"Arrival" is a really positive representation of linguistics and language learning

Arrival is a fantastic piece of science fiction. 12 (peaceful) alien spaceships arrive on earth, and a linguist is recruited to establish communication while the world at large slips into fear and panic. I will try to avoid spoilers here- go see it for yourself. But consider this a review of how the film portrays linguistics, linguists, and foreign language learning. I'll cover pros and cons:

PROS:
  • The complexity of language is presented with major importance to the plot. For example, Amy Adams' character has to explain how linguistically complicated the interrogative "What is your purpose on Earth?" to an Air Force general who sees it as one simple question composed of 6 words.
  • Linguistics is presented as science, and fights for equal standing along hard sciences. Jeremy Renner's character is a NSF scientist (chemist? physicist?) who is initially a bit dismissive of linguistics, making a distinction between language and science. But he is won over, and ends up being Adams' supporter. 
  • Interaction. Adams needs to interact directly with the aliens in order for there to be any way for her to learn their language/teach them ours. Interaction is key in language learning! 
  • Language teaching and learning is presented pretty positively. We get to see Adams' character providing comprehensible input to the aliens, using gestures and actions to illustrate concepts. She has to start with extremely simple messages, and gradually works up from there. Communication is important to the whole process.
  • Written language. The alien writing system is key for humans learning the language, and I think this is a nice parallel to the real world, where written language can provide a huge boon to foreign language learning, especially for adults. Some would argue that for adults in non-immersion contexts, it's really the ease of accessing a particular writing system that determines the difficulty of learning another language. The classic example is Mandarin being especially difficult for Anglophones, even though Mandarin is really no more or less complex than French (of course, cognate vocabulary also plays a role).
CONS:
  • Louise Banks (the linguist played by Amy Adams) speaks a lot of languages, and can interpret to English in real-time. While it's not a bad thing at all to have Anglophone movie characters demonstrate multilingual abilities, it nonetheless reinforces the popular conception of a linguist as someone who knows many languages.
  • Just about the only linguistic theory mentioned by name is Sapir-Whorf. This is actually somewhat of a key plot point, so I can forgive it on that account, but in the real world the idea that the language you speak shapes how you think and experience the world has been largely debunked. There are only very slight differences in processing information across languages, and these amount to arguably negligible differences when it comes to forming a worldview.
All in all, this is the movie you tell friends to watch if you want them to get a basic sense of what linguistics is- it's not perfect, but I think it's better than linguists-as-accent-coaches in My Fair Lady. It's also a well-crafted, entertaining movie otherwise. I think I'm going to have to check out director Denis Villeneuve's other work!

Communication Breakdown in Conversation: Pronunciation, Phonological Reception, Vocabulary... or a little bit of everything?

Alternate title: Dan overthinks a misunderstanding

As part of my ongoing efforts to at least retain, if not develop, my Korean abilities, I have been attending the Korean Conversation Table at my university (also, my wife helps put these on, so I kind of have to go- which is a good thing!).

I usually get grouped with a native speaker or two and some undergraduates who have finished all the Korean coursework and spent some time abroad, so we get some good conversation going on a range of topics. Generally, communication is doable, if a bit laborious at times, but occasionally someone experiences a breakdown, small or large.

At the most recent meeting, I experienced a major breakdown, but it was due to a really small bit that, once I realized my error, made me want to smack myself on the forehead. Another learner was talking about an internship she applied for, and she was worried that the working hours would be long- a topic I could generally follow along. In trying to explain her concerns about long working hours, she was talking about keeping a 9-5 schedule. In Korean, she was using the word 퇴근 (/twɛ.gɯn/), meaning "leaving work time", repeatedly (which makes sense). But for some reason, I kept hearing what I thought was something like 제근 (/dʑɛ.gɯn/)- a word that doesn't exist. It's worth mentioning that I think her pronunciation is quite clear (moreso than my own!), so I don't really know what was going on with my perception. I keyed on to the 근 morpheme, which I recognized as "work" and it was something that made sense given the context, so I started to think that "제근" was something like "regular work" (제 can mean something like "system" or "correct").

After sitting and listening, and spinning the gears in my head over what this word I thought I was hearing could mean, eventually I had to ask some clarification questions.  This helped me understand that she was actually saying 퇴근, a word I knew which makes total sense in this context (hence the smacking myself on the forehead). To indicate that I knew what she meant in relation to the topic, I offered the word 야근, which means "overtime"- a word that maybe I was expecting, given the topic, but she was unfamiliar with.

Meanwhile, the native speaker in the group naturally had no trouble following and helping both of us.

Fiction meets (near-)reality: Language Teaching and Technology

Instead of staring at my phone before going to bed, I've decided to buck the trend of "no for-pleasure reading in grad school." I'm currently reading Ready Player One by Ernest Cline. This is a book set in the near future where the virtually the whole planet regularly plugs in to a virtual reality called OASIS. OASIS is even used to deliver free public education, which includes language classes. A couple excerpts stood out to me:

Unfortunately, even with the limitless possibilities of OASIS at her disposal, my Latin teacher, Ms. Rank, still had a hard time making her lessons interesting. And today she was reviewing a bunch of verbs I'd already memorized, so I found my attention drifting almost immediately. (p. 61)
I think this is often the case in the present- impressive technology is used in very conventional and often boring ways. Sometimes convention works- I'm a big fan of digital vocabulary flashcards. But sometimes (more often than not?) putting a slick interface on top of low-engagement, low-context activities does very little to help language learning.

A few pages later, Cline describes the method of the protagonist's Latin teacher, Ms. Rank:
Our teacher, Ms. Rank, was standing at the front of the class, slowly conjugating Latin verbs. She said them in English first, then in Latin, and each word automatically appeared on the board behind her as she spoke it. Whenever we were doing tedious verb conjugation, I always got the lyrics to an old Schoolhouse Rock! song stuck in my head: "To run, to go, to give. Verb! You're what's happenin'!"

I was quietly humming this tune to myself when Ms. Rank began to conjugate the Latin for the verb "to learn." "To Learn. Discere," she said. "Now, this one should be easy to remember, because it's similar to the English word 'discern,' which also means 'to learn.'"

...

Ms. Rank continued, using the verb in a sentence. "We go to school to learn," she said. "Petimus scholam ut litteras discamus."
So first, I found it interesting that this is how Cline envisions or remembers language classes. To be fair, this is a description of a Latin class, which is (mostly) a dead language, in the real world and in Cline's fiction. Second, this sort of teaching still happens for living languages, and particularly in a lot of online language learning resources like Youtube video lessons or explicitly-oriented language learning apps. Explicit, L1-delivered instruction can definitely help people feel more comfortable about meanings and rules, and does arguably have some beneficial effect on learning, but it's clearly not the main driver of language learning. I hope that as the field of language teaching continues to move forward and more people learn in communicative classrooms, the next generation of authors will paint a different picture for us.

What I did this summer - Internship at CaMLA

I interned at CaMLA (Cambridge Michigan Language Assessments) in Ann Arbor, MI over the summer. They asked me to do a brief write-up of the experience, which you can read here:

http://cambridgemichigan.org/blog/2016/09/29/an-interns-words-dan-isbell/

SLRF 2016 - Conference Report

This past weekend hundreds of academics interested in second languages, from novices-still-in-training like myself to the titans of the field, met at Columbia University in New York for the 2016 Second Language Research Forum (SLRF). My highlights and take-aways:

  • Dr. Roy Lyster's plenary was fantastic. Lyster is probably known by most people in the field as "the corrective feedback guy", but his plenary drew back the curtains a bit and revealed how in actuality, much of his research has been concerned with content-rich classroom instruction. He also laid out his experience with teacher training, which is really impressive. To me, this plenary exemplifies how an SLA researcher can engage with classroom teaching.
  • There were a few presentations on L2 pronunciation! I didn't get to see them all, but the ones I managed to catch were all quite interesting. Dr. Mary O'Brien gave a very interesting talk on lexical stress in L2 German, and what I was particularly fascinating to me was how/whether learners were able to articulate the correct rule, an incorrect rule, or no rule at all. Yan Chen's talk on iconic enhancements to Cantonese scripts to facilitate tone learning was also really interesting. Although the effect of the iconic diacritics (Chao letters) was not particularly strong, it really made me think about the Korean script and how teachers might focus on letter shapes to reinforce particular vowel or consonant qualities for beginning learners.
  • Our group's presentation on Duolingo was surprisingly well-attended. Our timeslot was during the mid-to-late afternoon of the last day, and the schedule was so packed with concurrent sessions that I was expecting a smaller crowd, but we had people standing in the hall! But that actually sounds more impressive than it really was... our room was a bit on the cramped side. But a good turnout nonetheless, and a lively Q&A session. 
  • On a more personal note, NYC was pretty enjoyable. I got to visit family and an old friend from high school. I set very low expectations for sightseeing, and I was happy with the experience. The major sights will still be there next time.
  • The only negative experience with NYC was my train getting delayed Saturday morning, which caused me to miss a couple presentations I was hoping to see. On the sort-of bright side, that led to a walk through the Upper West Side and finding a tasty breakfast sandwich and super-sweet coffee for a very modest price at a little deli- it was a nice consolation.

More L2 Korean Phonological Error Rates

Following up on my previous post on L2 Korean pronunciation over time, I have finished coding and counting for another task (this time, a more spontaneous picture description task) and have some fresh plots to share:


Lots of individual variation in direction and magnitude of changes. The treatment group, at least for the read-aloud task, is a bit less "noisy" and seems to show a stronger trend towards reduction in error rates.

Some higher-level descriptive statistics below. Lots to talk about considering the plot above and table below! L1 Chinese seem to have noticeably higher syllable error rates, but groups showed improvement overall. Back to writing this up...





Segmental Error Rate

Syllable Error Rate

Combined Error Rate


Pretest
Posttest

Pretest
Posttest

Pretest
Posttest

n
M (SD)
M (SD)

M (SD)
M (SD)

M (SD)
M (SD)
Chinese
24
0.12 (0.07)
0.10 (0.04)

0.09 (0.05)
0.07 (0.04)

0.21 (0.11)
0.17 (0.07)
English
47
0.10 (0.06)
0.08 (0.05)

0.05 (0.03)
0.04 (0.03)

0.15 (0.08)
0.12 (0.06)










1st Year
47
0.13 (0.07)
0.09 (0.05)

0.08 (0.04)
0.06 (0.04)

0.21 (0.10)
0.15 (0.07)
2nd Year
24
0.06 (0.03)
0.07 (0.04)

0.04 (0.03)
0.04 (0.02)

0.10 (0.04)
0.10 (0.06)










Treatment
38
0.11 (0.06)
0.08 (0.04)

0.06 (0.04)
0.05 (0.03)

0.17 (0.09)
0.13 (0.07)
Control
33
0.11 (0.08)
0.08 (0.05)

0.06 (0.04)
0.06 (0.04)

0.17 (0.11)
0.14 (0.08)










Picture
36
0.09 (0.06)
0.08 (0.04)

0.07 (0.04)
0.06 (0.04)

0.16 (0.07)
0.14 (0.06)
Read-Aloud
35
0.12 (0.07)
0.08 (0.05)

0.06 (0.04)
0.04 (0.03)

0.18 (0.11)
0.13 (0.08)










All
71
0.11 (0.07)
0.08 (0.05)

0.06 (0.04)
0.05 (0.04)

0.17 (0.10)
0.14 (0.07)

Homework for Instructed Language Learning

Recently, a note to parents from a second grade teacher in Texas went viral. Instead of doing homework, the teacher urged parents to let kids play, to eat dinner with their kids, and to read to their kids. You can read the whole note on Facebook.

This teacher's sentiment seems to reflect a growing trend in American K-12 education, according to the NPR article linked at the beginning of this post. For language teachers, what does a move away from homework mean? After all, many language courses involve lots of take-home grammar worksheets and vocabulary exercises. At more advanced levels, language learners are commonly asked to do writing assignments or prepare presentations as homework.

Although it might be tempting to jump on the no-homework train and never look back, the issue of homework in language classes cannot be approached without considering learner age, instructional context, and class time.

First, children tend to be different than adults when it comes to language learning. Even putting aside debates about the critical period hypothesis (or sensitive period) and ignoring how the internal mechanisms for language acquisition might be different, any language teacher who has experience teaching both children and adults can tell you about some major differences in emotional and cognitive maturity. Simply put, young children are not likely to get much out of rule-based grammar worksheets, in-class or at home. Some would argue that older learners are not likely to get much out of them either, but at the very least they should be able to complete such exercises.

Second, instructional context matters. In a context where the target language is spoken widely outside of school, students may get less benefits from doing language homework. Heck, for children especially, sitting at their desk for an hour a night doing grammar worksheets is going to be far less beneficial than going to the park to play with friends who speak the target language. For adults, coffee with friends is also likely to be of help. But in environments where the target language is not spoken, a teacher creating some out-of-class obligation to use the target language, and provide materials for it, could very well be crucial to a learner's success. In those environments, flipped classrooms for older language learners are attractive: instead of spending class time on grammar lectures or running through a list of new vocabulary, those can be done at home in advance and class time can be packed full of good input and communication- the things that are much harder to get outside of the classroom for foreign language learners.

Finally, class time should be a major consideration in the decision to abandon homework. Language learning requires input, and getting lots of input translates into a vast amount of time. There really is no "one easy trick" or hack to learn a language quickly, even though good instruction can make the slow process appreciably quicker. So your 2-4 hours a week of Spanish in a high school class is not likely to be sufficient for developing a modest degree of communicative competence in the language- more input and opportunities for meaningful language use is needed. On the other hand, if students are getting 4+ hours per day of instruction, the benefits of homework might be diminished (I say might because in language learning, more input is universally a good thing), especially when exposure to the target language is easy to get outside of the classroom for social or entertainment purposes. Also, for child second language learners (e.g., recent immigrants), it may be just as worthwhile to maintain the first language and work on first language literacy at home, as we know that literacy skills transfer across languages (assuming that one has achieved some degree of competence in whatever additional language).

With those three considerations out of the way, the question of what kind of language homework deserves attention. So far I've alluded to the idea that grammar worksheets are not especially helpful, especially for children but I generally hold the same to be true for adults (they're not necessarily harmful, and in small doses may indeed be useful, but we have to think about opportunity costs and relative importance). Here's where the teacher's note to parents holds particularly good (though perhaps unintentional) advice for language teachers: "eat dinner as a family, read together, play outside." While this can be hard for parents if they do not also speak the target language, the principle that social and pleasurable language use (dinner conversation, reading books) is helpful should not be overlooked. In English language teaching, a lot of work has been done on extensive reading and the practice, which involves reading linguistically-appropriate texts for pleasure, has generally been shown to be effective in terms of vocabulary learning and reading fluency. In other areas, research has found language benefits for socializing online, living with host families during study abroad (dinner conversations, anyone?), and even participating in online gaming communities. Regardless of whether you overtly assign these sorts of activities or not, this is generally what you really want your students to be doing with the language outside of class rather than studying grammar rules. However, I should mention that some explicit language study can be helpful, especially for vocabulary: spending some time studying word lists and completing exercises that require some engagement with words have been shown to be effective and efficient for establishing at least some types of word knowledge.

So as with most things, there are shades of gray when it comes to homework. Some focused, empirically-based and hopefully limited homework that focuses on language features can be helpful in certain situations (consider your learners' age, learning context, and class time). But in general, the important thing is for learners to spend lots of time getting meaningful input and communicating, as assigned homework or not.

PSLLT 2016 - Day 1

Live from lovely Calgary, here are some brief thoughts on the first day of the 8th Pronunciation in Second Language Learning and Teaching conference:

- Great representation of non-English languages. Kyujin and I presented on Korean, and we saw presentations/posters on Chinese, German, and Russian (and that's not a comprehensive list).

- As would be expected given the conference theme, lots of interesting work being done incorporating tech. I'm particularly impressed with how corpus and NLP techniques are being utilized in pronunciation-focused projects.

- Ultrasound in pronunciation had 3 papers. Still strikes me as somewhat impractical, but the papers were presenting some really neat ideas and I'll b3 looking forward to seeing those lines of work develop.

- Is there a tension between pushes for individualized pronunciation instruction/training and greater classroom integration?

- It's been suggested that perception and pronunciation development sometimes requires some explicit instruction and drilling (i.e., HVPT). I wouldn't disagree that that approach can be effective. But does pronunciation instruction need to exclude non-phonological aspects of language learning? In other words, can we have a primary focus on pronunciation that might benefit language ability more holistically?