hedwards Posted April 19, 2014 at 09:29 PM Report Share Posted April 19, 2014 at 09:29 PM It sounds very much like this approach follows the typical fallacy of assuming that high frequency is high utility and if you look at a typical corpus, the high frequency words are typically low meaning words. If you know 95% of the words in a text, chances are really good that it's the last 5% of the words that carry all or most of the meaning. Obviously that assumes that you're learning based upon frequency, but I think that's pretty much inevitable unless you're choosing materials that are heavily skewed towards less common words. I've tried approaches based upon frequency and I have yet to find one that worked as well as advertised. The main reason being that while they do reduce the amount of time, most of the time the words that they want me to study are lower interest words that are hard to get motivated by. And because they're based upon frequency lists, they're also not necessarily getting the words that are necessary to understand any text completely. Except in cases where the text itself was specifically tailored to that particular list. Still, it probably does work for some people, but unless you're especially committed or have a gun to your head to force completion, I'm not sure this approach can really do much about that high burn out rate. A typical person can learn about 4 words a day without any particular effort and at that rate, you'll eventually be able to read and write, but the motivation is usually going to run out well before one can read even a graded reader. That's not to say that I think this research is a waste of time or can't be used in a way that's useful. I just think that trying to use it as-is is probably not going to see the sort of gains that it would were it not for human nature. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Members He JianMing Posted April 28, 2014 at 04:58 AM New Members Report Share Posted April 28, 2014 at 04:58 AM Interesting, I was just reading an article on the BBC about this. I agree with hedwards 100% Also, as character said, "Reading and Writing Chinese: Third Edition" is a good book - though I think the font of the earlier books is much better for beginners. I think the real purpose of this study was to try and create a base for other projects to use to enhance learning efficiency. While the study itself applied directly may not be effective, I can see it being well-used to improve upon other techniques. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yadang Posted April 29, 2014 at 06:30 AM Author Report Share Posted April 29, 2014 at 06:30 AM I'm not sure this approach can really do much about that high burn out rate. Yeah, that's a good point - if one used this just as a list, I too think the burn out rate would be really high. I think the real purpose of this study was to try and create a base for other projects to use to enhance learning efficiency. While the study itself applied directly may not be effective, I can see it being well-used to improve upon other techniques. Yes, I completely agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and select your username and password later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.