“Our use of language depends upon two capacities: a mental lexicon of memorized words and a mental grammar of rules that underlie the sequential and hierarchical composition of lexical forms into predictably structured larger words, phrases, and sentences.”
Michael T. Ullman: The Declarative/Procedural Model of Lexicon and Grammar
Journal of Psycholinguistic Research
Volume 30, Number 1 / January, 2001
According to Mr. Ullman the lexical knowledge (the association of meaning and sound into morphemes, irregular word forms etc) is linked with the declarative, temporal-lobe system. Declarative learning deals with learning active facts that can be recalled and used with great flexibility. Declarative memory is memory for facts. It is associated with the temporal lobe.
He links grammatical knowledge to the procedural memory system:
“In contrast, the acquisition and use of grammatical rules that underlie symbol manipulation is subserved by frontal/basal-ganglia circuits previously implicated in the implicit (nonconscious) learning and expression of motor and cognitive skills and habits (e.g., from simple motor acts to skilled game playing). Morphological transformations that are (largely) unproductive (e.g., in go—went, solemn—solemnity) are hypothesized to depend upon declarative memory. These have been contrasted with morphological transformations that are fully productive (e.g., in walk—walked, happy—happiness), whose computation is posited to be solely dependent upon grammatical rules subserved by the procedural system.”
The procedural memory system specializes in non-conscious learning and control of motor and cognitive skills (habit learning). It is associated with the striatum and frontal/basal-ganglia. Procedural memory is memory for skills (riding bicycle, dancing). There is convincing scientific evidence that highly automatized language skills are processed at this level.
The old saying that learning a language is like learning to ride a bicycle seems to be supported by a scientific explanation. They also say that learning to dance is very much like learning a new language.
From the above one could extrapolate that excessive rote memorization of grammatical rules is completely unnecessary and counterproductive. On the other hand language is a lot more complicated than a bicycle (or a dance). With a bicycle one at least needs to know where are the pedals, seat and handlebars. Dance manuals exist for a reason. The parts of speech and their use are not always immediately recognizable in a foreign language. Nor is it easy to understand how they dance or interact together. A good rule of the thumb is that the more complicated a piece of equipment or a skill that needs to be learned, the thicker will be the manual (and more pressing the need to consult it). Research (Erlam 2003) comparing learners who receive deductive (rule presentation and metalinguistic information) or inductive (focus on form with no explicit grammar) instruction "shows that learners receiving deductive instruction perform better on both listening and reading comprehension and written and oral production tasks". From the "Handbook of Educational Psychology" by Patricia A. Alexander and Philip H. Winne
In addition one could also conclude from the above that extensive and intensive use of dictionaries and word lists is a good way towards language proficiency.
1. "... excessive rote memorization of grammatical rules is completely unnecessary and counterproductive."
ReplyDeleteI find that a useful "lazy" alternative to memorizing grammar rules, which is a horrible concept, is to make sure you _understand_ what the rule says, and then look over the examples making the connection. And that's it, no memorization.
2. "From the above one could extrapolate that excessive rote memorization of grammatical rules is completely unnecessary and counterproductive."
Right, if grammar is somehow useful (to wit, "learners receiving deductive instruction perform better on both listening and reading comprehension and written and oral production tasks"), and yet at the same time is not like vocabulary, one has to _understand_ it, but not memorize it, as per item 1 above.
3. "... extensive and intensive use of dictionaries and word lists ..."
I know of extensive and intensive reading, the former not involving a dictionary. What do those two concepts mean for word lists?
And yes, Virginia, anyone who ever tried recording the new words met in reading and memorizing them knows that it results in very rapid progress.
"In addition one could also conclude from the above that ... word lists is a good way towards language proficiency."
ReplyDeleteI've actually wondered about this before. Are word lists really all that helpful? I mean, for one thing, making a list of words does not necessarily teach you how to use/apply the words correctly in various contexts (which is very important).
I'm also worried that making word lists would encourage confusion between 2+ languages. Then again, I've never tried the word list method (yet)... maybe I should try it out before criticizing it :)
//making a list of words does not necessarily teach you how to use/apply the words correctly in various contexts//
ReplyDeleteThis is argument by negation, which is dangerous even on logical grounds - the issue is not what the word lists cannot do, the issue what they can do. (A coffeemaker won't toast a slice of bread, but it will still make coffee.)
They quickly increase your passive vocabulary. This leads to a rapidly increasing understanding of what you read and hear. Indirectly, this allows for a more rapid development of active skills too, since one can focus on observing the subtleties of the language instead of constantly grappling with unknown words.
Drilling flashcards or word lists from target to native even helps with the active skills directly - there are plenty of words that are not contextually subtle, but one can't use a word actively if one doesn't know it at all.
Several 'How to Learn Any Language' forum members reported that when they chucked all the "natural acquisition" talk and went to drilling flashcards, their language skills ballooned.
You can always ask whether using flashcards instead of growing your vocabulary "organically" will somehow reduce the maximum level of fluency that you will ever be able to attain. This is pure speculation. Personally, I decided to ignore it.