Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Son Deureo!]

[thorin]

[mindmetoo]

Korean is easier than Japanese or Chinese for sure. No tonals. Hangul is easy to learn. A year of casual study it's not too hard to become a functionally bad speaker of Korean, enough to get by and engage in simple conversation.

[Wangja]

I have studied Korean for around 1200 hours and can still barely maintain a simple conversation: vocabulary is the issue for me. Grammar, no real problem.

By contrast, in Brazil I learned enough Portuguese in 6 weeks to hold a reasonable conversation - loads of words, no grammar. I did have the advantage there that I had learned Latin at school and was already a fluent French speaker.

[tomato]

Hello, Fondasoape!

I am trying to learn about the researchers and theorists whom you have mentioned. But I need some help.

Gass: See Selinker.

Bialystok: Amazon shows a sample page from a book by this author, and the book is reasonably priced. I ordered a copy.

Ellis: I can't figure out who you're talking about. Can you give us a first name?

Selinker: Amazon has a book by Gass & Selinker for $33.00. That's too much for a pig in a poke. But I might buy a copy if you can give us a preview. I agree with Son Deureo and I agree with Thorin.

Pavlenko: Again, the pig in the poke is too expensive. Amazon is asking $43.50. I'm not sure I could understand Pavlenko. A Google search revealed an abstract written by Pavlenko, and it had one big word right after another.

On the other hand, I am interested in what Pavlenko has to say about the role of emotions in foreign language learning. If Pavlenko can help me cuss out every store clerk who shows me the calculator, I will be very grateful.

[tomato]

Hello again, Fondasoape!

Now to change the subject:

G, B, E, S, and P may be important researchers and theorists. I don't dispute that.

Furthermore, G, B, E, S, and P may have information which refutes the chart which Mashimaro shows us. I don't dispute that.

But if all this is true, that is all the more reason why you should offer G, B, E, S, and P's writings in a way that makes these writings easily acceptable.

Insulting us does not make these writings easily acceptable. You are presenting us with two messages which can be easily confused:

1. The writings of G, B, E, S, and P are worth your time.
2. You are "ignorant".

Consequently, the reader has to consider the following two questions:

1. Are the writings of G, B, E, S, and P really worth my time?
2. Am I really "ignorant"?

This second question is a very emotion-laden question. When emotions come into play, it is difficult to think logically. The reader, then, might not be able to separate this question and another question presented by the same person. The reader, then, will be tempted to answer no to both questions.

I am asking nothing of you that I don't ask of myself. Someone wrote to this message board, asking for advice on how to bring a kindergarten class to order. I shared what I have learned through training and experience, but I didn't call him "ignorant" for not already knowing how. Another person wrote in, asking for action songs. I copied some items from from my song collection, but I didn't call him "ignorant" for not already knowing those songs.

There are many fine people who don't know how to call a kindergarten class to order, there are many fine people who don't know very many action songs, and there are many fine people who don't know who Pavlenko is.

[jajdude]

[d503]

Is any language harder to learn than another, no. Languages are composed of parts that all fully functioning humans are equipped to learn and understand, and this can be seen in that all children learn their mother tongues at approximately the same rate. This doesn't mean that all second languages can be acquired in the same amount of time, or with similar ease. I have a Spanish speaking friend who took Portuguese, it was really easy for him because of how close it was to Spanish. The amount of time it took him to acquire proficiency is nowhere near the time it took a non-Spanish speaker.

There are a lot of factors to consider prior to saying things like all languages can be learned in the same amount of time. It's not true for second languages. If your native tongue (or other known language) shares common points with the language you are learning it makes it easier. Things like learning new grammar rules, new writing styles, new vocabulary, all take time and the more you can dredge from your prior language knowledge, the quicker the acquisition will go. This is also why the first language you learn in a language group is the hardest one.

[Tiger Beer]

[fondasoape]

Some tidbits from linguistics and language behavior abstracts:


TI: Interlanguage Transfer and Competing Linguistic Systems in the Multilingual Mind
AU: Author De Angelis, Gessica; Selinker, Larry
SO: Source
CROSS-LINGUISTIC INFLUENCE IN THIRD LANGUAGE ACQUISITION: PSYCHOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES, Cenoz, Jasone, Hufeisen, Britta, & Jessner, Ulrike [Eds], Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters, pp 42-58
AB: Abstract
Aspect of interlanguage transfer, ie, the use of nonnative language knowledge in the acquisition of another language, are discussed, presenting a brief survey of existing research on interlanguage transfer & other issues related to multilinguals' interlanguages & their activation. In order to determine to what extent third (L3) or additional language interlanguage is influenced by native (L1) vs second languages (L2), with special regard to the perceived similarity of the languages in question, interlanguage transfer was studied in 2 adult multilingual learners of Italian; S1 spoke French as L1 & English & Spanish as L2s, & S2 spoke English as L1 & Spanish as L2. Two types of interlanguage transfer were observed in both Ss, ie, lexical transfer (use of a nontarget word) & morphological transfer (use of nontarget free or bound morphemes). It was found that both Ss tended to transfer lexical as well as morphological Spanish items in their Italian interlanguage. This tendency is explained from the perspective of perceived similarity as well as L2 status, ie, the "foreignness" shared between L2 & L3. 25 References. S. Paul
LA: Language
English
PY: Publication Year
2001
PT: Publication Type
Book Chapter (bca)


TI: Title
'Language of the Enemy': Foreign Language Education and National Identity
AU: Author
Pavlenko, Aneta
AF: Affiliation
Dept CITE, Coll Education, Temple U, Philadelphia, PA mailto:[email protected]
SO: Source
International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 2003, 6, 5, 313-331
IS: ISSN
1367-0050
AB: Abstract
The focus of the present paper is on the relationship between national identities & foreign language education policies & practices. The paper examines this relationship through a juxtaposition of three socio-historic contexts in which sociopolitical events led to major changes in foreign language education: post-World War I United States, post-World War II Soviet Union, & post-communist Eastern Europe. Based on these examples, it is argued that shifts in national identity images & sociopolitical allegiances have implications for foreign language policies & practices. It is also argued that foreign language learners may choose to construct oppositional identities in language classrooms: some may reject the languages imposed on them for patriotic reasons, while others may instead reject the dominant national identity & create an alternative one through the means of a foreign language. 52 References. Adapted from the source document
LA: Language
English
PY: Publication Year
2003


TI: Title
Bidirectional Transfer
AU: Author
Pavlenko, Aneta; Jarvis, Scott
AF: Affiliation
CITE Dept, Coll Education, Temple U, Philadelphia, PA mailto:[email protected]
SO: Source
Applied Linguistics, 2002, 23, 2, June, 190-214
IS: ISSN
0142-6001
CD: CODEN
ADLSDX
AB: Abstract
This paper argues for a refinement in the traditional approach to transfer in SLA, where transfer is generally investigated as the unidirectional influence of native (or other language) knowledge on the acquisition & use of a second language. We show that transfer can be bidirectional, influencing an individual's use of both the L1 & L2. We further argue that bidirectional transfer can be simultaneous or synchronic & base this conclusion on the results of our analysis of oral narratives produced by 22 Russian L2 users of English, who learned English post-puberty after having lived in the USA for 3-8 years. The narratives, collected in Russian & English, demonstrate that crosslinguistic influence works both ways in the oral production of these L2 users - while Russian continues to influence their English, their English has begun to influence their Russian as well. We discuss the factors that may influence the directionality & amount of transfer in these L2 users, as well as ways in which various types of transfer are similar & different in their two languages. Then, we outline the implications of our findings for the future study of transfer in SLA & bilingualism. 2 Tables, 3 Figures, 80 References. Adapted from the source document
LA: Language
English
PY: Publication Year
2002



TI: Title
Grammaticality Judgments in a Second Language: Influences of Age of Acquisition and Native Language
AU: Author
McDonald, Janet L
AF: Affiliation
Dept Psychology, Louisiana State U, Baton Rouge mailto:[email protected]
SO: Source
Applied Psycholinguistics, 2000, 21, 3, Sept, 395-423
IS: ISSN
0142-7164
CD: CODEN
APPSDZ
AB: Abstract
Native Spanish early & late acquirers of English as well as native Vietnamese early & child acquirers of English made grammaticality judgments of sentences in their second language. Native Spanish early acquirers were not distinguishable from native English speakers, whereas native Spanish late acquirers had difficulty with all aspects of the grammar tested except word order. Native Vietnamese early acquirers had difficulty with those aspects of English that differ markedly from Vietnamese. Native Vietnamese child acquirers had more generalized problems, similar to those of native Spanish late acquirers. Thus, native language appeared to make a difference for early acquirers, whereas a later age of acquisition caused a more general problem. A processing-based model focusing on the difficulty non-native language learners have in rapidly decoding surface form is offered as a possible explanation for both effects. 6 Tables, 2 Figures, 1 Appendix, 31 References. Adapted from the source document




TI: Title
Native-Like Attainment in L2 Syntax
AU: Author
Van Boxtel, Sonja; Bongaerts, Theo; Coppen, Peter-Arno
AF: Affiliation
U Nijmegen
SO: Source
EUROSLA Yearbook, 2003, 3, 157-181
IS: ISSN
1568-1491
AB: Abstract
In this study, we test the prediction, derived from the critical period hypothesis, that a native level of attainment in L2 grammar cannot be reached by learners who start acquiring a second language after the onset of puberty. We selected 30 very advanced German & French late learners (age of arrival less than or equal to 12 years) of Dutch & compared their performance on a grammar test with that of 44 (highly educated) native speakers of Dutch. The test consisted of two tasks: an elicited imitation task & a relative grammaticality judgment task. In these tasks, participants were tested on their knowledge of dummy subject constructions. These construction types were chosen because they are known to be very hard to acquire for learners of Dutch as a second language. The results show that it is possible to attain a native level of proficiency for learners who start acquiring a second language (long) after puberty. 4 Tables, 2 Figures, 1 Appendix, 35 References. Adapted from the source document




TI: Title
Producing Words in a Foreign Language: Can Speakers Prevent Interference from Their First Language?
AU: Author
Hermans, Daan; Bongaerts, Theo; De Bot, Kees; Schreuder, Robert
AF: Affiliation
Dept Applied Linguistics U Nijmegen, NL-6525 HT Netherlands mailto:[email protected]
SO: Source
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1998, 1, 3, Dec, 213-229
IS: ISSN
1366-7289
AB: Abstract
Two picture-word interference experiments were conducted to investigate whether words from a first & more dominant language are activated during lexical access in a foreign & less dominant language. Native speakers of Dutch were instructed to name pictures in English, their foreign language. The experiments show that the Dutch name of a picture is activated during initial stages of lexical processing in English as a foreign language. It is concluded that bilingual speakers cannot suppress activation from their first language while naming pictures in a foreign language. The implications for bilingual speech production theories are discussed. 3 Tables, 3 Appendixes, 42 References. Adapted from the source document
LA: Language



Beginning to get the picture?

[the_beaver]

[matthewwoodford]

fondascape, I read those articles and they all seem to back up the point made in the OP's website, except the one that says even late acquirers of a second language can master the grammar which doesn't back it up but doesn't contradict it either. Perhaps you don't understand the articles.

[Sliver]

To say some languages are harder to learn than others for a certain group of learners based on the L1 of said learners is distinctly different to saying one language is harder, better, more sophisticated or whatever than another language. I can agree that all languages are created equal (let��s not get into a language and power discussion) and as far as L1 acquisition is concern The Beaver has already said it.

Examining the articles posted by fondasoape

1. Interlanguage Transfer and Competing Linguistic Systems in the Multilingual Mind -has a sample size of two. No generalizability here.

2. 'Language of the Enemy': Foreign Language Education and National Identity – Discusses language and power, identity issues related to language planning policy. I don��t see how this is relevant to this discussion. Not a study either.

3. Bidirectional Transfer – Supports interlanguage theory and suggests some a two way transfer. This is line with further research being done into Baker (1995) and Hoffman��s (1991) Common underlying proficiency theory (iceberg analogy) where, of course, L1 and L2 are not distinct identities.

4. Grammaticality Judgments in a Second Language: Influences of Age of Acquisition and Native Language – Read closely here –

[fondasoape]

It's a case of perception versus reality.

Perceived similarity plays a bigger role than actual similarity in perceived rate of acquisition. For adults, this perception does not affect (significantly, at least) the amount of time it takes to reach proficiency (or at least one's actual level of interlanguage fossilization). For proficient users, it also takes a similar amount of time+effort to move ideas from L1 to L2.

Children are another story, but since I imagine you're all adults, and since the original Monterey data dealt with adults, I've (gasp!) decided to avoid/ignore the issue.

If you learned a language without knowing what language it was, it would take roughly the same amount of time to reach one's ceiling regardless of the language being learned.

All of this, of course, is based on the assumptions that (a) one was trying to reach the same level and kind of proficiency, and that the learners were all similarly endowed with tolerance of ambiguity, motivation etc.

[Sliver]

fondasoape wrote