exam. You should then make a
careful note of any mistakes you make more than once. Count up how
many times you make each mistake, and the mistake you make most
often should be at the top of your list, the next most common one in
second place, and so on. For instance, if you are studying English as a
foreign language, and your own language is Japanese or Persian, you may
find that the problem of articles ('a', 'the') comes at the top of your list. If
you speak German, you may find 'if is your biggest problem. If your
mother tongue is French you may find you are always having trouble
with 'since'. And if Spanish or Italian is your language, you may
constantly forget to use 'it' when you should.
But these are only examples of mistakes typical of speakers of certain
languages. They may or may not be your particular personal mistakes.
Those personal ones are the ones you must discover. It is surprising that
so few students organize their studies and exam preparations in this way,
for the logic of the method is so clear and simple:
Find out your problems and deal with them.
This principle is connected with another important truth that I have
already mentioned (see §197), and expressed in the slogan:
The problem is not remembering the answer; the problem is
remembering the problem.
An example of what I mean is given by the many thousands, perhaps
millions, of German-speaking students of English who repeatedly make
the mistake of using 'would' with 'if: 'If I would do that... ' etc. Most of
them, if you asked them how one uses 'if in English, would probably give
a correct answer. They know how 'if should be used. But they constantly
forget the problem when unreminded by someone else, and so,
unthinking, fall into the same trap again and again.
As I have explained before, most people will find that if they constantly
keep their particular problems in mind, they will very soon and very
easily and naturally learn the 'answer', learn the correct mode of
expression, simply because they are so often thinking about the point. It is
230
a much more pleasant as well as much more effective way of fixing the
necessary knowledge in your mind than learning rules by heart.
§263 Reading material
Just as reading is probably the most effective way for most people to
increase their knowledge of a language, so it is also one of the most
important things to do in preparation for an examination. The two
different ways of reading have been discussed in earlier chapters of the
book.
Look at as many old exam papers as you can get hold of, and find out
what sort of writing you are likely to meet in them, and then read the
same sort of material. But if you get the impression that you need a fairly
wide range of material, one of the best sources, apart from good quality
daily newspapers, is women's magazines. This may seem a surprising,
shocking and stupid suggestion to some men; nevertheless, it is certainly
true of at least British women's magazines, and I suspect of those in many
other countries as well, that they contain some of the most varied material
you will find anywhere. Nearly all other magazines are 'specialist', are in
some way limited in their subject matter, and so, of course, limited in the
language they use. But a women's magazine does not contain matters of
interest only to women. Certainly you may find cooking and knitting, and
babies' nappies; but, even more, you will find discussions of social
questions, information about famous women and men, sport, pop groups,
travel, history, practical do-it-yourself hints, and hobbies of many kinds,
mostly probably written in a popular style and vocabulary. Of course
there may be romantic novelettes and short stories. Don't look down on
them. They may be 'bad literature' if you judge by the standard of Tolstoy.
They are often made up of cliches - conventional expressions,
conventional thoughts, conventional feelings. But when you are learning
a foreign language, this is just what you need. First learn the way most
people talk and write conventionally, and when you have this foundation
then you can, if you want, start trying to be 'original'. You can only be
original if you know the conventions.
On the whole, reading literature is not the best preparation for a
language examination, unless the exam is particularly slanted towards
literature. If you are interested in literature, of course you should read it.
But you must understand that it is unlikely to prepare you so well for the
tasks you will meet in the exam. Newspapers and magazines will provide
you with the kind of 'active' vocabulary that in the examination you will
probably need far more than you will need the vocabulary of literature.
However, it is probably not a good idea to try in your own writing to
231
imitate in every way the language you find in high quality newspapers.
Remember the big gap there is between 'passive' and 'active' knowledge
of a language. Notice the grammar, the vocabulary, what words go with
other words, but be very careful about copying the style; you could get
into a fearful mess if you tried. Consider, after all, that even in your own
language there are not very many people who can write successfully in
the style of your good newspapapers.
§264 Grammar books
Grammar books have been discussed in chapter 10. Here I will only
emphasize once more that it is essential to have a book with a really
complete index. As you prepare for the examination you will need to look
up points of grammar and usage continually. A grammar book without
an index is useless for this purpose. The only exception might be a
grammar in which the topics are organized alphabetically with numerous
cross references.
§265 Examination technique - Timing
In some parts of the world, and particularly in Britain, many people find
the time they are given in examinations much too short. But even if you
are taking an exam where you are given plenty of time, you need to time
yourself very carefully in any written paper. You should plan the time
you are going to spend on each part of the paper and then keep to this
plan exactly.
The first rule to remember is that you must try to finish the paper. You
cannot get marks for parts that you do not do. If, for example, you miss
the last 25% of a paper, you cannot get more than 75% even if you get full
marks, the maximum, for everything you have written. It is like starting a
race with only one leg. You have lost marks even before the examiner
begins to look at your paper.
So you will find it much easier to finish if you follow a timetable. Some
people say that it isn't practical to keep looking at their watches, or that it
makes them nervous. But it is much better to have a lot of little panics,
when you can still do something about the situation, than to have one
very big panic when it is too late to do anything at all about it.
If you have a problem with time, but just go on writing without looking
at the clock, you will get further and further behind, and very possibly
end up managing to do only half the paper, or even less. Instead, you
must have strength of mind, and stop immediately you get to the end of the
time you have decided on for each section. You must stop whether you
have finished that section or not. It is useless having a timetable unless
you keep to it. Once you start falling behind you will never catch up
232
again.
This method has two advantages. First, you will make sure that you do
at least part of every section of the paper. And second, if you are behind,
you will realize this at a very early stage, and realize that you will have to
go faster.
But particularly wherever the paper demands 'free' writing (the most
obvious example is compositions) or any writing where you have some
degree of choice in producing whole sentences, the timetable you set for
yourself should provide for quite a long period at the end after you have
finished writing. This time at the end should first be used to finish the
paper, if you haven't already. Keeping a strict timetable acts as a kind of
safety net. As we saw above, it will make sure you keep up a good speed.
But then at the end you have that extra time which you can use to prevent
any catastrophes. However, if you have to use that end period for
finishing, you should finish as quickly as possible, because there is
something else just as important you must do, and that is checking.
As your timing is so important for both finishing and checking you
ought to find an opportunity to practise with a few old examination
papers (at least one of each sort) in order to make sure your timetable is
about right, and to train yourself to keep to it exactly.
§266 Examination technique - Checking
Checking can perhaps more than anything else make the difference
between a student passing or failing.
There are many, many students who complain that checking never does
any good, that they never see any of their mistakes; and there are even
many students who say that if they read through their work afterwards
they start changing things that were right in the first place into things that
are wrong. It is true that both these things happen; but it is because
candidates check in the wrong way.
It is useless to read through your work (probably only once) in a
general way, looking vaguely for any mistakes that may be there. If you
are looking for everything at the same time, you will probably either (if
you are one type of student) see nothing at all; or (if you are another type)
lose confidence in yourself and start thinking that half of what you have
written is wrong.
You must remember exactly what you are looking for. This will make
you efficient; and, in turn, because you know you are being efficient, it
will give you confidence and you will not start changing things that are
perfectly correct. This is where your own personal list of weak points (or
'favourite' mistakes) that I have talked about above comes in.
233
You should take each point in your list separately and read through
your work looking for mistakes connected with that one point only. Do not
think about anything except that one problem. You are then certain to see
if you have made that particular sort of mistake. You then take the next
point on your list and do the same with that read right through and look
only for that one sort of mistake. This means that if you have got seven
points on your list, you must read through your work seven times; if you
have twelve points, you must read it twelve times, and so on.
So this is the second reason why it is so important to time your
examination carefully. You must give yourself the time to make sure you
have not made any of those 'silly' mistakes which probably more than
anything else cause the failure of those who could pass.
§267 Examination technique - Summary
We can summarize the purposes of a strict timetable as follows. It gives
you:
1 time to finish
2 time to check
3 confidence
The last point, confidence, is as important as anything else. If you keep to
a timetable you will know that you are being efficient, that you are going
to finish, that you are going to check; in other words, that you are in
control of the situation. As a result your work will probably be much
better, because you will not be nervous - or at least you will be far less
nervous - and you will not be in a panicky rush. And apart from the
practical results, that is a much nicer feeling to have.
The three things to remember each time you go into the examination
room are:
1 the list of your personal or 'favourite' mistakes
2 timing (with finishing)
3 checking
§268 Multiple choice - Reading Comprehension tests
Most language examinations these days have multiple choice tests. I have
already written about the defects of such tests in §39. But they are a fact of
modern exam life and have to be faced.
Multiple choice tests are supposed to be objective. In reality, however, it
is possible to train for them, and if you have to do them in your exam it is
very important that you should have practised the right technique for
them.
To test people's ability to understand a language the examiners present
a passage or passages, usually about half a page to a page in length, and
234
give an instruction more or less as follows:
After each of the following passages there are a number of questions or
unfinished statements about the passage. Each one has four suggested answers or
ways of finishing; choose the one you think is best. (Sometimes more than four
alternatives are given.)
Below is a little piece on the American health system (shorter than what
you will normally get), followed by three of the type of question you
could expect to be set on it.
The standard of medicine in the United States is generally
agreed to be very high. There is no shortage of well qualified
specialists, and there is a lot of individual attention. Treatment is
backed up by the latest in the way of medical technology.
Doctors and hospitals do their utmost not to make mistakes,
because if they do they risk being made to pay out enormous
sums in compensation.
But the American health care system has what look like
insoluble problems. There are in fact two systems side by side.
One is the private system run on the basis of free competition.
The other is the public system which had to be created because
such a large part of the population, including many of the
elderly, could not afford to pay for the absurdly expensive
private treatment.
The public system is vast. A huge proportion - more than 10
per cent - of the United States federal budget goes on it. Yet there
are still very large numbers of Americans who are not covered
even by this service. The government tries to keep expenditure
down and so sets limits to the income of people using the
system. Millions of the unemployed are another important
group that is excluded.
1 What is the state of the health system in America? It is
A unsatisfactory.
B . satisfactory.
C too risky.
D too mechanised.
2 What can patients expect with regard to treatment in the U.S.A.?
A Frequent mistakes by doctors.
B Very honest hospitals.
C Personal attention.
D Some of the most skilful nurses in the world.
3 Among those Americans who cannot get proper health care are
A some people who earn too much.
235
B old people.
C people with very large incomes.
D private patients.
§269 Reading Comprehension - General technique
First, read through the whole passage fast. When you come to words and
expressions you do not know, whatever you do, do not stop and start
worrying about them. Reading fast will also help you to get a feeling of
the story or the idea of the passage as a whole. This will stop you
choosing wrong answers that are clearly completely against what the
writer is trying to say. You may find it useful, in fact, to read through the
passage twice.
Now, but not before, comes the problem of choosing the right answer
from the four possibilities, A, B, C, or D. Three of these are wrong, of
course. The examiners call these wrong ones 'distractors': they put them
there to confuse you and lead your mind away in the wrong direction.
You must not allow these distractors to lead you away.
So, as you come to each question, look at only the base question (or
'stem') and not yet at the alternatives A, B, C, D. Before you look at these,
look back immediately at the passage and find out what the passage says
about the question. (A practical method is to cover the alternatives A, B,
C, D each time with a sheet of paper, just leaving the base question
showing, while you study the passage.)
When you have decided what the passage says, but only then, you can
look at the alternatives A, B, C, D to discover which one fits what you
have already decided is the answer.
It is always completely safe to do it this way, because if it is a good
question there will only be one right answer and you will see it
immediately.
To study the alternatives A, B, C, D before you look at the passage
again is very dangerous in two ways. You will often be led astray by the
distractors and immediately decide you like the look of one of them and
so not be able to read the passage clearly with an open mind, because you
are just trying to prove to yourself that your choice was right. This may in
turn prevent you looking at the right part of the passage where you can
find the real answer.
You must look first at the picture of reality the writer wants to show us.
Looking at A, B, C, D first will often only give you the ideas of your own
imagination.
One very common method, unfortunately, is the elimination method of
looking at each alternative in turn and deciding whether it is impossible
236
or not . This is a dangerous system, for the reasons I have just explained.
Moreover, it is not only a bad plan to think about what the passage does
not say; it also takes more time.
Always be very careful to be guided only by what the passage actually
says. Never base any answer on anything you personally know or have
an opinion about. If there is a piece about psychology, and you are asked
how psychoanalysis developed, and one alternative suggested is that
psychoanalysis was started by Freud, you must not choose that
alternative if it is not stated in the passage.
When you study the passage in more detail to find out what it says
about each question, you must still not worry about separate words you
think you do not understand. First of all, you will find that in this sort of
test the answer seldom depends on knowledge of just one word.
Secondly, you should continue using the method I have suggested in the
section of the book on Vocabulary: use your understanding of the situation
to find out the meaning of single words. Always give yourself a picture of
what is happening in the real-life situation the writer is describing.
§270 Reading Comprehension - Answering the
questions
Let us look at the three questions above.
1 What is the state of the health system in America?
This is an instructive question, because if we ignore A, B, C, D for the
moment and look at the passage we find that in fact there is nothing about
the health system in the first paragraph. The first paragraph is about the
standard of medicine and treatment, not the health system. If you
assumed that the answer to the first question must be found in the first
paragraph you would almost inevitably choose the wrong answer. To
find out about the health system we have to read on through the second
paragraph.
There is an important double moral here. Firstly, we must always
concentrate carefully on exactly what the base question actually asks
about. We must act according to what the question really is, not according
to what we would like it to be - and what we would like it to be can be
strongly influenced if we look at A, B, C, D first!
Then we must always be ready to look at any part of the passage,
perhaps even read right to the end again. The information we need may
sometimes be spread out in several different places. In this way, too, we
will think about what is really happening according to the passage, not
just think abstractly about some individual words or sentences.
It is clear from the second paragraph that the state of the American
237
health system is not good. Now, but not before, we can look at the
alternatives A, B, C, D, and it is immediately clear that the answer must
be A.
You can probably see how dangerous it might have been to look at the
alternatives first: there is mention of good medicine, of risk, and of
technology in the text - but they are not the answer to the base question. If
you did not look back at the passage first you might have been tempted
by almost any of them and possibly not even bothered to look for
confirmation in the text.
It is a good idea to mark with a pencil - just a small stroke in the margin
- the parts of the text that give you the answer, and then rub the marks
out when you've finished each question.
2 What can patients expect with regard to treatment in the U.S.A.?
Again we look at the text before looking at A, B, C, D. We are told about
the treatment in the first paragraph. The standard is high, and there are
many good specialists, individual attention, and modern equipment. The
doctors and hospitals are careful.
Now we can look at the alternatives. There is only one that fits what we
have just found out that the passage says, and that is C.
Looking at the passage before A, B, C, D should make sure you are not
tempted by D. If you had looked at the alternatives first you might have
thought to yourself 'Well, it's true, isn't it? The nurses in America are very
well trained and very skilful. It must be D.' But the passage itself doesn't
even mention nurses.
3 Among those Americans who cannot get proper health care are
We look at the passage. We must be particularly careful here. We are
looking for the people who are left outside the system. It isn't the elderly
(paragraph 2), because the public part of the system was set up precisely
in order to look after them, among others.
We find the people that the system does not help in paragraph 3, where
it says that the income of people who use the public system must not be
over a certain amount. So people who get more than that amount of
money won't get government help. It also says that many unemployed
people are left out.
Now we look at the alternatives. The answer is clearly A. C would of
course be wrong. People with large incomes can get treatment through
the private part of the system.
That raises a very important final point. When, by looking at the
passage, you have come to a decision about what the answer to the base
question is, stick to that decision whatever you find in the alternatives.
Don't allow yourself to change your mind because of something you find
238
among A, B, C, D. Never forget that the whole purpose of the distractors
is to distract you! The only time you should even think of changing your
mind is if you find something among the alternatives that immediately
makes it clear that you have totally misunderstood the base question.
§271 Reading Comprehension - Practising
If you are preparing for an exam with multiple choice questions of this
kind you should obviously practise with a lot of old or practice papers.
(The best practice papers are those published by or in association with the
examining body itself.) You might find it both interesting and useful to
try doing the tests in two different ways. First do some by looking at the
alternatives offered before you look back at the passage; then do some new
ones and use the method I recommend - look at the alternatives only after
you have studied the passage carefully in connection with the base
question. See how your success rates compare!
There is just one warning: occasionally you will be presented with a
bad question bad in the sense that the base question will not tell you
clearly enough what you have to look for in the text. If you are unlucky
enough to be faced with this problem, you will obviously have to look at
the alternatives first in order to find out what the examiners are talking
about.
Nevertheless, in cases where the base question is a bad one because it
covers too many possible points, still at least start by looking at the
passage first, and mark all the relevant bits of information, even if you
end up by only using one of them.
If you have studied the text, noted the information you think is relevant
to the base question, and then find that that information is not mentioned
in any of the alternatives, don't panic. Just go back to the text and study it
more carefully.
§272 Multiple choice - Filling in blanks to complete
sentences
You sometimes find this sort of test in exam papers that are called
Reading Comprehension tests, although they are really tests of half active,
half passive knowledge of vocabulary.
You will normally find an instruction like this:
Choose the word or phrase to fit each blank which best completes each
sentence.
Here are four sample questions:
239
§273 Filling in blanks - Technique
If you have not prepared well enough for this sort of test, examination
technique will not, I'm afraid, help you very much. In almost all questions
you will either know the right word immediately, or you will not. If you
do not, then you must not waste time thinking about it. That will almost
certainly not help. Just guess, mark your answer sheet, and go on to the
next question.
If this sort of test is combined with other sorts of test in the same exam
paper, give less time proportionately to this test than to other parts of the
paper. The point is that even if it carries a lot of marks, you can do it far
faster than most other tests.
But always answer every question, however uncertain you are. You will
lose a mark if you leave a blank, and you will lose a mark if your answer
is wrong. So put something you have a one-in-four (maybe sometimes onein-five or six) chance of getting it right if you close your eyes and use a
pin. (This also applies in the type of comprehension test dealt with
above.) You are throwing away marks every time you leave a question
blank.
In a few questions, however, you will find that a preposition, an
infinitive, or some other grammatical detail will tell you what the right
word is, so watch for that sort of pointer.
There is, in fact, one little trick you can use when you get into difficulty.
I explain this below in connection with question 3.
In the end, though, we come back to the importance of preparation for
this type of test. Reading is the easiest way to learn about what we have
seen is one of the most important aspects of vocabulary: what words go
together with what other words, and what words are used in this or that
real-life situation.
§274 Filling in blanks - Answering the questions
The answers to the four questions above are as follows:
1 C This is a fairly typical question, where you know the answer or you
don't . The remaining three questions are not typical in that I have
chosen them specially to illustrate particular things you can bear in
240
mind when you do such tests.
2 A The infinitive 'to' with 'ring' makes 'suggested' impossible. The use
of 'suggest' here would be a classic mistake of students of English,
'recommended' and 'invited' would need 'me', 'us', or some other
suitable pronoun or noun.
3 A This is an example of where you might use the trick I referred to
above, if you get into difficulty. If you are not a native Englishspeaker you very possibly know all the words except 'shirk'. Let us
say you are fairly certain that all the other three words are wrong. So
choose 'shirk', even though you don't know it. You will probably be
right; you obviously 'must' be right if you 'know' the other words are
wrong! And in any case, you have nothing to lose. So, when in doubt,
choose the word that is new to you.
4 B 'on' is the key word, 'reaction' and 'response' would need 'to' and
'criticism' would need 'of.
§275 Multiple choice - Listening Comprehension
Just as you need to prepare for Reading Comprehension by reading a lot,
so you need to listen a lot to prepare for Listening Comprehension. As
with all types of test, you must practise it too. Try to get hold of practice
tests and cassettes. The questions are organized in more or less the same
way as the Reading Comprehension multiple choice tests.
However, you will have to use a slightly different technique from the
one I suggested for Reading Comprehension. In the Listening
Comprehension test you must look at the questions first, before you hear
the recording, because it is important to know what sort of things you are
going to be asked about, so that you can listen out for them when you
hear the tape. In this test you cannot examine the text! But still try to
concentrate on the base questions, as you listen to the tape, and use them
to lead you to the right alternative. Don't let your listening be guided by
A, B, C, D.
As in the Reading Comprehension, don't worry about new words you
do not know. As always, think about the context and the real-life situation
that is being described.
§276 Cloze tests = passages with missing words to be
filled in
Many students think these are very difficult. They are much easier if you
do them the right way. As they cause such anxiety, I am including a
complete test together with explanations of the answers.
Find a suitable word to fill each of the numbered blanks in the following
passage. Use only one word for each blank.
241
Until fairly recently almost everybody in the Western world (1)
uncritical faith in the power of medical science. The sulpha
drugs introduced in the thirties, drugs (2) as penicillin, and
vaccines like (3) developed against polio, as well as sensational
advances in surgical techniques, were regarded (4)
demonstrations of the triumph of modern medicine.
Now an ever (5) number of people are not so sure.
It has become apparent that (6) was in fact cleaner water and
better diet and hygiene that won the battle against the fearful
epidemics of earlier times. The 'wonder' drugs only arrived on
the scene (7) the job (8) largely been done. It (9) been asserted
that (10) having more doctors, more and better-equipped
hospitals, and more food (11) any other nation, the U.S.A. is the
unhealthiest country in the world. Perhaps an (12) more serious
charge is that much modern medical treatment, in (13) the
administering of drugs on a vast scale, (14) from helping
patients, actually makes people ill.
More and more people are turning to 'alternative' medicine,
such as nature cure, acupuncture, or homeopathy. Alternative
medicine differs widely from orthodox medicine (15) that it is far
less costly, is in practically every (16) harmless, and treats whole
individuals (17) than separate, depersonalised symptoms. A
further consideration is (18) that possibly attracts people to it as
much as (19): it does not subject patients to the painful and
frightening ordeals' that most moder n hospitals so often (20).
§277 Cloze tests - General technique
As with Reading Comprehension passages, read these cloze passages
through quickly. Context is just as important here as with the Reading
Comprehension. You must keep the meaning in mind the whole time, both
the meaning of the whole passage and of each sentence. If you forget the
meaning you will find either that you fill in almost no blanks, or that you
write nonsense. Worry about the story or the argument, not about the
foreign language concerned. Imagine, if you like, that it is a letter from a
friend who has very bad handwriting and that the blanks are words you
cannot read, so you have to guess. If you think about it like this I think
you will find most of it is quite easy.
Above all, you must never allow your mind to become like a robot (in
this or any other type of test). Using a language properly, whether it is
your own or a foreign one, is a thinking action, so don't behave like a
computer where someone presses a key and out comes an automatic
242
response.
You might be asked to fill in the blank in the sentence
Lift the receiver, and listen the dialling tone before dialling the number.
Many students of English react with a mechanical 'listen TO' and they
write 'Lift the receiver, and listen to the dialling tone...'. Listening to the
dialling tone would be a very strange thing to do - unless you are a
telephone engineer or regard telephone dialling tones as beautiful music.
Here it must be:
Lift the receiver, and listen FOR [as in 'wait for'] the dialling tone...
Or you get a passage with the sentences
Cosmetics manufacturers are one of the most important groups
that maintain such tests are necessary. Fanners are interested (1) a
rather different way (2) these large scale and apparently
scientifically productive experiments on animals,
where the correct word has to be put in at (1) and (2). Most students, I'm
afraid, write 'in' at (1) and all sorts of different prepositions - sometimes
not even prepositions - at (2). This is because they respond, robot-like,
with an automatic, unthinking 'in' after 'interested'. They don't think
about the meaning and so they don't see that the 'in' at (1), although quite
correct, has nothing to do with 'interested', but belongs to 'way'! We
haven't had the 'in' of 'interested' yet! That comes at (2). So both (1) and (2)
must be 'in'.
These are two very obvious examples. But they show both how to think
and how not to think when you are dealing with these passages with
blanks, and with many other types of question too. It has taken me a bit of
time to explain these examples, but it all goes very quickly in practice if
you yourself think clearly about the meaning all the time.
With the meaning always in mind, you will soon discover two practical
pieces of technique. One is that the key to the answer to many blanks is in
another sentence, sometimes before, sometimes after the sentence you are
dealing with. The other point is that often, when you find a particular
blank difficult, it is better to go on and do a later blank first. Then, when
you go back to the earlier blank, you find it is quite easy.
Never stare blindly at the blank and the one word before it or after it.
Always look at the whole idea.
In the same way, when you have filled in the blanks, you should read
the whole of each sentence to yourself to see if it makes sense, and finally
read the whole passage to yourself.
As with Reading Comprehension, make sure you fill in every blank.
You will lose as many marks for putting nothing as you will for the
wrong answer.
243
§278 Cloze tests - Answering the questions
Here now are the answers to the test above. I have intentionally made it
quite an advanced test so that those who are not native English-speakers
and are interested in taking advanced exams in English can perhaps find
it useful as a model.
Read through the whole passage quickly. Don't stop and worry about
the blanks until you have finished.
(1) HAD When you have decided on your answer you should read the
whole sentence to yourself, with your answer (or answers) and make
sure it all makes sense.
(2) The key word here is 'as', so the answer must be SUCH.
(3) Here we already have an example of how essential it is to think of
whole meanings. What is it that was developed against polio? The
answer is: vaccine. So what that phrase means is '...and vaccines like
the vaccine (or vaccines) developed against polio'. But 'the vaccine' is
two words, which we are not allowed to use. So we need one word to
replace a noun, and that is THAT or THOSE. There is another
important point to be made in connection with this particular blank.
What is needed is what we can call a replacement or substitute word.
You will often be asked to supply these in cloze tests (see also 18 and
20) and you should make a special point of learning what they are.
(4) AS Now read the sentence to yourself, and do the same with all the
other sentences as you complete each one.
(5) If you have any difficulty with this one, remind yourself of what it
says at the beginning of the passage: 'almost every body...had
uncritical faith...'. Then read further, and you will come to 'More and
more people are turning to 'alternative' medicine'. So it is clear what
sort of number of people are now not so sure about the triumph of
modern medicine. It must be an ever INCREASING one, or
GROWING.
(6) You will have no difficulty in seeing that IT is the answer here if you
have got into the habit of looking at the sentence as a whole.
(7) and (8) should be done together. They are a particularly good
example of how the key to the problem is quite simply always
keeping in mind the broad context, the real-life situation. What is 'the
job'? It is winning the battle against the epidemics. Was this done
before, after, or at the same time as the arrival of the 'wonder' drugs?
Obviously, through cleaner water and better diet and hygiene, before
the drugs, which 'only arrived on the scene AFTER (7) the job...' and
this job of winning the battle was before the drugs arrived, so the
244
answer to (8) cannot be 'has', but must be HAD. (So long as we get (8)
right the answer to (7) can also be WHEN.)
(9) But don't fall into the trap of thinking that this is 'had' too. If you
only look as far as 'asserted' you might reasonably feel it is a perfectly
good answer; we are still talking about the history of medicine. But if
you continue to the end of the sentence you find 'the U.S.A. is...'. So it
must be: HAS.
(10) The meaning the writer is conveying in this whole sentence - and
we have to read right to the end to find the meaning - is a contrast,
something we would not expect. So (10) is an 'although' idea.
However, we can't use 'although' in front of 'having'. But we can use:
DESPITE.
(11) is quite straightforward, 'more...more...better...more...' must here
sooner or later lead to only one word: THAN.
(12) This is that very English word: EVEN. (It cannot be 'much' here,
because of 'an'.)
(13) PARTICULAR, that favourite English word.
(14) Does modern medical treatment help patients? According to the
writer, certainly not. So the answer is: FAR.
(15) This may be more difficult. But if we look at the whole sentence we
can see that the second part of the sentence says in what way
alternative medicine differs from orthodox medicine. So the answer is
IN. ('in that' is an example of the sort of linking expression it is useful
to learn.)
(16) Here we need another way of saying 'always', and that is 'in...every
CASE'. ('way' may seem tempting, but is really illogical, as alternative
medicine that could be harmful in even just one way would be
undesirable.)
(17) is another contrast idea, and 'than' leaves us with only one
possibility: RATHER
(18) has the same meaning as we had with (3); we can call it a pronoun
to replace, or repeat, 'consideration'. The only difference is that in (3)
it was a definite pronoun, while here it is indefinite,
'a...consideration', one of several. So we get: ONE. ('something' is
perhaps possible, but not, I think, really logical: it suggests that
'consideration' is a 'thing', which it is not - it is a 'thought that it'...)
(19) You may find this very difficult if you do not think of the real-life
idea the writer is expressing. If you do, you will see that we could
continue the sentence a bit like this: '...as much as other
consideration'. I think it then becomes clear that the missing word is
ANY. (Perhaps 'anything' if you had 'something' for (18).)
245
(20) This word must replace, or repeat, the idea of 'subject patients to...'
(see 3 and 18), and so, because of the opinion expressed right though
the whole passage, there can be no doubt that the writer means: DO.
Now read through the whole passage, with your answers, and check that
the whole thing makes sense.
There are several more variations of tests where you are asked to
complete or re-write sentences, but these five should be sufficient to
illustrate the basic principles needed for answering them well.
§280 Re-writing or completing sentences - Preparation
It is for this type of test that preparation is most decisive and easiest,
because what you have to do is so clearly delimited. The first step is to
find out which points of usage are tested most often in the particular sort
of examination you are taking. It is astonishing that books that pretend to
prepare students for language exams that contain such tests do not
246
usually have lists of these points.
I know from the experience of helping hundreds of students to prepare
for such tests that simple systematic practice of the points that regularly
come up in the exam will very often make the difference between getting,
on one hand, 20 per cent and, on the other, 80 or 90 per cent of the
maximum marks for the test. For a very large proportion of candidates it
decides whether they pass or fail a whole examination where this type of
test is an important element.
If you are studying on your own, try to find a book which lists which
points have been tested in, say, the last ten examinations of the kind you
are taking, and how often. Obviously the more often a point is tested the
more important it is to make sure you have mastered it. If you have a
teacher, insist that he give you such a list and train you on it. If he refuses,
change your teacher.
If this is impracticable, or you have no teacher, do your utmost to get
copies of all the most recent papers of the exam concerned, and try to
make your own count of the frequency of the points that come up.
Unfortunately this may be difficult for some people, as they may not have
the experience to enable them to identify all the problems. They may be
caught in a vicious circle, since it is precisely a good teacher who can and
should do that for them.
At the same time, this is an area where what I said earlier very much
applies. There is no point in doing large numbers of practice questions
and getting the answers to them if you do not concentrate above all on the
technique. If you have a teacher who goes through the questions with
you, you must insist that he shows you in practical detail how to do them,
how to think about them. If he does not do this, anything else, even if he
tells you exactly what is wrong with your answers, is a waste of his and
your time.
It is essential you follow my advice here even if this type of test plays
no more than a comparatively modest part in your exam. It is essential
you get hold of a list one way or another, and that you should be firm
with your teacher. You cannot afford to be meek, since we are talking
about something that could affect the whole of the rest of your life. And
then when you've got your list it is essential you should be systematic.
§281 Re-writing or completing sentences - Technique
When it comes to doing the test, either for practice or in the real
examination itself, the first thing to do is write down the list of your most
common individual mistakes (see above, §262, and below, §287). In the
examination proper ask for a piece of paper if there isn't one available.
247
Check constantly with this list as you do the test.
Then at every question in turn you should ask yourself 'Why have the
examiners asked this particular question? What's the problem they're
testing?' You may not be able to give an answer every time, but usually
you will if you have prepared properly. We are back to the basic
principle: remind yourself what the problem is! This is the key to success.
When it comes to actually doing the questions, the important thing
above all is the meaning in the sentences.
Do not play mechanical games with them. Do not say to yourself 'We
must replace this word in this sentence with that one in that sentence, and
this word moves to here, and rule such and such says we must do so and
so.'
Instead, live the situation expressed by the sentence, see it happening in
your mind's eye, just as you would in your own language. Some simple
examples will show what I mean. Take the sentence
She learned to swim when she was three.
and imagine you have to begin 'She has...' If you approach this in a
mechanical way you will very likely produce a sentence such as
She has not learned to swim since she was three.
But what does that mean? Certainly not the same as the original sentence.
It is only by imagining the reality that we can see that 'learn' disappears
and we need a quite different verb:
She has been able to swim since she was three.
Or suppose you have to turn the sentence
I had never been so excited before.
into a sentence that begins ' I was more excited...' Any abstract or
mechanical exchanging of verbs will be disastrous. You may produce
something like
I was more excited than before.
(which does not mean the same at all) because your method has
prevented you seeing that we need two verbs:
I was more excited than 1 had ever been before.
Or you might have to turn the sentence
'Don't forget to turn the gas off,' my sister said.
into one beginning 'My sister reminded...' A lot of students, working like
robots, immediately think of 'remind OF' and write
My sister reminded me of turning the gas off.,
which is nonsense. It should be:
My sister reminded me TO TURN the gas off.
Do not work it out, do not calculate it. Just think of the real meaning - of
both the original sentence and of the sentence you suggest yourself. Bring
248
the sentence to life, dramatise it, and you will find you immediately
understand what is wanted.
You will often have to change words or expressions. That is often one of
the main purposes of this type of test. But never change anything unless it is
necessary. If you do you may, at best, get confused, and at worst, change
the meaning so much that the examiner cannot give you any marks at all.
E is a slightly different type of question. But the basic approach should
remain the same: keep constantly aware" of meaning and context.
§282 Re-writing or completing sentences - Answering
the questions
Now the answers to the example questions in §279.
A i) What's the problem? This illustrates well how important it is to 'live
the reality' of the language in your mind. The answer cannot be 'You
should inspect your brakes', because the original sentence says so
plainly that someone, that is, someone else, not you, should inspect
them. So it is a 'have something done' test.
You should have your brakes tested.
B i) What's the problem? This type of question tends to test vocabulary
more than the others, but you should still look for classic grammatical
points that may be involved. Here the principle involved is that of the
verb-noun '-ing' form after a preposition:
We are intent on getting the big factories to do something about acid
rain.
C i) What's the problem? Again a very good example of how important
meaning is. The problem is mainly one of tense (partly revealed by that
very English use of -by'):
shall have/will have travelled/covered/gone/driven etc.
D i) What's the problem? This is a tense problem. Should it be Past or
Present Perfect? (Speakers of some languages might even want to make
it Present!)
How long have you been living /you lived /you been here?
E i) With this sort of question you will normally not be able to identify a
single problem. But this means it is more important than ever to check
with the list of your 'favourite' mistakes.
lam writing to/writing in order to enquire whether/enquire if there is any
possibility of me/of my obtaining a job in/job with your export department.
Finally, make a last careful check of all your answers against your list
of 'favourite'
mistakes to make sure you have not fallen into any of your old traps.
§283 Mixed Comprehension / Writing tests
249
There are many variations of this type of test. But all require the candidate
to write short passages based on information that is presented in various
ways - a conversation, a series of advertisements, notes made by a
secretary, maps, etc.
Rightly or wrongly, this kind of question tests your ability to organize
information just as much as it tests your knowledge of the language. As a
rule, for most candidates comprehension is not a great problem. What
you need to develop is a really systematic method for dealing with the
information. Use a pencil and organize the information into whatever
categories are needed, using numbers or letters. (It is a waste of time and
less effective to underline whole sentences in a text. Just write numbers or
letters in the margin.)
Never add any ideas or points of your own, unless specifically asked to
do so. Only use the information you find in the text - nothing else.
As far as the language is concerned, the best method is probably to
copy, as far as possible, the language used in the original text. In this way
you will avoid bad mistakes, there will not be the risk that the examiner
might misunderstand you, and you will be able to finish the task far more
quickly. I say as far as possible, because you will often have to make small
changes, especially to pronouns and beginnings of sentences. Also, where
you have the opportunity, try to bring in expressions such as 'moreover',
'furthermore', 'in addition', 'another advantage is that', 'finally' etc.
Where it is impossible for some reason to use the original language, use
simple, easy language. Remember the key principle: never show the
examiner what you don't know. Try, too, to use information about details
of the foreign language that the exam text itself gives you. Failure to do
this is unfortunately a very common mistake made by candidates, and it
makes a bad impression if you cannot express something correctly
although the usage is right there in front of you, staring you in the face.
§284 Mixed Comprehension / Writing - Advanced level
In many examinations at advanced levels you will find passages followed
by a number of questions to test your understanding of it. To give you an
idea of the sort of thing I mean, I quote below some of the sixteen
questions that were asked about a passage on agriculture, fisheries and
forestry in north Canada.
250
§285 Comprehension / Writing - Advanced - General
technique
A lot of people find this a particularly difficult type of test.
As I have suggested in connection with passages in other types of test
above, start by reading the whole passage through quickly. As in Reading
Comprehension, don't worry about any individual words that are new to
you. A rather good way of finding out if you are thinking properly about
the meaning and broad context is to try, after you have read the passage,
to make up a long title for it - perhaps about one line long. If you can't,
you probably ought to read the whole passage again! And if you
constantly remind yourself of this title it will often guide you in the right
direction as you answer the questions.
Apply the same basic principles to the questions that I recommended
you should apply when you are dealing with reading comprehension
passages or passages with blanks to fill in: think of the passage as
connected parts. Don't think of the questions as artificial exercises (even if
they are!}; try to interest yourself instead in the writer's ideas, argument
or information. Imagine that it is important for you that you understand
exactly what the writer is saying, because you want to argue about the
ideas, or because the writer provides some interesting facts that you want
to remember and perhaps tell other people about.
Unless you have a really fine command of the foreign language
concerned, I strongly advise you to use the words of the original passage
when you can. (But, as already mentioned, be careful to make any
grammatical changes necessary to make the sentences fit the question.) It
is true that in some exams you will lose a few marks if you always use the
original language. (Find out to what extent this is true in the particular
type of exam you are taking.) But you may lose far more if you try to use
your own words. I have seen many hundreds of students get almost no
marks at all in examinations in English as a foreign language because they
have tried to do what they are not capable of doing.
251
You risk three things if you try to use your own words. First, you will
almost certainly make some language mistakes. It is much more difficult
not to make mistakes when the examiner, not you, is dictating what you
have to say. It is a strange but sad fact that most students' grammar
collapses under this strain. True, you may not lose very many marks for
mistakes in language in some tests of this type, but you may lose at least
as many as you would by using the language of the text.
A second and even worse danger is that by trying to use your own
words you may distort your sentences so much that the examiner does
not understand what you are trying to say, and therefore gives you no
marks at all, since you seem not to have understood the point.
Finally, trying to think of how you are going to say something in your
own words takes up a lot of extra time, and time is probably just what
you cannot afford.
So here is a type of test where it is best for most people not to try to
achieve a perfect model. What you must always do, however, is make
sure you quote the piece of text that fits the question.
If you are faced with questions where it actually says that you must use
your own words, use the simplest words and grammar possible. (See the next
section, §286, on the duties of teachers as regards this type of test.)
When you are asked to explain what some expression means, don't try
to be a dictionary and give some abstract general definition. In the first
place, this is often very difficult even for a native speaker, and in any case
it is almost certainly not what is wanted. What the examiners want to
know is whether you have understood what you have read, and if you
can show, clearly, that you do, you will get the marks. So it is the meaning
of the expression in a particular context that matters; the knack is not to
define the word itself but to ask yourself simply: What is happening? If
you explain the reality described by the writer you will automatically
show you understand the expression. Use the simplest language you
know. That will be easiest and safest for you, and clearest for the
examiner.
I remember a passage that was set for a test of this type some years ago.
It was about making a tunnel through the Alps. Candidates were asked to
explain what 'make progress' meant - in the context of the passage. There
was no doubt about what the best answer was: 'dig/tunnel further'. Yet I
do not think you will find any dictionary in the world that will tell you
that progress has anything to do with digging or tunnelling.
Never get in a panic because there are words you do not understand.
There may even be quite a number of them. If you always concentrate on
meaning, and on the meaning of the passage as a whole, you will in most
252
cases be able to work out at least as much as you need to know about
them by studying the context carefully. Sample questions (vii) and (viii)
above were illustrations of this. You may not know what 'logged out'
means out of context. Yet not only was it very easy to work out from the
context of the passage, but another part of the passage even supplied the
word necessary to replace it: EXHAUSTED. As for 'stands', that was a
new word for me too. But it was immediately clear to me from the context
that it meant GROUPS OF TREES.
Short answers are best, provided they cover the question. Don't waste
time and words on introductions or any subject not directly connected
with the question. Further, at the beginning of your answer do not repeat
the question in the form of a statement. I know this is something that
schools in many parts of the world make pupils do. But it is completely
artificial - people don't do it in real life - and it wastes time.
You may be asked for a summary, as in the last of the sample questions
above. It is especially important to be systematic in your summary: listing
all the correct points will probably more often than not give you more
than half the marks available. Number the points down the margin
opposite the parts of the text where you find them. It is then best to
choose sentences or parts of sentences from the original text as far as
possible, but remembering that you must keep within a limited number of
words. If you try to write a completely fresh summary of your own you
will almost certainly find that it takes far longer, that you tend to get
confused, and that you make language mistakes.
Some people find it best to do the summary question first, precisely
because in that way they have to start by getting an overall picture of the
passage. They can then use this to guide them efficiently and quickly in
answering the shorter questions. Others, however, prefer to use the
detailed questions to build up to the summary. I prefer the first method,
which I think is more rational, but you must experiment and find out
which suits the way your own mind works.
Throughout tests of this kind just ask yourself at every question: 'Am I
showing the examiner, clearly, that I understand?' That's all you have to
do, and it is obviously best to do it in the simplest way possible.
§286 Comprehension / Writing - Advanced - Some
duties of teachers preparing students
However, most students probably do need help in learning how to do
that. The problem is that it is not always easy to find teachers who give
effective help.
What students need is a method that will work every time for everybody.
253
Yet 1 fear there are many conscientious teachers who burn the midnight
oil producing splendid answers to present to their appreciative students
the next day. The effect on most of those students will in fact be to depress
them greatly, because they know or suspect they can never do it
themselves. It will probably completely destroy the morale of any student
who has great difficulty with this type of test.
Teachers who go about it in this way are well-meaning, but they are
totally misguided. If candidates are expected to produce adequate
answers (in a foreign language, moreover) in whatever time is allotted,
and without any preparation, the least teachers can do is do the same. If
they can't, something is very wrong. I suggest teachers should not even
look at a practice paper until their students do; they should only give
themselves the same amount of time for thinking about the questions and
the answers to them as the students are going to get in the exam.
If they do this, teachers won't always produce solutions that satisfy
their linguistic or literary self-respect. Producing even only near-perfect
answers is difficult and time-consuming even for native speakers,
particularly if it is to be done in their own words. What teachers should
remember is that such fine answers do not serve their students in any
way.
If they put themselves in the position of their students as I have
suggested, I think they will very soon develop a technique that is as
practical and quick as it needs to be. A proper conscientiousness will lead
teachers to show their students a method they can actually use.
And here again if you are a student with a teacher you should insist
that you be shown such a useful method. Ask your teacher if she has
prepared her answers to the test you are discussing together beforehand.
If she says she has, ask her how she expects you to produce what she says
are the right answers in the time you will have in the real exam. Once
again, she must show you how.
§287 Compositions - Your list of 'favourite' mistakes
Immediately you sit down at your place in the examination room, take a
piece of paper and write down on it the list of the mistakes that you tend
to make. (See §262.)
Put the list in front of you where you can see it, and look at it often, as
you write, to remind yourself of your own special problems. If you do this
you will find it very difficult to make those particular mistakes. Here is an
imaginary example of what a personal list might be for students of
English as a foreign language:
Past/Present Perfect
254
NOT 'do something for doing' (purpose)
NOT 'the nature, the life'
since: NOT 'since three weeks'
NOT 'suggest somebody to do'
word order: NOT 'I eat seldom eggs'
if: NOT 'if I would'
NOT 'by my car'
NOT 'bigger as'
NOT 'a so beautiful town'
which, by the time the examination comes, you should have been able to
turn into a 'shorthand' list, like this:
Past/Present Perfect
Purpose
the
since
suggest
Word order
if
Transport prepositions
Comparisons
so/such
§288 Compositions - Do NOT copy your work out
It is an exam in language, not in handwriting! It is madness to copy your
composition out again, so whatever you do, don't! Time that you might
spend copying it out must be spent on essential things (see §292).
Many people, in fact, make their writing harder to read, not easier,
when they copy out, because they do it in such a tearing hurry. What is
more, many people make mistakes in copying that were not in their
original. Write carefully the first and only time, making sure the examiner
can read your writing.
Unless there are very strict rules preventing you, write on every second
line. Then, if you make a mistake, you can cross it out with one simple
single line and write your correction clearly on the empty line above.
Don't draw a lot of balloons and arrows and confuse yourself as well as
the examiners. Don't let your line become complicated, with lots of bits
added on to it. If necessary cross the whole line out and write it again
above.
§289 Compositions - Keep EXACTLY to your timetable
Let us imagine, for the sake of argument, that you have to write two
compositions of about 350 words each, in two hours. It is a pretty good
255
principle to devote a quarter of the total time of a composition exam
paper to checking at the end. This checking is vital. (See §292.) The total
time allowed in the example I have suggested is 120 minutes, so your
timetable should look like this:
At the end of 45 minutes stop, even if you are in the middle of a
sentence, and start the second composition. Rigid self-discipline is
essential here.
Do not write too much. You are wasting time if you do; and the more
you write the more possibilities there are for making mistakes. Stop at the
end of 45 minutes even if you have not written the number of words they
have told you to write. You can write a little more later.
There is a little practical trick you can use to count the number of words
you have written, not only in your compositions but in any parts of an
exam where you need to know how many. Never actually count each
separate word you write in an exam. That is a terrible waste of valuable
time. Instead, long before the exam, in fact when you first start preparing
for it, find out how many words you personally write on average in three
lines. Then, when you want to know at any time how many words you
have written, you need only quickly count how many groups of three
lines there are.
§290 Compositions - Write on the subject the paper
tells you to write on
You must write about the subject set in the examination; don't change the
subject and write about something slightly or completely different. Follow
the instructions on the paper.
§291 Compositions - Only write what you KNOW IS
RIGHT
You cannot pass with lots of mistakes, however clever you intend your
sentences to be. Remember that you must show the examiner what you
know, not what you do not know. If you do not make mistakes, and you
write on the subject they ask you to write on, you are certain to get fairly
good marks at least, even perhaps very good marks. So if you are not
absolutely sure that what you want to write is correct, do not write it.
Write something different.
In a composition nobody makes you write particular words, so don't
256
make yourself do so. It is quite true that the examiners will want you to use
language that suits the subject. But your language will not suit the subject
if it is wrong.
It is an examination in language, not in philosophy or originality.
For this reason, too, if you have a choice of subjects you should not
always choose the subjects that interest you or that you like. Choose the
subjects that you know most of the foreign language about. If you are
crazy about boats and the sea, for example, and one of the subjects given
happens to be 'sailing', do not write about them unless you know the
foreign words you must use. Choose another subject.
§292 Compositions - Check for each of your 'favourite'
mistakes SEPARATELY
If at the end of the time you have allotted to actually writing the
compositions you have written too few words, you will have to add a few
more. But finish as quickly as you can.
You should spend as much as possible of your final period - 30
minutes, or whatever
it is - on checking in the way I have described in §266. This may make the
difference between you passing and not passing the whole examination. It
is more important to finish the paper and check than to have beautiful,
perfect endings.
Please, whatever you do, never leave the examination room early,
however much you are dying for a cigarette or a cup of coffee. There is
always important work for you to do. You cannot check too often, if you
do it in the right way.
I would like to make a special suggestion to all speakers of languages
without definite or indefinite articles (English 'the' and 'a') who are taking
exams in languages that have them. For you the problem is usually, of
course, that you leave the article out. So it is no good worrying in a
general way about articles, however passionately, because you cannot
study what is not there!
You must think about nouns.
When you check, think about every noun you have written in turn and
decide whether it needs an article, and if so, which. (Chinese- and
Japanese-speakers, among others, should ask themselves three questions
about every noun, in the following order: Should it be plural? Should
there be a preposition? Should there be an article? The question about the
article comes last because the answer often depends on the answer to the
first two questions.)
§293 Compositions - Don't make avoidable mistakes
257
through being too ambitious
There is something very important to bear in mind about compositions in
exams at more advanced levels. I emphasize again the point I made in
§260. My advice is not for those who are confident they can write top
grade essays in the foreign language. It is for those who worry that they
will not be able to write well enough..
One of the worst things you can do if you are not confident is to try to
be clever. You will almost certainly fail at advanced levels if you try to do
what you cannot do because you feel you have to write very 'advanced',
very elegant, very sophisticated language. You may be impressed by the
high standard of the exam you are taking, and the standard may indeed
be high. But an essential way in which it will be high is that you must
quite simply not make a lot of mistakes. Mistakes that are allowed in
lower level exams are not permissible at the higher levels.
There are examining bodies who say that in exams at advanced levels
they are looking for linguistic ambition, width of vocabulary, vocabulary
that suits the context, and naturalness of style. They object to the constant
repetition of the short simple subject-verb-object type of clause.
But they will also be looking for correct grammar, punctuation and
spelling, and use of the right words. To quote one examining body,
candidates are often below standard 'because their control of language is
not adequate for the thoughts they wish to express' and they go in for 'the
meaningless contortions of 'translatese".
So we must come back to the basic principle. Do not show the examiner
what you do not know. It is useless to be ambitious in a composition if
you do not have the means for achieving your ambition. It is useless to
attempt a style you cannot achieve in the foreign language. It is useless to
use words you do not know how to use. It is useless to try to produce
everything that the examiners require if all you produce is incorrect
grammar, illogical sentences and the wrong words.
If you are very, very good at the foreign language - and, as I say, my
advice is not for you - you will perhaps be able to express yourself as
effectively in the foreign language as you can in your own. But most
people cannot get anywhere near this, and it is foolish to try. The only
results will be that you use words in the wrong way, that you write
'translatese' nonsense (translating direct from your own language), that
you produce muddled, illogical sentences, and make grammar mistakes
that you would never make in simpler, less ambitious sentences.
Examiners may not like the subject-verb-object type of sentence. But a
subject-verb-object sentence that is right is much better than a confused
258
complicated sentence that is wrong. Bad mistakes cannot be natural style
and incorrectness cannot be width and suitability of vocabulary.1
§294 Compositions - Use simple language
Again and again we must come back to the truth that it is no good
showing the examiner what you cannot do. And do not despise short
sentences and simple language. Two of the finest twentieth-century
writers in English on the sort of subject you will often be asked to write
compositions on in advanced level exams were Bertrand Russell and
George Orwell. They both wrote simply and clearly, often in very short
sentences. You will find you can often keep yourself out of trouble by
remembering that the/u// stop is your best friend.
In many languages there is a danger in building sentences that are built
around nouns. Some languages tend to do this more than others. English
used not to be one of them, but in the last few decades academic, or
'scientific', writing has had a fearful influence on the way English is used.
My favourite example is from an American scientific journal: 'The fish
[Actually the writer could not bring himself to use such a simple word he used a word I do not remember exactly, beginning 'ichth...'.] displayed
a one hundred per cent mortality response.' I guess he meant they all
died.
Sentences based on nouns are in many languages much more difficult
to get right. Much more knowledge is needed to fit nouns correctly into a
sentence, because for them the linguistic conventions tend to be far
stricter. One has to know the particular verbs, the particular adjectives,
the particular prepositions that fit a given noun. One usually has far
greater freedom if one makes verbs the key words of one's sentences; one
is much less likely to make mistakes with sentences based on verbs.
To continue with English as an illustration:
These cars can travel at very high speeds.
This is a simple example of a noun-based sentence. It is based on 'speeds'.
To get it right we have to know that:
(a) 'speed' can be used as a countable as well as an uncountable noun;
(b) 'high' - not 'fast' - is the conventional adjective with 'speed';
(c) 'at' is the right preposition with 'speed';
(d) 'travel' is a correct verb with 'speed' - 'go' would not be truly
idiomatic in this sentence.
But if we choose 'go' as the key to our sentence, we have no need of any
special knowledge of that kind. We simply say:
These cars can go very fast.
You personally may have known all the points (a)-(d) that I have
259
explained above, even if you are not a native English-speaker. But I hope
you can understand the principle. Here is a more complicated example
where you may not know the various 'rules' of vocabulary.
Doubts might be entertained in certain quarters as to whether an alternative
procedure might not, in preference, be adopted.
The sentence is formed around the nouns 'doubts', 'quarters', 'procedure'
and 'preference'. First of all we have to know that those are themselves the
right nouns to use.
Having got that far we have to know that 'entertain' and 'adopt' are the
right verbs for 'doubts' and 'procedure', that the adjective 'alternative'
suits 'procedure', that 'in' is the right preposition for both 'quarters' and
'preference', and that the proper expression linking 'doubts' and the
second part of the sentence is 'as to whether'. Isn't it better to say what the
sentence in practice simply means?
Some people might think there is a better way.
Here the verbs 'think' and 'is' are the key words.
§295 Compositions - Construction: don't waste time on
it
Examining bodies may emphasize that compositions or essays at
advanced levels should be well constructed and thought out, with a clear
pattern of connected ideas. Although they may not demand that essays
should be particularly original or interesting, they may criticize
candidates for not dealing with the subject properly, or for jumping
suddenly from one point to another.
However, do not forget that examiners' judgement of these things is to
a very large extent subjective. No two examiners are going to mark a
composition exactly alike in these respects.
It is therefore impossible to know in advance how the examiners are
going to judge your compositions as regards organization and the
development of your ideas. So in your preparation for the examination, I
believe that spending time and effort on essay organization, if you are still
making a lot of mistakes in your grammar and vocabulary, is a luxury
you cannot afford. A sense of proportion is needed here. Please get your
grammar and vocabulary right first.
Grammar and vocabulary are objective problems. You can know
definitely whether you are right or wrong. Concentrate on this area of
certainty, not on the vague uncertainty of beautifully constructed essays.
If you can write largely without mistakes you will be very unlucky if you
do not get at least reasonable marks. You might even get very good ones.
But you won't if you make bad mistakes, however well your essay is
260
organized.
Once again you must be firm with your teacher. If your composition
teacher spends time on essay construction, talking to you about how to
produce striking beginnings,2 elegantly developed middle sections and
effective endings, and about details like paragraphing, you should ask
him whether these things are going to make the difference between
passing and failing for you personally; whether he is confident that you
have already shown that your practical command of grammar and
vocabulary is so good that there is no doubt that you will pass as far as
they are concerned; whether all that is needed to tip the balance is some
training in essay construction.
§296 Compositions - Summing up
The biggest mistake you can make in compositions in advanced
examinations is to aim too high. If you fail to achieve your aim, the best
you can hope for is precisely that: that you fail to achieve it. But the worst
and the more probable result is that your mistakes will cause you to lose
far more marks than you would have lost if you had not been so
ambitious.
So wherever you are not absolutely certain of yourself: keep it simple.
Notes
1 But in preparing for writing discussion-type essays it is well worth
learning a number of beginnings to sentences or paragraphs, e.g. 'This is
clearly a problem of the greatest importance', 'I think we must define
what we mean by (democracy)', 'From the earliest times (the individual)
has (been the victim of society)', 'Where (road transport) is concerned...',
'A good thing about (the new technique) is...', 'The same applies to...',
'On the other hand...'. If you can learn thirty or so of these, and use
them at the right point, you will find that not only do they greatly
impress the examiner, but that they take up a nice lot of words on the
page, thereby saving you the trouble and time of thinking of some more
ideas to fill up the space with.
2 My advice should perhaps be modified in one respect here, however. If
you can master a small set of elegant opening sentences that you know
are absolutely right and that can be adapted to a variety of subjects, and
can use one of them at the beginning of each composition in an exam,
you may well influence the examiner in your favour. Exam markers are
human too. While a single superb sentence right at the end of an
otherwise mediocre or downright poor composition is unlikely to do
you any extra good, at the very beginning it will very possibly make the
examiner think more kindly about the rest.
261
APPENDICES
262
APPENDIX 1
UNSTRESSED SYLLABLES AND WEAK FORMS' IN
ENGLISH (AG)
(Readers may find it useful to study this appendix in conjunction with
Appendix 2.)
Unstressed Syllables
The pronunciation of English is largely a mixture of energetic, strongly
stressed syllables, and lazy, unstressed syllables; it can be likened to a
series of highly contrasted peaks and troughs. More often than not, native
English-speakers pronounce a syllable that is unstressed differently from
the way they would pronounce it if it was stressed. 'Agony', for instance,
is pronounced
while 'ago' is pronounced
(' indicates that the syllable that follows it is stressed.)
The vowels of most unstressed syllables are pronounced /a/, as in
'another'
'opinion'
'circular'
'author'
'better'
'creature'
'temperament'
'Birmingham'
'Napoleon'
'considerate'
'colour'
'dangerous'
Unstressed /I/ nearly always remains /I/. Unstressed 'e' is often
pronounced /I/ as well (e.g. 'because' =
'expensive' =
'ticket' =
but, as we have seen with 'temperament', it too can be pronounced as
There are a fair number of exceptions to this tendency to pronounce
unstressed vowels as
Nevertheless, it is an outstanding
263
characteristic of the pronunciation of English,
is easily the most
common sound in the language. It has been calculated that in southern
British English it makes up almost 11% of all sounds. A child who uses
one of the several variations of English pronunciation in which final 'r' is
not pronounced, and whose spelling is not yet very good, might well
write 'Canada' as 'Canerder' (both pronounced
and 'Hitler' as 'Hitla' (both pronounced
Weak Forms
As native English-speakers pronounce some unstressed syllables
differently from stressed ones, there are naturally a number of short
words - nearly all of them one-syllable words, in fact - that they
pronounce in one way if the word is stressed, and in a different way if it is
not. The unstressed form of these words is called the 'weak form'.
Most students of English as a foreign language know that 'the' and 'a'
are pronounced
and
respectively. But many,
unfortunately, do not realize that these words are usually pronounced in
this way only because they are usually unstressed, and that if they are
stressed, their 'strong' form
and
is used. (E.g.
'Paul McCartney's here? Do you mean the Paul McCartney?' and 'It may
be a reason, but it's not the only reason.') They do not realize that 'the' and
'a' are only two of the short words whose pronunciation varies according
to stress.
In almost every case the vowel of the weak forms is pronounced
The main exceptions are: (1) where the stressed vowel is
or
and becomes or remains
(2) where the long /u:/ sometimes
becomes the short /u/ ('do', 'to'); (3) where the form is weakened so much
that the word is contracted and the vowel sound disappears altogether
(she'll etc.).
Nearly all the words with weak forms are among the fifty most
common words in English. Nobody who knows their everyday English
grammar will normally have any difficulty recognizing these words,
however fast, unstressed and unclearly they are spoken. (Very often they
sound, not as an articulated word, but as little more than a 'beat' in the
264
rhythm of speech.) This is because they are just the words one would
expect from the context in order to complete the logic of the sentence. In
the following examples you will notice that all the vowels of the weakform words (in smaller print in the normal alphabet version) are
pronounced /a/ (except for 'the' in 5).
In cases like 4 it might seem possible for listeners to think they heard
words other than 'should', particularly if the words are spoken very fast
and unclearly. But in practice the 'sh' sound
together with
what is grammatically necessary and the meaning of the context, means
the weak-form word can only be 'should'.
Notice the contrast between the weak and strong forms of 'are' in 5. The
second 'are' has to be stressed, because there is no other word in the
clause to show its meaning unstressed 'some are' would sound like
'summer'; but if we added 'bad', this 'are' would become
as well.
The third 'are' can be weak because the strong 'not' makes the meaning
clear. We could instead weaken the 'not' to
but then we
would have to leave 'are' in its strong form
Notice, again, the contrast between the weak and strong forms of 'do' in
6. The first 'do' is 'only' an auxiliary verb and is there simply to complete
the grammatical logic of the sentence. But the second 'do', pronounced
is a main verb, essential to the particular meaning of the sentence.
This gives the key to deciding which words should be unstressed and
spoken in their weak form. The words that are unstressed are those that
are not crucial for understanding the particular meaning of a sentence. It
is not in practice difficult to choose the right ones, and students very
seldom have any trouble doing so if they just think of practical meaning.
Here is a list of the most important words which are pronounced in
both strong and weak forms. I have included the weak forms which result
265
from contraction (e.g. I'm), (r) means that /r/ (or a variation of it) is heard
before a vowel sound in all the various pronunciations of English, and in
all or most positions in many types of English pronunciation (Scottish,
American, etc.).
266
As you can see, many of these words have more than one weak form. The
faster a person speaks, the 'weaker' the form tends to be.
No student of English who has not mastered the pronunciation of the
weak forms will be able to speak the language in a natural way. Equally,
it will be very difficult for anybody who is not aware of the weak forms to
recognize a lot of the most important words and grammar of spoken
English.
3 No more than /fr/ may be heard, for example, in a phrase like 'for
instance': /fnnstans/.
4 The contracted form s is pronounced /z/ after voiced consonants and
/s/ after voiceless consonants.
5 'should' is never contracted to the form /d/ when it has the sense 'ought
to'.
6 Notice how demonstrative 'that' is always pronounced in the strong
form. This is quite logical, as demonstratives are by the very nature of
their meaning always stressed.
7 The contracted form /s/ is used only in the expression 'let's', and only
then when 'let' has the sense of urging an action on 'ourselves', e.g. Let's
think! = We should all think, 'us' after 'let' used in the sense of 'allow' is
not contracted, e.g. Let us think! = Allow us to think, don't stop us
thinking!
267
APPENDIX 2
THE INTERNATIONAL PHONETIC ALPHABET
The charts below are those published by the International Phonetic
Association, revised to 1993. We are very grateful to Marion Shirt and the
Association for providing them and letting us use them.
There is no need for language learners to learn the meaning of all the
terms in the charts or the exact tongue and mouth positions that the
various symbols refer to. If you learn a language from books that use the
international phonetic alphabet, and you are interested, you can discover
a lot about the terms as you go along. We do not at all wish to suggest
that it is a waste of time to study the way the sounds of speech are
produced, or the words phoneticians use to describe them. Many people
find it a fascinating and rewarding subject . We only want to point out
that a knowledge of phonetic terminology and the physiology of the
speech organs is not necessary for acquiring a good, even perfect, accent
in a foreign language.
What makes the phonetic alphabet so useful is that once you have
heard the sounds of a language, and your book has shown you what
phonetic symbols they are represented by, you can discover the
pronunciation of any new word if it is written in the phonetic script. For
those unfamiliar with the alphabet, we print many of the symbols below,
and illustrate them with words from some European languages. It is
important, though, to understand that if sounds from two or more
different languages are represented by the same phonetic symbol, the
sounds are not necessarily exactly the same. There are often slight
variations from language to language, and the only way to learn the exact
pronunciation in each language is to listen to it.
There are two terms it might be useful to explain here: 'voiced' and
'voiceless'. To produce a voiced sound we vibrate the vocal chords. For
example, in English, V, 'd' and 'g', as pronounced in 'bad' and 'good', are
voiced sounds. In voiceless sounds the vocal chords are not vibrated.
English 'p', 't' and 'k' - or 'ck' or 'c' - as in 'pat', 'cat' and 'kick', are voiceless.
Some letters are sometimes pronunced voiced, sometimes voiceless. In
English again, for instance, V is sometimes voiced, as in 'rise', while in
both places in 'sister' it is voiceless; 'th' in 'this' is voiced, 'th' in 'think' is
voiceless.
In the table below, the English referred to is the British 'Received
Pronunciation' (RP).
268
269
270
271
APPENDIX 3
MINILEX A: ENGLISH-SWEDISH
The best use can be made of this list if it is used together with the Swedish
Minigram (Appendix 5) and the cassette tape of Appendices 3 and 4
available (from January 1996) from Erik V. Gunnemark (Södra Vägen 30,
412 54 Gothenburg, Sweden, price including postage SKr 300 inside
Europe, SKr 320 elsewhere.
We mark here: T-nouns, i.e. neuter nouns (T); irregular plurals; the
plurals of common nouns (N-nouns) ending in -er (marked -er); adjectives
with irregular neuter or plural/determinative; adjectives with irregular
comparison; irregular verbs and all verbs not belonging to the -ade
conjugation (-de/-te verbs are marked de or -te).
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
APPENDIX 4
MINIPHRASE A + B: ENGLISH-SWEDISH
The best use can be made of this list if it is used in conjunction with the
cassette tape available (from January 1996) from Erik V. Gunnemark
(Södra Vägen 30,412 54 Gothenburg, Sweden, price including postage SKr
300 inside Europe, SKr 320 elsewhere).
Swedish colloquial pronunciation
There follows first a numbered list of the words or word types of
everyday Swedish speech that are normally pronounced differently from
their spelling. The pronunciation is given in the international phonetic
script.
In the list of phrases, every phrase that contains a word with a 'colloquial'
pronunciation has the number(s) of the word(s) printed in square brackets
at the end of the phrase, e.g. Kan jag hjälpa dig? [15,11]
287
The Swedish equivalent of 'you'
Expressing the equivalent of 'you' in Swedish used to be, within the
lifetime of many people still living, a complicated social 'process'. Even at
its simplest it involved the distinction between the familiar 'du' and the
more formal 'ni'.
Today, however, DU (object pronoun DIG) is the word used to address
others which comes completely naturally to some 90% of the population
of Sweden. If Swedish is not your mother tongue, you have, so to speak,
the 'right' to use 'du' with everybody and anybody. It has gained general
acceptance as a neutral mode of address. In other words it has come to
correspond almost completely to the English 'you'.
The only occasions when it might be preferable to use NI (object
pronoun ER) are when you first meet 'elderly' people. Some members of
the older generation have strong objections to being addressed as 'du',
and their sensibilities should be respected.
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
APPENDIX 5
MINIGRAM: SWEDISH
Nouns
Genders
There are two genders in modern Swedish (from the point of view of the
inflexion of nouns and adjectives:
Common gender (called N-nouns below)
Neuter gender (called T-nouns below)*
*N-nouns mostly correspond to der- and die- nouns in German, T-nouns
to das- nouns, e.g. huset/ das Haus
304
305
306
307
308
APPENDIX 6
THE INTERCONTINENTAL DICTIONARY SERIES
(IDS)
General Editor: Mary Ritchie Key, University of
California, Irvine
Purpose
This is a pioneering effort that will have global impact. The purpose of the
IDS is to establish a database where lexical material across the continents
is organized in such a way that comparisons can be made. Historical
studies and comparative and theoretical linguistic research can be based
on this documentation. It is a long-term cooperative project that will go
on for the next generation or so and will involve linguists all over the
world. It is aimed toward international understanding and cooperation.
Thanks to the IDS, information will be preserved on the little-known and
'non-prestigious' languages of the world, many of which are becoming
extinct.
Need for IDS
Information on languages of the world is scattered over all the continents
and islands and published in dozens of languages and scripts. There is
need for a database where one can find comparable material to formulate
hypotheses and test and validate those theories. For example, theories on
intercontinental connections have been proposed on the basis of the
distribution of 'sweet potato' and yet there is no single source where this
form can be found with examples from many languages. Good
quantitative and statistical studies are almost impossible to do at present
in non-Western languages. The IDS will provide a quantitative base for a
scientific approach to language analysis and comparisons as well as the
research tools necessary for expanding such studies as phonological
theory, word formation, language change, lexical distribution, symbolism
and onomatopoeia, classification, and other ideas that have to do with the
history of peoples and migrations. The IDS will serve not only as a
synonym dictionary, but also as an index to meaning and to the cultures
of various peoples around the earth. It should be noted that no
comparable work has ever been produced for non-Indo-European
languages.
Plan of series
The IDS series may appear (1) in a volume, with 25 or more languages
309
recorded; (2) in a fascicle, with 5 to 10 languages recorded; (3) as single
wordlists, which are archived until enough are gathered to make up a
fascicle or volume.
Format
Comparative work in Indo-European languages has been carried on for
over 200 years, and excellent research tools have been produced. This
experience forms a basis for IDS research. An obvious model was A
Dictionary of Selected Synonyms in the Principal Indo-European Languages,
compiled by Carl Darling Buck. (University of Chicago Press, 1949, 1515
pages, reprinted 1988 with reduced pages.) This is organized by topics in
22 chapters (see the Table of Contents below). The IDS adaptation has the
same outline, with over 1,300 entries. The entries will be in two or three
languages, with English first and the language(s) of the area alongside.
Each fascicle and volume will be produced in the same format, which will
ensure the elegance of having comparable material.
Editors and contributors
Each volume etc. will have one or more editors, as well as groups of
contributors. The scholars are chosen for their interest in cross-cultural
research and for their skills and willingness to give time and thought to
the objectives of the IDS. The contributors of language data generally
have a high level of field work and experience in the language. No
salaries are paid to any of the contributors or editors.
Origin of IDS
The idea for a work such as the IDS came while Mary Ritchie Key was on
a Fulbright scholarship in Chile in 1975 studying the semantic groupings
in the cognate sets of comparative studies. In 1984 an award from the
University of California, Irvine, set the series on its way. In 1990 the IDS
won an Honourable Mention from the Rolex Awards for Enterprise, one
of the finest distinctions that a pioneering scholar can receive.
Future possibilities
The immediate product of this intercontinental enterprise is a dictionary
series, but the prospects for future development are limitless. An 'IDS
Center' will become a clearinghouse for comparative work between the
continents. It could also serve as a repository where retiring scholars can
leave their unpublished materials; thus it will ensure preservation and
continuity of unpublished work-in-progress. And finally, it will bring
together data on the languages of the world in a way that will give
importance to all languages.
Charter Honorary Board, formed in 1983-1984
310
Henry M. Hoenigswald, University of Pennsylvania; Winifred P.
Lehmann, University of Texas; Andre Martinet, Universite Rene
Descartes, Paris; Stanley S. Newman, University of New Mexico.
International Advisory Board
Raimo Anttila, University of California, Los Angeles; Brent Berlin,
University of California, Berkeley; Christos Clairis, Universite Rene
Descartes, Paris; Bernard Comrie, University of Southern California;
Sheila Embleton, York University; Joshua Fishman, Yeshiva University;
Thomas V. Gamkrelidze, University of Tbilisi, Georgia; Joseph H.
Greenberg, Stanford University; Carleton T. Hodge, Indiana University;
Saul Levin, State University of New York, Binghampton; H. Joachim
Neuhaus, Westfalische WilhelmsUniversitat, Munster; Ambrosio
Rabanales, Universidad de Chile, Santiago; Johannes Wilbert, University
of California, Los Angeles.
Carl Darling Buck. A dictionary of selected synonyms in the principal IndoEuropean languages: A contribution to the history of ideas.. University of
Chicago Press, 1949,1515 pages. Reprinted 1988 with reduced pages.
311
NEWS RELEASE (1994)
Gothenburg scholar appointed Chief Editor of the Eurasia volumes, part of one
of the 20th century's greatest language projects
Erik V. Gunnemark (Gothenburg) - well-known as a translator from some
45 languages - is now the Chief Editor of the Eurasia part of the
INTERCONTINENTAL DICTIONARY SERIES (IDS). These volumes will
comprise wordlists for many languages in Scandinavia and the ex-USSR
which are not found in C.D. Buck's famous Indo-European dictionary of
1949.
The choice of Erik V. Gunnemark as Chief Editor for the Eurasian
312
volumes was above all in consideration of his contributions in the
interdisciplinary field of geolinguistics, his long experience in work on
basic dictionaries, and his thorough knowledge of Russian and many
other languages.
Great store was also set by the unique network of contacts he has built
up since the 1960s in the course of producing his books Countries, peoples
and their languages: the Geolinguistic Handbook (with Donald Kenrick,
London), Konsten att lara sig spr&k ('The art of learning languages') and
The art and science of learning languages (with Amorey Gethin, Cambridge).
For the work on the Eurasian wordlists Erik V. Gunnemark has called
on the assistance of the following editors:
Scandinavian languages: Ola J. Holten from Surnadal, Norway, now
living on the Swedish west-coast island of Tjorn. (Expert on numerous
subjects, including medieval runic characters, such as on the Kensington
stone in Minnesota.)
Romani: Donald Kenrick, London. (World-famous as a specialist on the
Gypsies and their language.)
Uralic languages: Ago Kiinnap, Tartu, Estonia. (Professor of Uralic
languages. Knows a large number of Finno-Ugric and Samoyed languages
and works with a wide network of experts in Scandinavia, Russia, etc.)
The IDS - the Intercontinental Dictionary Series - is undoubtedly one of
the century's most important language projects. With their commentaries,
the wordlists will be a mine of information for linguists and ethnologists
and generally for all those interested in languages, peoples and cultures
throughout the world.
313
APPENDIX 7
GRAMMATICAL TERMS
The purpose of this appendix is to explain some basic terms that we think
English-speaking learners of foreign languages may find useful. It
contains only a very small proportion of the terms used by specialist
students of linguistics.
ablative
The ablative case is used in some languages to express ideas such as the
agent, instrument, cause, movement from (see case).
accidence - see morphology and morphemes
accusative
The accusative case is normally the object case (see case and object).
active voice
The parts of a verb used when the subject is the actual 'doer' of an
action. The active voice is in contrast to the passive voice. In 'The dog
greeted the postman', 'greeted' is active. In 'The postman was greeted
by the dog', 'was greeted' is passive.
adjective
A word that describes a noun. Adjectives can be attributive (a large
dog), or predicative (the dog is large).
adverb
A word answering questions such as 'How?', 'When?', 'Where?', and
qualifying verbs (Cook it slowly), adjectives (I'm extremely hungry),
other adverbs (We'll eat very soon), prepositions (Spread crumbs all
over the top), and conjunctions (Use it only when it is properly
defrosted).
adverbial phrase
A combination of words that functions as an adverb (Put the dish in the
middle of the oven).
agent
Person or thing that performs the action of a verb, particularly a passive
verb, and in English most often introduced by 'by'. (Our supper has
been eaten by the dog. He was hit by a piece of flying glass. It is
introduced by 'by'.)
agreement
Words 'agreeing' with each other as regards number, gender etc. Here
are four examples from different languages: In the English phrase 'that
girl', the singular 'that' agrees with the singular 'girl'; in 'those girls'
there is agreement between the plurals 'those' and 'girls'. In Italian there
314
is agreement of feminine forms in a phrase such as 'quelk belk ragazzd'
(that beautiful girl). In the German phrase 'das schone Madchen' (the
beautiful girl) there is agreement between the nominative neuter
definite article 'das', the nominative neuter definite form of the
adjective 'schön' (i.e. schöne), and the nominative form of the neuter
noun 'Mädchen'. In many languages there has to be agreement between
person and verb ending, as in Spanish 'hablo' (I speak) and 'las
muchachas hablan' (the girls speak).
aorist
The name of a tense in some languages. It has varying meanings: for
example, in Greek and Sanskrit it indicates various aspects of past time,
while in Turkish there are both present and past aorists.
articles
In English the definite article is 'the', the indefinite article 'a(n)'. The
English articles are indeclinable (the addition of n to 'a' before vowel
sounds is a phonetic convention) but the articles in many languages
have inflexions for gender (e.g. French 'le', 'la', and 'un', 'une') and
number (e.g. French 'les'), and some are inflected for case as well, such
as German and Greek. (The German definite article, for example, thus
has twelve forms in the singular alone, although only six different ones,
since those for some case and gender combinations coincide with each
other - e.g. the masculine nominative is the same as the feminine
genitive, 'der'.) In some languages the definite article is attached to the
end of the noun, as in Romanian 'avionul' (the aeroplane) or Swedish
'boken' (the book). Many languages do not have any articles, either
definite or indefinite - Chinese, Japanese, and Russian are examples
among the major languages. There are also languages which have an
indefinite article but no definite article, or vice-versa.
attributive
An attributive adjective qualifies a noun. Attributive adjectives usually
go before their noun in English (the red house), but in many languages
they can go after the noun, as in Italian ('la casa rossa' = 'the red house',
but literally 'the house red'). Adjectives used attributively are in
contrast to adjectives (or nouns) used predicatively, which form part or
the whole of the predicate, i.e. say something about the subject (That
house is red). Not all adjectives can be both predicative and attributive.
'Ill', for example, is used predicatively (The man is ill), but not normally
attributively [the ill man] (cf. the sick man), while 'main' is attributive
(the main problem) but not predicative [The problem is main].
auxiliary verb
A 'helping' verb, used to complete certain forms of verbs. (He has
315
arrived. - French: II est arrive. Swedish: Han har kommit. - She is
sleeping. They will be told. Do you know?) Verbs such as 'can', 'must',
'may', 'should', etc. (Can you help me?) are sometimes described as
(modal) auxiliaries as well.
cardinal numbers
These are 'one', 'two', 'three', 'four' etc. cf. ordinal numbers
case
A form of nouns and pronouns, and sometimes other types of word,
which shows their relationship to other words. English uses few case
forms: the genitive (or possessive) is the only case form that nouns have
apart from the basic form (the cat's food, the dogs' tails); all English
personal pronouns except 'you' have a nominative (or subject) case (I,
he, etc.) and an accusative (or object) case (me, him, etc.). But many
languages have several cases. German, for instance, has four, which are
used for the articles and adjectives as well as for nouns. Turkish has six.
Sometimes a whole extra meaning is included in the case itself, as in the
examples above ('des Marines' by itself means 'of the man', and 'otobüste'
by itself means 'on the bus'). But there are many meanings where an extra
word, often a preposition, is necessary, and this word is used with a
particular case, e.g. the German 'mit' (with), which takes the Dative (mit
dem Wagen - with the car), or the Turkish preposition (or, strictly
speaking, postposition) 'sonra' (after), which takes the Ablative (tatilden
sonra - the holidays after = after the holidays). Some languages have an
even greater number of cases, such as Finnish, which has fifteen.
clause
Part of a complex sentence with its own subject and predicate. In 'When
316
they began to work together they fell in love', 'they fell in love' is the
main clause and 'When they began to work together' is a subordinate
clause. A main clause makes sense when it stands by itself; a
subordinate clause, normally starting with a conjunction, does not.
comparative
The form of an adjective or adverb that expresses the idea of 'more' or
'less', e.g. in English 'more difficult', 'less difficult'. In Germanic
languages the 'more' idea can be expressed by a word ending (e.g.
English '-er': harder). But in the Latin languages, for instance, for most
adjectives there exist only the equivalents of 'more' and 'less' (e.g.
Spanish 'mas' and 'menos': mas alto - higher).
comparison of adjectives and adverbs
The comparative and superlative forms.
compound
Compound words are made up of two or more parts, which can often
stand as separate words in their own right (toothbrush). 'Compound' is
also used of verb forms consisting of more than one word (has gone, is
being met). Some languages, such as other Germanic languages, have
many more and often longer compound words than English.
concord - see agreement
conditional - see mood
conjugation
A system of verb inflexions. For instance, in the conjugation of the
present indicative of the Italian verb 'arrivare' (arrive) the root, or stem,
is 'arriv-' and the inflexions are:
The inflexions can vary according to voice, mood, tense, number or
person. In English there is only one regular conjugation, but in some
languages there are several. The 3rd person singular present of the
Italian 'perdere' (lose), for example, is not [perda] but 'perde' (he loses);
'perdere' belongs to the 2nd conjugation, while 'arrivare' belongs to the
1st.
conjunction
317
A word joining sentences, clauses, or other words (and, but, if, when,
etc.).
conjunctive
The name of a mood sometimes used instead of 'subjunctive'.
continuous
A form of the verb (sometimes called 'progressive'), which is
characterized in English by the ending -ing used with the verb 'be' and
in Spanish by the ending -ando or -iendo used with the verb 'estar'. 'He is
eating' (Spanish 'Está comiendo'), for instance, is in the present
continuous, and the continuous form exists for the other tenses as well.
(We shall be eating. They were eating, etc.) The passive, too, can be in the
continuous. (We were being followed.) Not all languages have this form
- most west European languages, for example, do not - but a major
language which does is Japanese. In contrast to the continuous form is
the 'simple' form. ('He eats' - Spanish 'Come'.) The two forms of the
various tenses are often misleadingly described as separate tenses.
Tenses distinguish times, while the simple and continuous forms
distinguish other aspects of the meaning of verbs. 'He ate' and 'he was
eating' are not different tenses; they are both past tense, but different
forms of it.
Neither of the terms 'simple' and 'continuous' give any useful indication
of the real meaning of the respective forms, so it is proposed that in
future they should be called FACTUAL and ACTIONAL, at any rate for
languages such as English and Spanish. 'Actions!' gives a very good
idea of the use of the so-called 'continuous', and although 'factual' is an
incomplete description of the form concerned, it tells one at least
something useful about it, whereas 'simple' tells one nothing except
what one already knows, namely that it is not a compound form,
contraction
Shortening words. Very often this also involves joining words together,
and sometimes modifying them as well. 'It's', 'don't', 'they'll' are
examples in colloquial English. But whereas contraction in English
mostly only takes place in the spoken language, or in written dialogue,
there are languages that use contractions consistently in both the
written and spoken language. For example: the French 'eau' (feminine,
= water) and its definite article 'la' are combined to produce Teau'
(omitting the vowel in this way is called 'elision'); 'de' (of) and 'le'
(masculine article) combine into 'du'. Sometimes the way words are
combined can in fact increase their length, rather than shorten them. In
Italian, for instance, 'di' (of) and 'lo' (one of the forms of the definite
article) combine to make 'dello', as in 'dello stato' (of the state).
318
dative
The dative case is used in some languages for the indirect object, or to
express movement towards (see case and indirect object).
declension (declinable)
System of varying endings of nouns, pronouns, adjectives or articles.
See case.
defective verb
A verb which does not have all the usual forms. 'Can', for example, has
the form 'could', but no others (e.g. no infinitive, so one cannot say [you
will can]).
defining relative - see relative
definite article - see articles
determinative - see determiner
determiner
Word that limits or determines a noun, such as 'the', 'this', 'that' and
possessives (my, etc.).
direct speech - see indirect speech
elision - see contraction
emphatic - see reflexive
feminine - see gender
finite - see mood
gender
One of the groups into which many languages divide nouns (and
pronouns) and the adjectives, articles and sometimes (e.g. Russian)
verbs that go with them. Theoretically the division is on the basis of sex,
but in practice in most languages the division is mainly arbitrary. The
divisions vary from language to language. In most Latin languages, for
example, there are only two genders, masculine and feminine. For
instance, the French word 'jour' is masculine, and so takes the
masculine definite article (le jour = the day), while 'semaine' is feminine
and takes the feminine definite article (la semaine = the week). In
modern Swedish as well there are effectively only two, but they are the
common gender, which combines masculine and feminine, and neuter
('en dag', common = a day, 'ett ar', neuter = a year); in German there are
three ('der Tag', masculine = the day, 'die Woche', feminine = the week,
'das Jahr', neuter = the year). There are very few distinctions of gender
in English: they are confined to third person pronouns and a small
number of nouns where they are based on a real difference of sex (actor,
actress, etc.).
genitive
The genitive case is often used as the possessive case (see case).
319
gerund - see participle
idiom
An expression consisting of more than one word that is characteristic of
a language and whose meaning is not obvious from knowledge of each
of the separate words and of the grammar, but must be learnt as a
whole (put up with, drop a brick).
imperative
One of the moods of verbs - see mood
imperfect
The name of a tense used in many languages ('imparfait' in French,
'imperfetto' in Italian, 'imperfecto' in Spanish). The equivalent of the
English past tense, including its continuous form, is usually expressed
in such languages either by this imperfect tense, or by the past historic.
See tense
indeclinable
An indeclinable word does not have any inflexions (case endings etc.),
that is to say, it is invariable, it has only one form.
indefinite article - see articles
indicative
One of the moods of verbs - see mood
indirect object
Thing or person affected by the action of a verb, but not directly so. In 'I
gave him a book' the direct object is 'a book'; 'him' is the indirect object.
The indirect object in 'He told his story to the doctor' is 'the doctor'. In
many languages the indirect object takes the dative case. See also case.
indirect speech (sometimes called 'reported speech')
Words not quoted directly as spoken; quotation marks are not used.
'I'm hungry' is direct speech, exactly what somebody actually said, he
was hungry is indirect speech in the sentence: Bill said he was hungry.
infinitive
The form of a verb by which, in most languages, the verb is identified,
the 'name' by which it is known. In regular verbs one can recognise all
the different forms from the infinitive, as in the English 'love' and the
Italian 'amare' (love): love/amare (infinitive), loves/ama (present),
loved/amava (past/imperfect), loved/amato (past participle) etc. The
infinitive of irregular verbs, however, does not always tell one what
form the other parts of the verb will take: 'go - went - gone' in English,
for example, and the Italian equivalent 'andare (go) - vado (I go) - vai!
(go!)'. English has the infinitive particle 'to', which is used together with
the infinitive in all but a few cases. The use of infinitive particles varies
from language to language. The infinitive is a non-finite mood of the
320
verb - see also mood.
inflexion, inflected
The adding of an ending to a word, or a change in its form. Inflexions
show number, case, person, tense etc. 'Ask' is inflected by the addition
of -ed to produce the past tense 'asked'; the masculine singular of the
French 'petit' (small) has -e added to make the feminine singular,
'petite', and -s is added to make the masculine and feminine plural
forms, 'petits' and 'petites'. In Spanish, 'hermoso' (beautiful), for
example, changes form from masculine to feminine by changing the
final -o to -a: 'hermosa'. For further examples of inflexions, see case and
conjugation.
instrumental
An instrumental inflection, or case, expresses the meaning *by means
of.
interjection
Exclamation, such as 'Oh!', 'Damn!' etc.
intransitive
An intransitive verb does not govern a direct object (We live in the
country). Many verbs are used both transitively and intransitively, e.g.
'He opens the shop at nine' (transitive), and 'The shop opens at nine'
(intransitive).
irregular
Not following the usual patterns in changes of form. The plural of the
regular noun 'book' is formed in the usual way: 'books': but the noun
'child' is irregular: its plural is not 'childs' but 'children'. The adjective
'tall' has a regular comparative and superlative, 'taller' and 'tallest'; but
the comparative and superlative of 'good' are not 'gooder' and 'goodest'
but 'better' and 'best'. The French regular verb 'finir' (finish) follows the
usual pattern for French verbs ending in -ir, so its 1st person present
indicative is 'je finis' (I finish); the same form of the irregular 'dormir'
(sleep) is not 'je dormis' but 'je dors' (I sleep).
locative
The locative case is used in some languages to express the idea of place
- 'in', 'on', 'at' etc. (see case).
main clause - see clause
masculine - see gender
modal
In English, verbs that are sometimes called modal verbs, or modal
auxiliaries, are: can, could, may, might, must, shall, should, will, would,
dare, need.
mood
321
Subdivision of a verb, often distinguished by particular forms, that
indicates the function for which the verb is used; or we might say it
shows the psychological angle from which the user sees the verb. The
moods of a verb can be further subdivided into 'finite' and 'non-finite'
moods. The finite parts of a verb are those that are associated with a
particular tense (time), person and number. The non-finite parts are not
associated with a particular person, and, in a language such as English,
not with number either. The usual finite moods are:
Indicative - the mood used for statements or questions of fact, and so it
is the most common mood. (He lives here. They were cooking their
supper. The house has been finished. Do you like cheese? It won't rain,
etc.)
Conditional - the mood usually expressing actions or states dependent
on a condition (and so most conditional sentences contain a clause with
'if, 'unless', 'provided that' or some other 'conditional' conjunction). In
English and many other languages there are two conditional tenses,
present conditional and past conditional. (I would help you if you asked
me to. If you had explained, she would have understood.) Subjunctive the mood often used to express uncertainty, desire, or other emotions.
How much it is used varies greatly from language to language. In
English it is used very little, although there are three forms: 'He insists
she get a doctor.' 'He insisted she got a doctor.' 'I suggest(ed) she should
get a doctor.' In the Latin languages, however, the subjunctive is far
more common, particularly in the written language. In the Italian
'Speriamo che migliori' (We hope that he gets better), 'migliori' (he gets
better) is in the subjunctive; the indicative statement of the fact that he is
getting better is 'migliora'.
Imperative - the mood used to express a command (or urgent request,
exhortation, or advice, expressed as a command). (Stop! Help! Push!) In
English, imperatives have the same form as infinitives, but in many
languages they have a distinct form (Italian: infinitive scusare = to
excuse; scusi = excuse me). Non-finite moods are: Infinitive - see also
infinitive
Participles, Present and Past; Gerund - the extent to which these are
limited by person, number and time varies from language to language see also participle, gerund
morphemes
The smallest elements of a language that have their own individual
meaning. Free morphemes can stand alone, such as each of the five
words in 'I shall ask a question'. Bound morphemes (prefixes, suffixes
etc.) cannot stand alone, e.g. '-ed', '-un', '-ing', and '-s' in 'I ask-ed un322
end-ing question-s'.
morphology
The analysis of the structure of words (see morphemes). The structure
of words is sometimes also called 'accidence'.
neuter - see gender
nominative
The nominative case is normally the subject case (see case and subject).
non-finite - see mood
noun
A word used as the name of a thing, person, place, state, quality etc.:
house, people, Smith (a proper noun), dogs, outer space, peace,
gentleness. Some nouns are 'verbnouns'; in English these can be made
of the -ing form (I enjoy eating) or the infinitive (To love is to suffer). In
many languages nouns are inflected far more than in English (see
inflexion and case).
noun phrase
A group of words that functions as a noun. (The man over there in the Tshirt is my companion. Being able to see in the dark is important for cats.)
number
In most languages 'number' refers to singular (only one) or plural (more
than one), although in some languages (such as Icelandic) there is a also
a dual form meaning 'we two'. In many languages verbs are divided
into singular forms and plural forms, usually three singular and three
plural. See also person, and cardinal, ordinal
object
Noun, pronoun, or equivalent of a noun, to which the action of an
active transitive verb is directed. (Dogs eat meat. The dog greeted her.
The dog greeted the woman standing at the door. The dog greets whoever
comes to the door. She explained that the dog likes everybody.) (See also
indirect object.)
ordinal numbers
These are 'first', 'second', 'third', 'fourth' etc. cf. cardinal numbers
participle
European languages have two sorts of participle, present and past. In
English the present participle always ends in -ing (eating); regular past
participles have the same form as the past tense (asked), but there are
many irregular past participles (eaten). In English grammar a
distinction is often made between the present participle and the
gerund. 'Gerund' is used to refer to the '-ing' form used as a noun (He
enjoys eating), though I personally prefer to call it directly what it is, the
verb-noun, or action-thing. One of the main uses of the present
323
participle in English is as part of the continuous form. (She is eating.
They have been eating, etc.) The past participle is used to form 'perfect'
tenses (She has asked. They had asked. You will have asked.) and in English
and many other languages is used both actively (Italian: Ha pubblicato i
libri - He has published the books) and to form the passive (I libri
saranno pubblicati - The books will be published). Both the use and
terminology of participles vary from language to language. In Spanish
grammar, for instance, the gerund is what is called the present
participle in English, while the equivalent of the English 'gerund' does
not exist in
Spanish; in Italian there are two different forms: the present participle,
ending -ante or-ente, used mainly as an adjective, and the gerund (again
with functions similar to the English present participle) ending -ando or
-endo. Present and past participles are sometimes combined to make a
third sort (Having heard what he had to say, I left).
passive voice - see active voice
past - see tense
past participle - see participle
past perfect - see tense
perfect
The perfect tenses are usually formed by the auxiliary verb 'have' and a
past participle. (I have asked. She had asked.) Some languages use the
equivalent of 'be' instead of 'have' to form the perfect tenses of certain
types of verb, such as verbs of movement the French 'II est arrive', for
example, literally means 'He is arrived'. See tense.
person
In most languages there are three persons singular and three persons
plural, described as:
In many languages verbs take different forms according to the person
which is their subject (see conjugation). Nouns, as opposed to pronouns,
normally take the 3rd person form of the verb (singular or plural
according to whether the noun itself is singular or plural).
pluperfect
An alternative name for the past perfect tense.
324
plural
Form of a word expressing the idea of more than one, as opposed to the
singular, which indicates only one.
possessive
Used of words or phrases that express possession, ownership or
belonging. In English the two normal ways of expressing possession are
the apostrophe -'s (or -s') and the of genitive (the nurse's husband, the
husband of the nurse). Languages vary in the ways they express
possession. (See also case.)
postposition
A word or ending, with the same function as prepositions, that is put
after rather than before the word it refers to, as in Japanese 'Tokyo kara
Kobe made' (from Tokyo to Kobe). Postpositions are used in many
languages (Finnish, Turkish etc.).
predicate - see subject
predicative - see attributive
prefix
A form attached to the beginning of another form (unclear).
preposition
A word or phrase expressing position, direction, origin, method etc.
(the book on the table, the day after tomorrow, travel by bus, in spite
o/the cold). English prepositions always govern nouns or their
equivalents, but this does not apply to all languages (Swedish: 'utan att
vanta', literally 'without to wait', i.e. 'without waiting'). In many
languages different prepositions govern different cases. German 'mit',
for example, governs the dative, as in 'mit den hunden' ('with the
dogs').
present perfect - see tense
preterite
An alternative name for the past tense.
principal parts
The principal parts of the English regular verb 'ask' are Infinitive 'ask' Past 'asked' Past Participle 'asked', and of the irregular verb 'go' they
are Infinitive 'go' - Past 'went' - Past Participle 'gone'. Normally one can
conjugate - that is, discover or recite all the parts or forms of a verb - if
one knows the principal parts.
progressive - see continuous
pronoun
A word used in place of a noun or equivalent of a noun. T, 'he', 'him'
etc. are personal pronouns. 'Mine', 'yours' etc. are possessive pronouns.
'Myself, 'yourself etc. are reflexive or emphatic pronouns. 'Who', 'which',
325
'that' are relative pronouns. 'Who?', 'what?' are interrogative pronouns.
'This', 'these', 'that' and 'those' are demonstrative pronouns. Indefinite
pronouns are words such as 'some', 'none', 'others'. English personal
pronouns have two cases, e.g. nominative (subject) 'he', and accusative
(object) 'him', but pronouns in some other languages have more. For
instance, German personal pronouns have three, e.g. the equivalent of
'he': nominative 'er', accusative 'ihn', dative 'ihm'; and German relative
pronouns have four cases, those of the masculine form of the word that
means 'who/which' being: nominative 'der', accusative 'den', genitive
'dessen', dative 'dern'.
proper noun
A noun which is a name, almost always written with an initial capital
letter (Gandhi, Mary, Adolf Hitler, Paris, Greece, the Sahara, the
Amazon, the New York Times).
reflexive
Word or form showing that the agent's action is on himself; or verb of
which the subject and object are the same person or thing. In 'I've cut
myself, 'myself is a reflexive pronoun, and 'cut' a reflexive verb
(because of 'myself). Most English reflexive expressions are more truly
reflexive than many of the so-called reflexive expressions of some other
languages. There are many 'reflexive' verbs in the Latin languages, for
example, that are not reflexive in the English sense (e.g. Italian
'Miricordo del suo sorriso', where 'Mi' is a reflexive pronoun, = ' I
remember her smile'). In English one should not confuse reflexive
pronouns with emphatic ones: 'He told himself (reflexive) not to be silly'
and 'He told me himself (emphatic)'. But emphatic and reflexive
pronouns have the same or partly the same forms in some other
languages too.
regular - see irregular
relative
A 'referring' or 'connecting' word or clause. In 'The family which lived
upstairs were all trumpet players', 'which lived upstairs' is a relative
clause, and 'which' is the relative pronoun. A clause such as 'which
lived upstairs' is sometimes termed a 'defining' relative clause, as it
defines or limits 'the family', says which family is concerned. In 'They
played very loud, which drove us mad', 'which drove us mad' (notice
the comma before it) is a so-called non-defining relative, as it does not
define 'They' (the family) or anything else, only adds further
information about the effect of their action. The distinction is important.
In English the same words - 'who', 'whom', 'which' - are used as both
defining and non-defining relative pronouns. ('That', which is only
326
used as a defining relative pronoun, is the exception.) But different
words are used for defining and non-defining relative pronouns in
some languages. In Swedish, for example, the defining 'which' in the
first sentence would be translated as 'som', while the non-defining
'which' of the second sentence would be 'vilket'.
reported speech - see indirect speech
root
Roughly equivalent to 'stem', but often referring to a more original
stage, as in the phrase 'Finno-Ugric roots'. See also stem.
simple form - see continuous
singular
Form of a word expressing the idea of only one.
stem
(Also called root.) Basic part of a word to which endings (suffixes,
inflexions) are added to give various forms and meanings. Thus, for
instance, the stem of the Spanish adjective 'bueno' (good) is buen, to
which is added the ending -o (masculine singular), -a (feminine
singular), -os (masculine plural) or -as (feminine plural): bueno, buena,
buenos, buenas. The stem of the English verb 'talk' is talk, which forms
the basis of talks, talked, talking, talker. Usually the stem remains the
same, whatever endings are added to it, but quite often the stem is
modified, as in the Swedish 'hand': hand (hand), hander (hands). In
irregular words the stem can disappear and be replaced by a
completely different word (e.g. Spanish ir (to go), voy (I go); English go,
went).
subject
Definitions of 'subject' are very unsatisfactory. You will usually find
that dictionaries and grammar books define 'subject' as the part of a
sentence about which something is said, or 'predicated'; if you look up
'predicate' you will find it defined as what is said of the subject.
Examples are a better way of conveying the idea of 'subject' (notice that
it can consist of several words): 'Wolves are intelligent. They hunt
caribou. There is a wolf over there. The wolf we saw last winter has
returned. Ignorance and cruelty have caused much suffering to wolves.'
Subjects can be 'done-to' as well as 'do-ers'.
i.e. passive as well as active verbs have subjects: 'Wolves have been
persecuted for centuries.'
subjunctive - see mood
subordinate - see clause
substantival
Having the quality of a substantive, i.e. of a noun.
327
substantive
This term is sometimes used with the same meaning as 'noun'.
suffix
A form attached to the end of a stem, e.g. 'clear/y', or (Italian)
'informazione'.
superlative
The final degree in the comparison of adjectives and adverbs. English
has two ways of expressing the superlative: by the addition of .-est' to
the basic form (hardest), and the use of 'most' (most beautiful). Not all
languages have two forms for expressing the superlative.
syntax
The way words are combined to form sentences.
tense
The 'time' of a verb. 'He went', 'I go', and 'We shall go' are examples of
the past, present and future tenses of the verb 'go'. Terms such as 'past',
'present' and 'future' are self-explanatory, but not all the names of
tenses are so easy to understand. Moreover, tenses with the same or
equivalent name do not have the same meaning in all languages. For
instance, the present perfect tense in English - e.g. 'He has gone' - is not
used in exactly the same way as its Italian equivalent - 'E andato'; in
Italian one can say 'E andato ieri', i.e. [He has gone yesterday], which
one does not say in English. Here is a list of the tenses of the indicative,
subjunctive and conditional in English, with their nearest equivalents in
Italian, illustrated by means of the verb 'love' (Italian 'amare', 1st
conjugation).
328
All these tenses have passive forms (I am loved/Sono amato etc.). The
English tenses all have a continuous form as well, not set out above - 'I
am working' (Present), etc. Some of the tenses listed here are sometimes
called by other names, such as 'preterite', and there are tenses in other
languages that neither English nor Italian have, such as the 'aorist' (see
those words).
transitive
A transitive verb governs a direct object (The dog ate his food. I like cats
that are independent). (See also intransitive.)
verb
A word or phrase expressing doing (action), being (state) or becoming
(Bill cooked supper for us. This is the apple pie he made. He has turned
into a very nice person.).
verb-noun
A form which combines the idea of an action with the idea of a thing,
such as, in English, 'smoking' in 'You should give up smoking'. (Notice
that one can also substitute the pronoun 'it' for 'smoking': 'You should
give it up'.)
vocative
Some languages have a vocative case, a form used to address a person,
animal, or other personalized entity (oh sublime Nature!). Latin is
perhaps the most well-known such language (Domine! = oh Lord!).
voice - see active voice
329
APPENDIX 8
SOME HINTS ON PRINCIPLES OF ENGLISH
GRAMMAR (AG)
In §161 it was suggested that there are often fairly simple principles of
grammatical meaning that can be discovered. In the following pages I
should like to offer some examples of these, and also some advice on how
to approach certain learning tasks. Students of foreign languages could
often save themselves much toil, pain and bewilderment if they became
aware of such simple principles and adopted a rational approach to some
of the problems that seem so formidable to them. I am not suggesting that
what follows below are new discoveries. Most of it is old knowledge, but
unfortunately knowledge that is usually presented piecemeal, with the
result that most students fail to see the wood for the trees.
Los árboles no dejan ver el bosque
One can't see the wood for the trees
1 The adverbial use of nouns
By the adverbial use of nouns I mean when the noun is used, not to talk
about something as a thing, but to talk about an activity, a place, an
occasion, how something is done, etc.
For instance, if Bill is 'at school' we know he is studying, or attending
lessons, although he may not actually be in the school building, but out in
the fields doing nature study. 'At school' is an adverbial use of 'school',
and, quite logically, we do not use 'the' with it, because we are not really
talking about a thing, the school itself. But if we say Bill is 'in the school',
then we are indeed talking about a thing, we know he is in the actual
thing, the school, the school building. Again, if we say Keiji has 'gone to
bed', we know where he is and that he intends to sleep. But, as Keiji is
Japanese, he very likely has not actually got the thing, a bed, at all. He
sleeps on the floor.
The problem is that not all nouns are used in this adverbial way. Keiji
can 'go to bed'; but he does not 'go to bank'. He 'goes to THE bank'. So the
problem is not the problem of learning more about the articles. The
problem is learning about individual words. This is a good example of
how some problems that appear to be grammatical are not really
grammatical at all. They are, rather, problems of vocabulary.
2 Nouns and adverbs of 'transport'
But there is a group of words you can always use 'adverbially' in English.
These are the words for means of transport, including animals. The use of
330
these words is a good illustration of the principle explained above in 1.
The preposition that is always used 'adverbially' with means of
transport (and also for travelling by 'air', 'land' and 'sea') is by.
(There are no exceptions. Phrases like 'on foot' or 'on horseback' do not
involve means of transport but parts of bodies.)
They arrived by bicycle, by car, by train, by bus, by helicopter, by
elephant, etc.
Notice how, quite logically, the noun is always used in the singular when
it is used adverbially. The noun is only being used to show the sort of
activity that is going on. 'He came here by bicycle' is a way of saying 'He
pedalled here'. There may be a hundred men with a hundred bicycles, but
we don't want to talk about the things bicycles; we want to say only how
the men got here, what their activity was. So we say:
A hundred men arrived BY BICYCLE.
Immediately we use the word 'bicyleS' we show we are talking about the
actual things bicycles. Immediately we use the plural we show we are
thinking about the things themselves - we would not use the plural
otherwise. But if we are thinking of the things bicycles, what is the logical
preposition to use with those things? Certainly not 'by'. If we said 'They
came by bicycles', and it meant anything at all to anybody, it would
probably be understood to mean that the men walked beside some bicycles!
People ride on bicycles, so that is the right word to use with the things
bicycles.
A hundred men arrived ON BICYCLES.
In the same way, if we talk about 'a' bicycle, or 'the' bicycle, or 'your'
bicycle, or 'that' bicycle, we are again talking about the thing, a bicycle, so
again we need the logical preposition to go with it. 'I'll go on my bicycle;
she went on the bicycle, etc.' In the same way we logically use 'in' for cars.
(Although it is perfectly correct to use 'in' for trains and buses and
coaches etc., idiomatic English tends to use 'on' for means of public
transport that have schedules.)
Let's go in the car. It'll be quicker on your bicycle. They all
arrived by coach. The football teams travelled in coaches. He
used to visit us by giraffe. Marie arrived on the ten o'clock train.
He set off in his motor boat. I like going in a rowing boat. In
those days everybody went by boat.
3 Prepositions
The adverbial use of nouns leads on to the matter of prepositions. We
have seen earlier how the prepositions of the various languages do not fit
into a convenient system of equivalents (§§17 and 129) and so people tend
331
to draw the conclusion that the preposition systems of foreign languages
are horribly erratic and illogical.
This is a serious mistake. Prepositions are as logical and consistent as
probably most people think the prepositions in their own language are.
But prepositions will naturally seem inconsistent if one expects them
always to have the same translations. If you are a French-speaker and
expect that 'dans' will always be 'in', and 'de' will always be 'of, etc., you
are bound to be repeatedly disappointed.
The prepositions of any language are consistent in their meaning. They
must be. They would be impossible to use otherwise. Prepositions have to
be regular in what they mean just as any other word does. What does
undoubtedly add, though, to foreign-language learners' consternation is
that there are a very limited number of prepositions, and so each tends to
have a larger number of different meanings than most words have.
Each language has its own unique system of preposition meanings, so it
only causes confusion and discouragement to try to make it fit the system
of another language. To master prepositions it is essential to understand
how they really work and to recognise the true problem and not be
frightened by a false one.
The most basic point as far as English prepositions are concerned is that
they are used in two different ways. Or we could perhaps say that there
are two different kinds of preposition:
Unattached prepositions
Attached prepositions
4 Unattached prepositions
It is the unattached prepositions which are consistent and logical in their
meaning. Let us look at an example. As a rule it is impossible to give a
suitable name or description to the meaning of prepositions (just as it is
impossible with most words). But we can give a description to one of the
meanings of 'to'.
She was friendly to me, unfriendly to me, kind to me, unkind to
me, polite to me, rude to me, cruel to me, tender to me, good to
me, helpful to me, hospitable to me, nasty to me, nice to me.
We can see from these examples that 'to' is the preposition used to
indicate what we can call 'behaviour'.
Compare these 'to' examples with some where we use 'with'.
She was angry with me, pleased with me, displeased with me,
satisfied with me, dissatisfied with me, fed up with me,
delighted with me, bored with me, furious with me, annoyed
with me.
332
This time it is wiser not to try to give a name or definition to the way
'with' is used. We could draw misleading conclusions if we did. But I
think almost everybody can feel straight away the sense in which it is
used - a sense quite different from the way 'to' was used in the previous
examples.
We can make a little experiment here. Normally, as you probably
already know, 'angry' is used with 'with', as it is in the first 'with' example
here. That is because 'angry' is usually used in a 'with' situation. But
supposing two people, A and B, visit the same person, X, in his office. A
goes in, has his interview with X, and goes out. B then goes in to see X,
has his interview, comes out, and meets A. B tells A that X was very
angry. A then says:
"That's very strange. X wasn't at all angry TO me. '
A uses 'to', not 'with', because he is not talking about the normal 'angry'
situation - in this case he is telling B about X's behaviour. A does not know
whether or not X was in fact angry with him; all he knows is that X was
not angry to him.
Do not be misled by my example here. I am not saying that you will
often hear English-speakers using 'to' with 'angry'. You will very probably
never hear it or read it in your life. But if you are ever in A's situation and
want to report events accurately, 'to' is what you should use, not 'with',
because in this case 'to' is what you mean, not 'with'.
But notice too that there is another preposition often used with 'angry'.
He got very angry at my remark.
I am surprised at her attitude.
We are all happy at the result.
She expressed her annoyance at his behaviour.
We can be angry with a person, but not really with a thing. Notice how the
'at's in all four sentences above have the same meaning.
Here, then, we have looked at some examples of prepositions used in
an 'unattached' way. Every preposition has at least one such unattached
use where the meaning is always consistent, and, one can say in a sense,
independent. Don't run away from prepositions. Recognise that they are a
very important part of their language, that they each have their own
meaning or meanings, that they are very useful, and that native speakers
often use them to make important distinctions in meaning. (If you are not
a native English-speaker, would you understand if someone said: 'He
didn't read the notice TO me; he read it FOR me'?) So look on prepositions
as things to make into your friends, observe them closely, and learn their
meanings when they are used in an 'unattached' way. However, do not
try to define these meanings unless it is very easy to do so accurately.
333
To master a foreign language's prepositions properly it is probably
necessary to realize, consciously or unconsciously, that they are not a
grammatical problem. They are only 'grammar' in the sense that there are
the principles of how they work that I have tried to explain here. But
really prepositions are quite simply a matter of vocabulary simply, I say,
but certainly they are vocabulary of considerable subtlety.
Also a matter of vocabulary that has to be learned are
5 Attached prepositions
Unfortunately prepositions are not always used in an 'unattached' way.
But this is not nearly such a big problem as it may seem at first. Look at
some examples of 'attached' prepositions.
Bill is married to Nancy.
She's very fond of Bill.
Is Bill keen on walking?
No, but he's interested in football.
In cases like these, where you can see no logical, consistent, 'unattached'
reason for the particular preposition that is used, try not to think of the
preposition as a separate word. Rather, think of the two words
(preposition and what goes with it) as one, each with its own special
meaning:
marriedto
fondof
keenon
interested in
Think of them, and try to learn them, in this way.
To see that there is a good reason for thinking of many prepositions as
attached in this way, think about the following little story:
I had always considered de Sica to be one of the two finest film
directors in the world. For this reason I was for many years very
interested in his 'The Garden of the Finzi Contini', but never had a chance
to see it. Then at last I was able to see it on television, but I'm sorry to say
I wasn't interested it at all.
What is the preposition we should use after the second 'interested'?
Surely not 'in', because that would clearly not be true. I had been interested
in it before I saw it... What I am trying to say with the second 'interested'
is that the film, when I saw it, did not interest me. In other words, I was not
interested BY it. 'Interested' is here not the adjective 'interestedin' but a
passive verb, and with passives we always need, to introduce the agent,
the consistent unattached preposition 'by'.
You should also be encouraged by the fact that the number of common
334
words with 'illogical', attached prepositions is not very great. However,
attached prepositions give an insight into how one should approach
6 Phrasal verbs
Phrasal verbs are the source of one of the greatest and saddest
misunderstandings for learners of English.
There is a strong and widespread tendency for students to try to learn
the meanings of phrasal verbs 'systematically'. That is, they take a word
like 'turn' and then try to learn by heart the meanings of
turn + about
turn + away
turn + back
turn + down
turn + in
turn + off
turn + on
turn + out
turn + over
turn + round
turn + to
turn + up
turn + upon
The result is nearly always that the students' heads begin to spin after a
very short time, they become confused and frustrated, and very soon give
up in despair the whole enterprise of mastering phrasal verbs.
This is very regrettable, because phrasal verbs are a basic and very
important part of normal English vocabulary. Native English-speakers
learn all the more common phrasal verbs at an early age. The situation is
all the sadder because there is in fact no difficulty whatsoever. The
difficulties are all of the students' own making - or perhaps it would be
fairer to say that it is the fault of their teachers.
Is there any student of English who sets about learning words like
335
I can imagine some students who already know these words getting
confused merely as a result of looking at a list of this sort. Yet students
who approach phrasal verbs in the way I described above are doing
exactly the same as learning the '-tain' verbs in this bizarre way.
Psychologically it need make no difference at all that in one case the
particle is at the front of the word and attached to it, and in the other is at
the end and separated. It is pure historical accident that the two parts of
phrasal verbs are not written together and that the parts of words like the
'-tain' verbs are.
Anyone doubtful about all this should think simply of German. In
German there are what in effect are phrasal verbs. Take as an example the
verb 'geben' (give). There are:
and very possibly others that I do not know of. Yet not only are the
particles often put
after the main part of the verb; they are frequently separated from it far
further than they ever are in English phrasal verbs. For instance (using the
3rd Person Singular Present of 'ausgeben'):
Er GIBT fur das Auto zu viel Geld AUS.
He GIVES for the car too much money OUT.
(He spends too much money on the car.)
But I have still not met any students of German as a foreign language who
have ever dreamt of learning such German verbs by saying to themselves,
for instance:
336
'Today I am going to learn all the verbs with geben:
geben + an
geben + auf
geben + aus
geben + be
geben + ein
geben + her etc., etc.'
I think everybody would regard this as a crazy procedure. Yet it is just
such a crazy procedure that a student is following if he tries to learn lists
of all the phrasal verbs made with 'turn', with 'bring', with 'put', and so
on. (It is of course equally misguided to learn phrasal verbs in lists
according to which particle or preposition they are formed with 'at', 'by',
'in', 'out', 'over', 'up' etc.)
Think instead of phrasal verbs as one word, and treat them just like any
other word. Look out for them, certainly. They are very important. But
learn them as you would any other word in English vocabulary - as you
come across them, in context. Thus you may learn 'anchor', followed by
'makeout', followed by 'hedgehog', followed by 'refrain', followed by
'whistle', followed by 'putoff, followed by 'prefer', followed by 'average',
followed by 'turnup', and so on.
Remember: apart from the special conventions of word order that apply
to them, there is nothing special about phrasal verbs except that they are
particularly important.
So never try to learn lists of them. Never waste your money buying
special books about them. (A good dictionary will tell you what they
mean if you cannot understand from the context.)
7 The '-ing' form: (a) Verbs followed by the '-ing' form
(It is not my purpose in the following three sections to give a complete
explanation of all aspects of the '-ing' form, only to draw attention to some
useful basic principles that are usually neglected.)
One of the most important simple principles that grammarians tend to
miss is the one that explains what verbs take the '-ing' form. The method
of almost all books on English grammar (including, I am sorry to say, one
that I have collaborated on myself) is to give a list of such verbs. This
implies that it is completely arbitrary whether a verb takes the '-ing' form
or not, that God has closed his eyes and pricked off verbs here and there
at random with a pin. Students are thus cut off from insight into a basic
pattern of meaning, and confronted with a lifeless series of unconnected
words which they have to lear n by heart. They are pushed into a purely
abstract and mechanical process that misses the essential truth that
337
learning languages is learning about meanings and their logical connections to
other meanings.i It is significant of the impractical arbitrariness of these
lists that there are almost no two of them that are the same, even where
the most common of the verbs used with '-ing' are concerned.
When contrasting the '-ing' form with the infinitive, the basic point to
remember is that '-ing' can always mean, among other things, a verbnoun, an 'action-thing'.2 The fact that '-ing' can always mean a 'thing'
gives us the following principle:
This is a principle without any exceptions. But naturally there are many
verbs that in practice are never used with '-ing' simply because nobody
ever wants to express that 'action' meaning of '-ing' with them. The
process is always self-regulating, so to speak - one says whatever makes
sense. We can look at some examples of the use of '-ing' with verbs that
appear on few, if any, of most grammarians' lists.
They have added mistreating prisoners to the list of charges.
I can't really afford living like this.
The council no longer allows smoking in public buildings.
aim --- (I cannot think of a sensible example of '-ing' being used with
this verb. Can you?)
The club arranges dancing for the pensioners.
The chairman claimed breaking the strike as a great triumph.
I don't count making money as a virtue.
The investigators discovered cheating on a huge scale.
We must encourage planting earlier in the season.
I thank travelling for teaching me much about the human condition.
The principle applies equally to phrasal verbs, both the 'prepositional'
type and the 'adverbial particle' type.
She insisted on helping me.
Bill's putting off writing till tomorrow. (Or: ...putting writing off...)
The managing director picked out idling on the job as the main cause of
the declining profits.
turn up --- (Another example of a verb I cannot think of any sensible use
for with '-ing').
Meaning is always the key, and so there are naturally some verbs and
verb phrases that one will not know how to use unless one knows their
338
exact meaning. For example, one needs to know that 'carry on' and 'go on'
have meanings basically the same as 'continue'. One can say 'continue it',
so one can also say:
He continued talking. He carried on talking. He went on talking.
8 The '-ing' form: (b) No grammatical analysis of
different '-ing' forms is necessary
When they discuss how to use the '-ing' form, grammarians as a rule insist
on distinguishing between 'present participles', 'gerunds', 'true nouns' etc.
There is no need at all to do this. All one needs to know - and remember are the possible meanings of the '-ing' form, the different ways it can be
used. It can be used like this:
So long as you are aware that these are the possibilities, you can make 'ing' mean whatever you want it to mean within those possibilities,
without worrying about its grammatical definition. Don't forget that you
cannot make any grammatical analysis before you understand the
meaning. Since the meaning is the only thing we are really interested in if we are sensible - there is seldom much point in pursuing grammatical
abstractions once we have grasped the meaning. Let us consider various
examples of the use of '-ing'.
The phrase 'boiling water' is, by itself, ambiguous, 'boiling' could be a
description of the water (it's boiling); or it could be referring to what
somebody is doing to the water. But if we say 'We need boiling water', it
is clear we mean water that is already boiling; while if we say 'Start
boiling water', it is clear we mean that somebody should boil water.
In the phrase 'a steaming kettle', 'a' obviously belongs to 'kettle', not to
'steaming'; in the same way, in 'Pour the boiling water into this pot', 'the'
refers to 'water', not to 'boiling', and we are again talking about water that
is already boiling. But suppose we want to say, using the '-ing' form, that
we recommend that somebody should boil water every morning. We cannot
say 'We recommend the boiling water every morning', because although
that is a perfectly good and sensible sentence, we have just seen that it
must mean something quite different from what we want to express.
What we have to say is:
We recommend the boiling of water every morning.
339
Now 'the' belongs to 'boiling', not to 'water'.
But we should never forget that the overall meaning of a particular
piece of language depends on the particular combination of the particular
meanings used. For instance, the two sentences
The Red Cross stopped shooting prisoners.
The Red Cross stopped the shooting of prisoners.
mean two quite different things. The first sentence tells us that the Red
Cross had been shooting prisoners. The second is almost certainly
intended to mean that somebody else - not the Red Cross - had been
shooting prisoners, and the Red Cross stopped this somebody else doing
any more shooting. In other words, in one sentence the Red Cross shoots
prisoners, and in the other it doesn't. But we must not draw from these
two sentences the general conclusion that when there is no 'the', the '-ing'
action is carried out by the subject of the main verb, but that when there is
a 'the', the '-ing' action is carried out by somebody else. For instance, we
can say:
I support sending more aid to poor countries.
This does not mean that I myself am going to send more aid to poor
countries; it only means that I think that this is a good thing for people to
do. But if we say instead 'I support the sending of more aid...', it makes no
difference at all to the basic meaning of the sentence, and that is because
of the particular meaning of 'support'. In the next three sentences, on the
other hand, with no 'the' in the first, but a 'the' in the other two, you will
see that in every case it is T who performs the '-ing' action:
I hate decorating. I don't mind the actual painting. But I can't stand all the
getting ready beforehand.
Consider also the next two sentences.
I don't like helping politicians.
I don't like lying politicians.
They are identical in every respect except one. They both consist of 'I don't
like -ing politicians.' The difference between them is merely that one uses
'help-' and the other uses 'ly-'. Yet this is enough to make it clear that in
the first sentence I do (or rather, don't want to do!) the helping, while in
the second the politicians do the lying.*
But there are two points that are worth mentioning here. One is that if
there is an 'ordinary' noun which expresses the same idea as an '-ing'
noun, the 'ordinary' noun rather than the '-ing' word is normally used.
He campaigns for the abolition (not abolishing) of torture (not torturing)
throughout the world.
And do not be confused by '-ing' nouns that are not 'action-things' (not
340
'verb-nouns'), but 'ordinary' nouns. A 'painting' and a 'meaning' are
examples of such words. 'He was in the middle of painting this painting
when he died' is an illustration of the two types being used together.
9 The '-ing' form: (c) '-ing' or the infinitive?
Here again the grammatical explanations tend to become a mass of 'small'
generalizations that are mostly untrue and miss the essential principle.
This is that: '-ing' emphasizes the action itself.
The infinitive (and non-'-ing' generally) emphasizes some other aspect
of the verb: the fact, event, result, effect, achievement of the action.
It is impossible to describe the meaning of words completely accurately
with words. In the end the only wholly correct indication of the meaning
of words is the words themselves. But I think the two statements above
are about as close as we can get to the truth about '-ing' and non-'-ing'.
Here are some examples of the difference:
I like to get up really early, around 5, as I can get so much more done
in the day that
way. But I have to confess I don't like actually getting up at that hour
at all.
I prefer cycling to work. It's much more fun than sitting in car queues.
I prefer to cycle to work. It's good for me.
She was afraid to go near the edge, because she was afraid of
falling off. (It was not the action itself of going near the edge that
she was afraid of - it was dangerous, and might result in
disaster, but would not in itself hurt her; the action that would
itself hurt her, and that she was afraid of, was falling off the
edge.)
Very often it makes little or no practical difference whether one uses '-ing'
or the infinitive. But in some contexts the difference is obvious and
crucial. There is, for instance, a wholly logical reason why one cannot use
an infinitive after 'enjoy'. This is because one can only enjoy actions
themselves; one cannot enjoy the fact or result of an action. The meaning
of 'enjoy' simply does not fit the meaning of the infinitive. (The same
principle applies to 'loathe'.) Consider, too, that we do not say [' I can
smell something burn']; it must be 'I can smell something burning'. And
Max saw Marie cross the road,
means something quite different from
Max saw Marie crossing the road.
In the first sentence Max finally saw Marie on the other side of the road,
the crossing achieved, and she had presumably escaped the danger of the
traffic. In the second sentence the emphasis is on the action of crossing
341
itself, actually in the road. Perhaps the next moment Marie was run over
by a bus. There is nothing in the sentence to tell us she was not.
Certainly there are problems with some verbs. 'Want' is one of the most
important examples. But it illustrates well how, on one hand, the basic
principle is nearly always at work, and, on the other, how important the
subtleties of exact meaning are. We can say 'They want it', so we can say
The plants want watering.
However, this is not at all the most common use of 'want'. (The meaning
is very close to the meaning of "The plants need watering.') The common
use of 'want' is, of course, as in
I want to water the plants.
But when one says 'want to do...', one is talking of the wish to 'achieve', to
accomplish something - not a feeling of concern with an 'action in itself.
When one says
I want that flower.
one expresses a wish for possession. That is not the same as a 'want to do'
feeling, but it is not an '-ing' feeling either. It is only when 'want' takes on
a 'need' sort of feeling that it becomes logical to use '-ing'. But the effect of
'want' having various different meanings is further illustrated by the fact
that we can also say things like
I don't want you messing about in the garden and stepping on all the
plants.
'Try' is another verb that shows how important the precise meaning of a
word is. The 'try to do' expression is very obviously about achievement,
not about action in itself:
Try to protect these plants from frost.
But 'try it' expresses the idea of 'experiment with', so just as we can say
Try a richer compost on those plants,
we can say
Try giving them less water.
When one explains the '-ing' or infinitive alternatives, it is important to
use examples such as 'remember' and 'forget'. But it is doing learners a
great disservice simply to state, as if it was just an arbitrary rule without
reason, that '-ing' is used for actions before the remembering or forgetting
('I don't remember posting the letter, but I think I must have') and the
infinitive for acts after the remembering or forgetting ('I'm afraid I forgot
to post the letter'). The most important part of the explanation is showing
why 'remember' and 'forget' work like this. They are not some special case
with their own peculiar rules. Whenever people remember or forget
something ('it'), the something must be in the past. This is the very essence
of the words' meaning. We cannot remember or forget a thing before we
342
have experienced it. So the usage of 'remember' and 'forget' has to be as it
is. Compare these words with one like 'anticipate'. In the sense that we are
concerned with here, the meaning is the opposite of 'remember', and so
naturally the '-ing' form must mean actions after the anticipating ('I don't
anticipate having any difficulty at the customs'). As practically always,
the grammatical usage follows the logic of the meaning.
There are indeed several verbs whose use seems logically inconsistent.4
But learners of English should always be suspicious of statements that
you cannot use such and such a pattern with this verb, or use that verb in
such and such a way. As often as not the statement is untrue. It may be
only that situations where such language would be used are rather rare in
real life, and the grammarian has failed to use enough imagination in
thinking of them. And it would be a great pity to let any genuine
inconsistencies make one lose sight of the overall basic principles that are
undoubtedly at work and give insight into the language.
1 The only sort of special list that verbs should appear in is an
alphabetical one that shows, with examples, all the various types of
expression that each verb can govern. For instance, 'suggest':
(a) She suggested going to a concert. [+ -ing]
(b) I suggested (that) we took/should take a taxi. [+ that + subjunctive]
(c) Please suggest where we should go. [+ interrogative + should/ought]
(d) 'I suggest, ' said the prosecutor, 'that you are lying.' [+ that]
Seeing 'real life' associations of a word with other words is how one
learns its exact meaning and how one remembers how it is used.
I compiled such a verb list in 1959, and it was possibly the first of its
kind to be published when it appeared in 1967 in Cook, J.L., Gethin, A.
& Mitchell, K., A new way to proficiency in English (Blackwell). The only
other book I know of that contains such a list is Close, R.A., A reference
grammar for students of English (Longman, 1975).
A.S.Hornby devised an elaborate system based on tables of all the
possible patterns of English that verbs can be used in. Together with
each pattern there was a list of all the verbs that can be used with it.
Dictionaries were published in which each verb entry was given a
number which referred to the pattern or patterns used with that verb.
There could not be a more misguided approach. Again it is an abstract
and lifeless way of thinking about the verbs, quite the wrong way
round. The starting point should be the individual verb, which,
together with the context, should trigger the usage that goes with it. But
I do not advise anybody to learn the usage of the verbs by heart; only to
remember its importance, to remember that in some ways it is very
343
different from that of other European languages, and to remind
yourself of how to use a particular verb whenever you are unsure.
There should, in fact, be no need for special lists of verbs with their
patterns of use, neither of my kind nor any other kind. Any good
dictionary, even quite a small one, should include the respective
patterns (with examples) in the entry for each verb.
2 There are '-ing' forms that seem to lack the 'action' element in some
contexts, most obviously 'being' and 'having'. But the 'thing' element is
always there, so there is no practical problem.
3 This is a case where some grammarians might make the mistake of
saying that the correct explanation is as follows: 'Help' is a transitive
verb, and therefore 'politicians' is its object; 'lie' is an intransitive verb,
and therefore 'politicians' cannot be its object.
But this is to put the matter the wrong way round. One can only decide
to call 'help' transitive and 'lie' intransitive after one has understood the
meaning of both words and context. The grammatical analysis does not
give any information.
4 'Cease' is just one example of such inconsistency. 'Stop', when used with
roughly the same sense, cannot be followed by an infinitive, but 'cease'
is often followed by an infinitive, as well as by '-ing'. Yet 'roughly' may
be a very important point here. There are important differences even
between these two verbs. If one is talking about someone walking
along, one cannot say that he 'ceased' instead of 'stopped'. And a doctor
fond of slightly eccentric speech would have to say 'Cease breathing'
(emphasis on action), not 'Cease to breathe'. The latter would sound like
a command to die.
A rational explanation based on meaning can very often be found
hiding beneath apparent grammatical inconsistencies.
344
APPENDIX 9
40 OF THE MOST COMMON WORDS IN ENGLISH
(EVG)
345
APPENDIX 10
TESTS AND EXERCISES (AG)
We should make a distinction between language tests and language
exercises. The same material or activity is often used for both purposes. In
many cases that is a mistake.
Tests
A test should be used purely to find out how good a person is at a
language. That is to say, how much she can understand of it, in spoken or
written form, or how much of it, how well, she can speak or write. To be
fair, as well as to have any real meaning, a language test must be realistic,
that is, it must imitate as closely as possible the language problems of real
life. It should not make demands on abilities that are not directly
connected with command of the language.
Together with my colleagues I experimented over a period of two
decades with a great variety of tests for placing new students in the right
class at the beginning of each language-school term. After every trial of a
new scheme of tests we always came back to the simple test which,
among those practicable for groups of people with different mother
tongues, proved consistently to be the most accurate and least ambiguous:
we asked them to write one or two short compositions or 'essays'.
Naturally even this method is not infallible and we sometimes put
students in the wrong class, but all the ambitious and varied sets of tests
we tried were far more misleading and confusing. A striking example of
how tests can mislead was given by some of the many young Iranians
who made up a large part of the students who came to Britain in the 60's
and 70's to study English. Many of them were very good at tasks such as
filling in blanks, choosing the right form of a given word, or selecting the
correct word from a list of alternatives. Sadly, when they had to write a
piece of continuous English these same students were usually rather
hopeless.
Testing comprehension: translations
Where testing the understanding of a foreign language is concerned, I
think it is a great pity that simple translation into the native tongue is
apparently being abandoned more and more. It is the only remotely
realistic test. It is also by far the easiest and quickest sort of test to select
and set up.
Testers should not demand a skilled or even idiomatic translation. A
moderately literal translation is quite enough, since the only object should
be to establish whether the person being tested understands the text.
346
Metaphorical language can be translated literally too, but the translator
should also show her understanding by explaining the import of the
metaphor.
Comprehension of the spoken language can be tested by asking the
listener to write notes on what she hears, or write it down more or less in
full if given pauses to translate short sections at a time. Or, if possible and
probably even better, she can be asked to report orally in her own
language on what she hears.
Other tests of comprehension
Multiple choice tests, as I pointed out in §39, are not truly either relevant
or objective. They, as well as tests that require answers to questions on a
passage, are neither fair nor an accurate indication of a person's
proficiency in a language. They all demand more than purely linguistic
abilities. The same applies to summaries or 'precis'. (See §§268271, 283286.) Moreover, any instruction to 'express in your own words' is a bad
idea, as it is encouraging students to do the opposite of what they should
be doing: observing and imitating the usage of the language as they
actually find it.
Testing active knowledge of a language: translating
Again I think translating, this time into the foreign language, is a good
sort of test. It is by far the most objective. It is also realistic to the extent
that many people may find themselves having to interpret for others in
real life. (Testers will naturally appreciate that translating from one's
native tongue is much more difficult than the other way round.) Oral
translation is also in practice the most objective way of testing a person's
ability to speak the foreign language.
But there is a dilemma inherent in translating into the foreign language.
It is in an important sense an unrealistic activity (see below). Its
objectivity as a test has to weighed against the fact that it can give a very
misleading idea of a person's true active command of a language. It may
also be difficult to organize such a test for practical reasons, as when there
are people with several different mother languages to be tested at the
same time.
Compositions
For both these reasons I believe compositions are the other right sort of
test of active knowledge of a language, even though the tester's
judgement is bound to be subjective. If the topics are chosen well, they
provide a truly realistic test. If the writers are given plenty of time and
judged purely on linguistic grounds they are also fair. (Unfortunately
exam candidates are given far too little time in some countries,
347
particularly in Britain.)
Conversations
Conversations set up between an examiner and the candidate or between
two or more candidates in the examiner's presence are artificial and the
results depend unfairly on an individual's 'social' temperament and on
the examiner's subjective judgement.
Marking
There is apparently a tendency within some language examining bodies
which can only be described as scandalous. This is the movement to
design tests that can be marked by machine. This is to do things quite the
wrong way round. One has to first decide what are the true linguistic
abilities that need to be tested; then decide the best tests of those abilities;
and finally to find the most accurate way of marking those tests. I have
already criticized the tendency of researchers to shape their ideas on
language teaching and learning by what is made possible by information
technology (§65). To design testing by the same criterion is to risk
compounding the irrelevance and unfairness.
Exercises
Exercises should help one to learn. They should draw one's attention to
points of grammar and vocabulary, particularly the ones that are known
to cause problems; they should help one be aware of context and how
meaning is crucial to practically all language problems that go beyond
simple failure of memory - and indeed they should show how context can
help the memory. But several sorts of useful exercise are very 'unrealistic'
and should never be used as tests, except perhaps as a personal and
private way of seeing how one is getting on.
The exercises I am considering here are for improving one's active
command of a language. There are only two simple exercises necessary
for improving one's passive knowledge: reading and listening. If one does
them properly these are probably the best exercises for one's active
knowledge too.
Translations
Translating whole passages into the foreign language can be a very useful
exercise. But it can also be a dangerous one, because it can encourage
quite the wrong approach to language learning. I had a lot of opportunity
during the 60's to observe and supervise students translating from many
different languages into English. Practically every student produced
English that was of a far lower standard than they would have dreamt of
offering if they had been writing similar ideas straight into English
without going through their own language. Directly into English they
348
wrote much more idiomatically and made many fewer mistakes. We
finally abandoned all translation out of the native language, because it
was clear that it was doing no good as an exercise and might in fact be
doing a lot of harm. It seemed to make students think of English as a
translation of their mother tongue and took time away from observing
English as it really is. In practice it appeared to be merely an invitation to
them to corrupt their English with their own language. It is also worth
bearing in mind that few people are ever called on to translate
professionally from their own language into a foreign one.
On the other hand, if the translator can constantly keep in mind that a
good 'translator' does not actually translate, but turns a language into
ideas and then turns those ideas back into another language, translation
of whole passages can be an excellent exercise. (See §§15-27, 32-33,124125,128-129.) Indeed, if it can be checked straight away, a student's
translations of whole passages can be just the right sort of exercise to
drive home the lesson and keep alive the awareness that languages are
different from one another, and that one must always think in context.
The problem is that, as the experience I reported above suggests, it seems
to be very difficult for a great many people to maintain that awareness.
Translating sentences
Translating sentences which have been specially chosen to illustrate
particular problems is an entirely different matter. But, as urged in §§155156, these sentences should mostly be used in 'general' exercises. That is
to say, points exercised should all be mixed up together so that the learner
is not warned in advance what the problems are.
In all my own language learning I have never used any sort of exercises
other than the translation of sentences. Unfortunately, though, I have
never found books which provided many (if any) 'general' exercises. If
you feel the lack of such exercises is a serious problem, it should not be
too difficult, if you have a word-processor, to jumble up the exercises in
your book yourself.
It is also worth remembering that if you have a book with exercises for
translating into your own language, you can double the number of 'active
knowledge' exercises at your disposal by doing them the other way
round.
Translating sentences is easily the best sort of exercise for most kinds of
linguistic usage. But there is one particularly important factor to keep in
mind. Good exercises should train you in the idiomatic usage that is
typical of the language concerned. For instance, the use of '-ing' as a noun
is one of the outstanding characteristics of English. If you are translating a
349
sentence in your own language into English, it is not good enough
training to be given an English answer that is merely formally correct,
something that could be said but which is not an example of that typical
English usage. If you are asked to translate an enquiry about whether it is
all right for you to smoke, the answer should tell you that you can
certainly say 'Do you mind if I smoke?' but that it is also very English to
say 'Would you mind me smoking?' This need to practise what is typical
of the language reminds us how essential it is to have mixed exercises. If
you are given a lot of sentences together which all exercize you in this 'ing' usage, and are then not given any more such exercises after that, you
are most unlikely to get into the '-ing' habit. This problem also shows how
essential it is to have all the answers in your learner's book see below
under Answers.
Re- writing sen fences
When it comes to exercises that do not involve translation, the re-writing
or completing of sentences is probably one of the best kinds. I have given
examples of these in §279. They put the right emphasis on meaning and
context. Once again, though, they should exercise mixed problems.
They are both unfair and misleading as tests, since many people find
them difficult to do if they have not been trained in the technique. This
applies even more to
Cloze passages
I have given an example of these in §276. But they are excellent as
exercises. They can be a great help in showing students the basic
importance of meaning and context.
However, my impression is that by and large they have not been made
as useful as they can be. This is probably due to the confusing of cloze
exercises with cloze tests. Cloze passages should only be used as the
former. At the end of this appendix I give an example of the sort of cloze
passage that can be used to help students remember important common
words and expressions, the typical usages of the language. You will notice
that the exercise not only makes learners think constantly about the logic
of the meanings, and emphasizes important typical usage in the language;
it also encourages them to observe usage by leaving blanks which need to
be filled with words that have appeared earlier in the passage.
Answers
For exercises to do the things they ought to do effectively, the answers
must be immediately available to you, that is, in the same book. (But as
regards computer programs, see the suggestions in §208.) You need to
think about any mistakes you have made, about why you have made
350
them, as soon as possible after thinking about the problem in the first
place. If you have to wait for the 'answer' even only until the next day, the
problem tends to have become 'dead' for you. Any thinking that led you
astray must be fresh in your mind; otherwise you are liable to repeat your
mistakes.
Unfortunately there are many language books that do not provide
answers to their exercises. I am afraid this may often be because
publishers want to sell huge quantities of their course books to
institutions and they want to give the teachers something easy to do that
the students will clamour for them to do, i.e. reveal the answers. The
publishers may be frightened that if the students can find the answers out
for themselves, the teachers and their institutions won't want to buy the
book. I fear the publishers may be reluctant to make it obvious to students
that they can do so many things for themselves without teachers.
The value of answers is increased immensely if it is explained in detail
why they are the correct ones.
Testing tests and exercises
Many conscientious examining bodies test their tests to try to make sure
they are good tests. A test or exercise that consists of composition neither
can nor needs to be tested; and as for straightforward translation tests, it
is not really a matter of testing them but simply of deciding in advance
the level they should be pitched at. But there is a serious problem where
any other sort of test or exercise is concerned. This is because inevitably
test makers test their tests on contemporary students. It may seem that this
is the only method possible. But if it is believed that learning methods can
be improved, it is an irrational method. It does not make sense to judge
whether a test is a good one or not by trying it out on students who might
have done better on it if they had used better learning methods. If one
assumes that learning can be more effective, it is a stick-in-the-mud
approach to go on using only tests that present students can manage, and
not to make tougher demands on them, set harder tests. Surely tests
should test what students could do if they learned better, not what they
actually do with misguided methods. On the other hand, it is not very fair
to give them harder tests before they have improved their learning
methods, even though those tougher demands perhaps spur them to
greater and more effective efforts.
Furthermore, how does one know that learning methods have in fact
become more
effective? Finding out how well the users of 'better' methods do on the
tests in current use (those that contemporary students can do) tells us
351
nothing except that they do or do not do better in those particular sorts of
test. The performance of neither contemporary, 'unimproved' students
nor the perhaps improved ones can tell us whether the tests are good
ones, whether they are relevant. This in turn means something even more
important: that we cannot tell whether or not the language learners using
different methods have actually improved their learning.
This seems to me an extra, perhaps decisive, argument in favour of
using only translation and composition as tests. They are unquestionably
the most direct and realistic sort of test. In view of the defects I have just
mentioned of any other type of test, they are surely in practice also as
objective as it is possible for any test to be.
Finally, if my argument is valid, it is another reason for insisting on the
difference between tests and exercises. Exercises which do not consist of
doing translations or compositions should be made more demanding, so
that they 'stretch' students more, encourage them to think about language
in more fruitful ways, to learn faster.
Model Cloze Passage
352
353
354
The answers follow on the next page. When you do an exercise like this,
never think in terms of isolated words. Always think in context. Think in
whole sentences, in whole paragraphs, in whole situations. Not only
make use of the vocabulary and usage that you notice earlier in the
passage to help you fill in later blanks; use vocabulary and usage that you
notice later in the passage to fill in blanks that you had difficulty with
earlier. If you can train your mind to move about flexibly like this, you
will be able to learn much more, more quickly, from ordinary texts that
you read in the foreign language.
355
356
APPENDIX 11
POLYGLOTS (EVG)
1 Learn from the multi-linguists!
The name for people who can speak many languages is 'polyglots'. I know
personally four of the greatest, all members of the association Amid
Linguarum ('Friends of languages'). Each of them can read, and translate
from, at least 50 languages and can speak about 25 languages at varying
levels from fluent to 'survival' standard.
Eugene M. Czerniawski, Russia, reads more than 50 languages and is
the one of the four who speaks the largest number of languages
fluently.
Arvo Juutilainen, Finland, can read nearly 60 languages, and has a
photographic memory for words.
Donald Kenrick, United Kingdom, can read about 70 languages, and
speaks among others a number of Celtic, Semitic and Indo-European
Indian languages, including the Gypsy language Romani.
Pent Nurmekund, Estonia, can translate from over 80 languages. He is
well known as the founder of the Oriental department at the University
of Tartu.
It is now considered that a person ought to know at least 10 languages to
be called a 'polyglot'. By 'know' I mean here either read or speak or read +
speak. To be able to say that one has 'mastered' a language one ought to be
able to write it, at least in the form of simple letters.
The least demanding skill is normally reading.
To learn to speak a language is almost always more difficult. The most
important exceptions are Chinese and Japanese. For both of these a
knowledge of about 1,000 Chinese characters is a minimum in order to be
able to read.
2 Some notes on the working methods and ideas of
polyglots.
It is a characteristic of polyglots that for the most part they learn each new
language on their own. They consider, however, that they need help with
the pronunciation from language teachers (normally native speakers)
when it is especially complicated.
An 'active minimum' is usually the first goal for the great polyglots (see
§94). Thereafter it is above all the ability to read that they aim to acquire.
They want to be able to read non-fiction in all the languages they learn,
including school books on geography, history and languages. (Cf. §181
Fiction or non-fiction?)
357
Organization and concentration are two key principles for polyglots.
They concur wholeheartedly in Stig Gunnemark's maxim (see §35): 'Better
a lazybones who can organize than a workaholic who endlessly rushes
blindly on.' They express astonishment when they hear of opposition to
concentrated study and so-called experts' assertions that concentrated
reading has insignificant effects on students' learning.
All great polyglots agree that they must constantly read or speak or
write foreign languages in order to keep them up. But to have the time on
top of that to learn new languages it is necessary to concentrate one's
efforts and not waste any time.
Universities in Estonia, Russia and other countries in eastern Europe
have for a long time been keen to make use of the experience of eminent
polyglots, who have appeared on television programs and assisted in the
production of educational films.
The best book on polyglots that has come out so far is Kak stat'
poliglotom ('How one becomes a polyglot') by Dr. Dmitri L. Spivak (St.
Petersburg, 1989).
3 Pent Nurmekund, an 'Estonian national treasure'
If the list of polyglots at the beginning of this appendix is rearranged
according to the number of languages that they can read, Pent
Nurmekund, with over 80 languages, will come at the head of the list.
Bearing in mind that he can also speak and write many languages, I
believe that at present he is truly Polyglot No. 1 in the world. Dr. Robert J.
Throckmorton, a scholar and writer in Nevada, U.S.A., is intending to
publish an essay entitled The life and time of Prof. Pent Nurmekund, an
Estonian national treasure. This will certainly be very interesting reading.
Pent Nurmekund has been loved and admired as a teacher and adviser
in Estonia and elsewhere. His encouragement and support have been of
enormous importance to me in the 1980s and 1990s. As early as 1984 he
began using The geolinguistic handbook (by E.V. Gunnemark and D.
Kenrick) as a basic book at Tartu University. He is convinced that the
primary condition for learning many tongues is a strong desire to do so.
In contrast to many theoretical linguists. Pent Nurmekund firmly
believes in the advantages of being a 'polyglot scholar'. In a radio
interview, published as Picking up languages (Tallinn, 1988), he declared:
'Anyone determined to accomplish something in the field of linguistics
should study as many languages as he possibly can.'
4 Do polyglots forget 'their' languages?
This is a question that I am often asked, so I would like to summarize my
experience here. (I can translate from nearly 50 languages, speak - at least
358
'survive-speak' - half of them, and I write letters in a dozen languages.)
When a polyglot has learned to read a language tolerably well, that
ability is usually retained, or can be revived in a couple of weeks.
The ability to speak is quite another matter. If the language concerned is
not used for a year or so, the chances are that one will need a period of
training which may have to be quite lengthy if the language is a difficult
one. (So I am sorry to say that I cannot speak Icelandic or Bulgarian at
present, because I have not visited those countries since the 1970s.)
Maintaining the ability to write seems to be similar, in principle, to
maintaining the ability to read. For example, when I resumed writing
letters in Portuguese in 1993 after a gap of some thirty years, it did not
take me long to recover the knowledge needed - the inflections of
irregular verbs, the word order typical of Portuguese, etc.
Quot linguas calles, tot homines vales. ('You are worth as many
men as you know languages.' The Emperor Charles V, 16th
century)
359
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Below we list first a select bibliography of books we think are useful or of
interest to learners of foreign languages. It can only be a sample, and
naturally contains only a tiny proportion of even the useful books that
have been published. Section 2 is a list of the works mentioned in the text
that we have not listed in the select bibliography.
More and more of the world's best language books are being published
only in German. American and British publishers seem reluctant to
translate them and publish them in English. A good reason to learn
German first so that you can have access to these books! (There is no need
to master all the grammar in order to read German.)
It is not always easy to find good dictionaries. Quite a good quick test
(from the English-speaker's point of view) is to see whether they contain:
bed - go to bed AND get out of bed; mistake - make a mistake (much more
important than the lexicographer's favourite be mistaken); spend - spend
time doING.
360
361
D. Series publications
[There is today a vast choice of books for learning many different
languages, and many of them are published as one of a series.
Unfortunately this does not mean it is a good choice. The material
found in modern language-learning books is greatly improved in three
ways. The language presented is far more practical and realistic than it
usually was in the old days. It is very often available on cassette. And
many of the new books have indexes. But a terrible mistake has been
made in most of the more recent editions. The old straightforward
translation exercises have disappeared and been replaced by what, in
many cases, can only be described as silly games. This is very likely the
result of corruption by the tests used for English as a foreign language,
which now seems to set the fashion. Questions are asked about a text or
sentences: 'replace the nouns by pronouns'; 'supply the questions for
the following answers'; 'match the following sentences'; 'put the words
of these sentences in the right order'; .say how you would ask for a
ticket to Madrid' (why not a straightforward translation question?); 'are
the following statements true or false?'; multiple choice questions; etc.
etc. The publishers and authors have perhaps forgotten that such
exercises originated in the need to test students in their own language or
cater for groups of students of different nationalities. They do nothing
that cannot be done as well or better by translation, and cannot do
many things that translation exercises can do. Moreover, many of the
'new' types of exercise warn students more than ever that they are
being tested on a specific point (see §§155-156 and Appendix 10). Try to
362
get hold of old editions of the various series, second hand if necessary,
even if some of the turns of phrase in them are a bit old-fashioned.]
363
364
365
366
367
INDEX
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384