"I have been learning Spanish for over three years now ... However, I really struggle with understanding spoken Spanish."
In this person's case, it could be that they've spent three years on duolingo instead of practicing listening to native Spanish speakers.
I've been learning my target language for two years and have no difficulty understanding it when spoken. Over that time I have listened to hundreds of hours of podcasts, audiobooks and TV shows.
Yeah, in my experience you get out exactly what you put in. If you want to be good at listening to people, then you need to spend your time listening to people. So this seems like a good hint that Duolingo is pretty different from actual people.
Is it? I have studied languages at school and using apps and never really achieved any fluency or understanding of spoken or written language.
I lived in Spain for a bit over 3 months when I was a young man and became fluent in spoken Spanish. To the point I started thinking in Spanish but never noticed when that happened.
So the method of learning really does seem to matter, at least for me.
So you spent 16*90 = ~1440h practicing spoken Spanish. I do believe that if you spent the same amount of time but focused on written Spanish you would acquire a richer vocabulary.
English is my second language. We started learning it in school when I was 10. My first trip to England, and my first serious use of English, was when I was 16. I went to a summer youth camp of sorts, and there were no one I could communicate with using my primary language.
The first day was rough, I had trouble understanding the English dialects and making myself understood. It got gradually better.
On the fifth day I had a 30 minute conversation with a native, before they asked where I was from. When I said Norway they looked very surprised. Turned out they thought I was a native too, they just struggled to place my dialect.
When it was over my parents picked me up. We all spoke Norwegian as they asked me about my stay.
Not even half an hour later I asked for something in a shop and it was instantly obvious my English was back to how it had been on day one...
Sure quantity of exposure helps, but I think something happens when you're immersed in it with no option but to try to understand or be understood. If you have an escape hatch it just isn't the same.
It's not harder, it just requires different type of fitness. For example, there is a very good and highly effective, although intensive, way to learn to speak Dutch - Delftse Methode. There they focus on building speaking skills by, surprise-surprise, a lot of speaking, training and remembering standard situations. I think, there may be similar methods for other languages.
I think it probably depends on how far the writing system is from your own. Imagine you were coming from the English alphabet and learning Japanese. You put in the same number of learning hours, but in one scenario you only learn the written language, and in the other scenario only the spoken.
I think you'd probably learn more from the spoken language. Spoken language is higher bandwidth. Tone of voice, melody and rhythm can convey a lot of extra information with the same words. Plus if you're getting the spoken language in real life or from video, there's probably a bunch of extra context that makes it easier to understand. Even better, if you're talking to someone willing to help you learn, they will simplify their speech and start using gestures to help you understand.
I can accept that, as in the article, for someone who's spent all their time on written language spoken language will seem harder. I've split my time equally between the two and neither seems "harder" than the other. For what it's worth, my target language also uses the latin alphabet.
Ya not sure about that one tbh. I have lived in the Czech republic for about 15 years, and I speak fluent Czech and but reading is quite different.
It's highly individual of course but I managed to become fluent with a 6 month low intensity course, and then about 5 years of just intently listening, asking questions, and grinding it out. That's the only way imo to really learn to speak. Classes and books are shit compared to having monolingual in-laws or being forced to navigate life using the thing. Immersion beats all else, including intense study.
I’m currently nearing the end of section 5 of the the Spanish duolingo course which is lower B1 level and I watched a Spanish film with only Spanish subtitles on for the first time a few weeks ago. I could definitely hear a lot of the words but I wouldn’t have been able to follow along if I didn’t have the subtitles because my brain just isn’t at the point where it can decode the speech in real time. But if I watched it a few times I think I would have been able to. It’s complicated by the fact that Duolingo Spanish accents are probably closest to Mexican accents whereas Spanish speakers like in the film have a much softer and lispier accent than the Latin American areas. When I watched a Mexican film a while back I was pleasantly surprised by how easy I was finding listening compared to the Spanish tv show I had been watching earlier.
I agree that you’ve got to branch out (otherwise what is the point of learning the language) but the Spanish and French courses on Duolingo give you a solid foundation.
> whereas Spanish speakers like in the film have a much softer and lispier accent
A person who pronounces the words "think" and "sink" differently doesn't have a "lisp". The same is true in Spanish with words such as "zaca" and "saca" -- See? They are even written differently!
This phenomenon is called "distinción" [0]. The lack of this distinction, which is what we see in most of Latin America is called "seseo".
All of this is to say: please stop calling it a lisp.
I'm glad you have informed me of what this term is but that being said, anyone who doesn't know that term (which is probably 99.9% of English speakers) is not going to have any idea what I'm talking about. If I say "the main difference in pronunciation between Latin America and Spain is that Latin America have a lack of distinction in their pronunciation which is called seseo" no-one is going to know what I'm talking about whereas if I say "the main difference in pronunciation between Latin America and Spain is that Spanish sounds a bit softer and more lispy" everyone knows what I'm talking about immediately. I also don't consider it particularly offensive, there is no mocking of anyone with a lisp in that sentence.
> if I say "the main difference in pronunciation between Latin America and Spain is that Spanish sounds a bit softer and more lispy" everyone knows what I'm talking about immediately
And if you were to say that "the main difference in pronunciation between straight and gay men is that gay men sound softer and more lispy" everybody knows what you are talking about immediately too. Also, "you may not consider it particularly offensive, there is no mocking of anyone with a lisp in that sentence".
The reality of it is that as a Spaniard I am just tired of Latin Americans constantly making fun of our dialect, so forgive me for politely informing a foreigner that our dialect is not a lisp.
Now please carry on explaining how much you don't find it offensive. It makes all the difference.
So the entire English speaking world should study the linguistics of Spanish in order to accommodate your specific annoyances, annoyances you have with bullies from Spanish speaking countries and not English ones? That's like getting mad with any regular person for saying "gnomes are short like dwarves" because you're a dwarf and some tall guy at school decided to bully you for being short and called you a gnome.
A foreigner studying Spanish repeats an insult commonly thrown at Spaniards. A Spaniard very politely informs them about it. The foreigner doubles down instead of, saying something like "Hey, I didn't know that. Sorry for repeating a common misconception".
You do you, man. Why learn and do better when you can show everybody your true colors?
Not only do words have multiple meanings, the intention of how they are used is also important. I didn't use the word as a noun or an insult, I used it as an adjective to describe the sound to a fellow english speaker. The fact that you are so offended about it speaks volumes about you because your attitude suggests you don't want to be associated with those with lisps, presumably because you see it as shameful.
My theory is that people will use the minimum 'whistles and clicks' to communicate with each other, so when there is a lot of shared context (shared society, culture, mannerisms etc) that does much of the heavy lifting for communication. For example there is the English I (unconsciously) use when speaking to English as a Second Language people, and a much cut down English for talking to native speakers that is apparently unintelligible to non-native speakers.
This. Be kind to new speakers of your language by (a) waking up your points of articulation and enunciating more clearly, and (imho) (b) pausing a bit between clauses. Maybe stir in techniques like placing the topic of the sentence at the beginning: "My goofy cat, I had to call the fire department to get him out of a tree yesterday."
Correlate for writing: deploy commas strategically and effectively.
> We don't notice how much adapting and adjusting our brain has to do in our own language, but in a new language, we have to re-learn those sound boundaries, for potentially dozens of new sounds.
Some examples from Japanese and English:
Japanese distinguishes between short and long vowels and between short and long consonants in a way that English does not. For example, the words kata, katta, and kātā (where ā indicates a long a) are pronounced differently and have different meanings (“shoulder,” “bought,” and “Carter,” respectively). Native English speakers learning Japanese as adults will often think at first that all three words sound the same (kata). Even after they become aware of the differences, they may still have trouble recognizing them in continuous speech.
Similarly, English makes phonemic distinctions that do not exist in Japanese. The most well known is that between r and l, so that, for example, “grass” and “glass” can sound the same even to fluent Japanese speakers of English.
My first language is English; I moved to Japan at the age of 26 and have lived here for 40 years. Although I speak, read, and write Japanese fluently, I still sometimes mishear words in spoken Japanese because, despite much study, effort, and experience, I have not fully acquired all of the phonemic distinctions.
As a consequence of this you will occasionally realize that native speakers distinguish between two sounds that appear the same to you, which means that not only you didn't hear the difference, but also you must have been pronouncing it wrong all along.
That's where I am right now in English with "Colin" and "calling", after almost twenty years living in English-speaking countries. Sigh!
Another thing that separates Japanese from other languages is the fact that it's a pitch-accent language. I'm currently learning the language and it's the part I'm struggling with the most. I struggled less while learning a tonal language like Mandarin.
Both pitches and tones in those languages are picked up by native speakers naturally, while language learners have to actively adapt from all the habits they've formed in their native languages.
My experience matches yours. In my case, I think it was due to the different teaching methods I was exposed to in the early stage of language learning.
I studied Mandarin for two years when I was in college in California. From the first day of class, our teachers drilled the tones into us, and I made a point of memorizing the tones for every word I learned. Our textbooks and dictionaries also marked the tones on all words. I have since forgotten Mandarin, but when I could still speak it a little I think I had pretty good feeling for the tones.
Eight years later, when I started taking Japanese classes in Tokyo, our teachers occasionally mentioned the pitch accents and gave examples of minimal pairs (usually hashꜜi “chopsticks” vs. hashꜛiꜜ “bridge”), but they didn’t drill us on them or correct us. None of our textbooks indicated word accents. Even today I am uncertain about the pitch accent for a lot of the words I acquired during my first year or two of Japanese study. I have a better sense for the accents of the words I learned later, because by then I had mostly acquired the pitch-accent phonology by osmosis.
When I was a student of Japanese, only a couple of Japanese-English dictionaries, both published by Kenkyusha, and only one regular Japanese-Japanese dictionary, from Sanseido, marked pitch accent for headwords. Years later, when I worked with professional narrators of Japanese, I learned about an NHK accent dictionary that they would refer to when uncertain about how to accent a particular word.
One of those Kenkyusha dictionaries is long out of print, and the other—Kenkyusha’s New Japanese-English Dictionary—dropped pitch accent from the fifth edition published in 2003. The managing editor, whom I knew, felt that the Japanese users at whom the dictionary was primarily aimed didn’t need to have the accent indicated.
These days, of course, people have much better resources for learning languages. I learned today, from another discussion here on Hacker News, that Microsoft Edge has very good text-to-speech built in. I just now had it read aloud a couple of Japanese sentences containing the two hashis, and the pitch-accent difference was clear and natural.
Yes, I think you're right. The teaching methods are probably the biggest cause. I studied Mandarin for a year at Leiden University and the tones were drilled just like you mentioned.
Also, most people who learn Mandarin are aware of the fact that the tones are an essential part of the language. But when it comes to Japanese, there seems to be a divide between people who think that learning pitch accents is essential and people who think their time is better spent on learning other things.
I think a good middle ground is to at least learn about pitch accents until you can recognize them when a Japanese sentence is well articulated. I believe you'll be able to emulate them with enough exposure when you can at least recognize them. The next phase would then be for them to become second nature, but that will probably take many years.
By the way, the following two websites are essential to me when it comes to learning pitch accents:
The first link generates images that visualize the pitch accents of sentences that you enter. You can then adjust those pitch accent graphs by clicking on individual syllables. It can also generate the (very robotic) audio files of the pronunciations of those sentences. I add those images to the cards in my Anki deck, and reference them after attempting to pronounce the pitch accent of a word or sentence.
The second link is an online dictionary that includes the pitch accents of individual words. I use it mostly when I need to double check the pitch accent of a word.
As an L2 German speaker living in Germany, I have witnessed how slight vowel length differences matter. In my native Polish, vowel length is not phonemic - unlike in German. I've recently had a situation when I pronounced the word Krokette with a long E /krokeːtə/ instead of a short E /krokɛtə/, and I had to repeat myself a few times before the seller understood what I meant. I pay a lot of attention to properly timing my words, because this seems to be the biggest barrier for others to understand me in here.
One other thing is stress placement; Polish places its primary stress on the penultimate syllabe of each word, making it probably the only Slavic language without variable stress (sentence stress is an another case). Whenever I hear Czech or Ukrainian - closely related languages - I need some extra time to post-process what has been said, and then I recognize the words that are understandable to me to a significant extent. I'm usually not able to process those in real time.
31 comments
[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 75.7 ms ] threadIn this person's case, it could be that they've spent three years on duolingo instead of practicing listening to native Spanish speakers.
I've been learning my target language for two years and have no difficulty understanding it when spoken. Over that time I have listened to hundreds of hours of podcasts, audiobooks and TV shows.
I lived in Spain for a bit over 3 months when I was a young man and became fluent in spoken Spanish. To the point I started thinking in Spanish but never noticed when that happened.
So the method of learning really does seem to matter, at least for me.
English is my second language. We started learning it in school when I was 10. My first trip to England, and my first serious use of English, was when I was 16. I went to a summer youth camp of sorts, and there were no one I could communicate with using my primary language.
The first day was rough, I had trouble understanding the English dialects and making myself understood. It got gradually better.
On the fifth day I had a 30 minute conversation with a native, before they asked where I was from. When I said Norway they looked very surprised. Turned out they thought I was a native too, they just struggled to place my dialect.
When it was over my parents picked me up. We all spoke Norwegian as they asked me about my stay.
Not even half an hour later I asked for something in a shop and it was instantly obvious my English was back to how it had been on day one...
Sure quantity of exposure helps, but I think something happens when you're immersed in it with no option but to try to understand or be understood. If you have an escape hatch it just isn't the same.
Maybe you are a lot more talkative than I am!
I think you'd probably learn more from the spoken language. Spoken language is higher bandwidth. Tone of voice, melody and rhythm can convey a lot of extra information with the same words. Plus if you're getting the spoken language in real life or from video, there's probably a bunch of extra context that makes it easier to understand. Even better, if you're talking to someone willing to help you learn, they will simplify their speech and start using gestures to help you understand.
I can accept that, as in the article, for someone who's spent all their time on written language spoken language will seem harder. I've split my time equally between the two and neither seems "harder" than the other. For what it's worth, my target language also uses the latin alphabet.
It's highly individual of course but I managed to become fluent with a 6 month low intensity course, and then about 5 years of just intently listening, asking questions, and grinding it out. That's the only way imo to really learn to speak. Classes and books are shit compared to having monolingual in-laws or being forced to navigate life using the thing. Immersion beats all else, including intense study.
I agree that you’ve got to branch out (otherwise what is the point of learning the language) but the Spanish and French courses on Duolingo give you a solid foundation.
A person who pronounces the words "think" and "sink" differently doesn't have a "lisp". The same is true in Spanish with words such as "zaca" and "saca" -- See? They are even written differently!
This phenomenon is called "distinción" [0]. The lack of this distinction, which is what we see in most of Latin America is called "seseo".
All of this is to say: please stop calling it a lisp.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonological_history_of_Spanis...
And if you were to say that "the main difference in pronunciation between straight and gay men is that gay men sound softer and more lispy" everybody knows what you are talking about immediately too. Also, "you may not consider it particularly offensive, there is no mocking of anyone with a lisp in that sentence".
The reality of it is that as a Spaniard I am just tired of Latin Americans constantly making fun of our dialect, so forgive me for politely informing a foreigner that our dialect is not a lisp.
Now please carry on explaining how much you don't find it offensive. It makes all the difference.
You do you, man. Why learn and do better when you can show everybody your true colors?
Have an excellent day!
Even I have issues understanding some regions or slang outside of the region I grew up with Spanish (Portuguese/Spanish border on Extremadura).
Just like living half of my life in DACH region, I get still get surprised by some German expressions and local dialects.
Hearing lots of native stuff helps more than Duoling that is for sure, but it isn't not having any dificulties.
Took me going deep into mmorpgs to get at a decent level of spoken English
Correlate for writing: deploy commas strategically and effectively.
Some examples from Japanese and English:
Japanese distinguishes between short and long vowels and between short and long consonants in a way that English does not. For example, the words kata, katta, and kātā (where ā indicates a long a) are pronounced differently and have different meanings (“shoulder,” “bought,” and “Carter,” respectively). Native English speakers learning Japanese as adults will often think at first that all three words sound the same (kata). Even after they become aware of the differences, they may still have trouble recognizing them in continuous speech.
Similarly, English makes phonemic distinctions that do not exist in Japanese. The most well known is that between r and l, so that, for example, “grass” and “glass” can sound the same even to fluent Japanese speakers of English.
My first language is English; I moved to Japan at the age of 26 and have lived here for 40 years. Although I speak, read, and write Japanese fluently, I still sometimes mishear words in spoken Japanese because, despite much study, effort, and experience, I have not fully acquired all of the phonemic distinctions.
That's where I am right now in English with "Colin" and "calling", after almost twenty years living in English-speaking countries. Sigh!
Both pitches and tones in those languages are picked up by native speakers naturally, while language learners have to actively adapt from all the habits they've formed in their native languages.
I studied Mandarin for two years when I was in college in California. From the first day of class, our teachers drilled the tones into us, and I made a point of memorizing the tones for every word I learned. Our textbooks and dictionaries also marked the tones on all words. I have since forgotten Mandarin, but when I could still speak it a little I think I had pretty good feeling for the tones.
Eight years later, when I started taking Japanese classes in Tokyo, our teachers occasionally mentioned the pitch accents and gave examples of minimal pairs (usually hashꜜi “chopsticks” vs. hashꜛiꜜ “bridge”), but they didn’t drill us on them or correct us. None of our textbooks indicated word accents. Even today I am uncertain about the pitch accent for a lot of the words I acquired during my first year or two of Japanese study. I have a better sense for the accents of the words I learned later, because by then I had mostly acquired the pitch-accent phonology by osmosis.
When I was a student of Japanese, only a couple of Japanese-English dictionaries, both published by Kenkyusha, and only one regular Japanese-Japanese dictionary, from Sanseido, marked pitch accent for headwords. Years later, when I worked with professional narrators of Japanese, I learned about an NHK accent dictionary that they would refer to when uncertain about how to accent a particular word.
One of those Kenkyusha dictionaries is long out of print, and the other—Kenkyusha’s New Japanese-English Dictionary—dropped pitch accent from the fifth edition published in 2003. The managing editor, whom I knew, felt that the Japanese users at whom the dictionary was primarily aimed didn’t need to have the accent indicated.
These days, of course, people have much better resources for learning languages. I learned today, from another discussion here on Hacker News, that Microsoft Edge has very good text-to-speech built in. I just now had it read aloud a couple of Japanese sentences containing the two hashis, and the pitch-accent difference was clear and natural.
Also, most people who learn Mandarin are aware of the fact that the tones are an essential part of the language. But when it comes to Japanese, there seems to be a divide between people who think that learning pitch accents is essential and people who think their time is better spent on learning other things.
I think a good middle ground is to at least learn about pitch accents until you can recognize them when a Japanese sentence is well articulated. I believe you'll be able to emulate them with enough exposure when you can at least recognize them. The next phase would then be for them to become second nature, but that will probably take many years.
By the way, the following two websites are essential to me when it comes to learning pitch accents:
- https://www.gavo.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp/ojad/eng/phrasing/index
- https://www.kanshudo.com/searchw
The first link generates images that visualize the pitch accents of sentences that you enter. You can then adjust those pitch accent graphs by clicking on individual syllables. It can also generate the (very robotic) audio files of the pronunciations of those sentences. I add those images to the cards in my Anki deck, and reference them after attempting to pronounce the pitch accent of a word or sentence.
The second link is an online dictionary that includes the pitch accents of individual words. I use it mostly when I need to double check the pitch accent of a word.
One other thing is stress placement; Polish places its primary stress on the penultimate syllabe of each word, making it probably the only Slavic language without variable stress (sentence stress is an another case). Whenever I hear Czech or Ukrainian - closely related languages - I need some extra time to post-process what has been said, and then I recognize the words that are understandable to me to a significant extent. I'm usually not able to process those in real time.
unsurprisingly, Ted Chiang has a very good short story on the topic, "The Truth of Fact, the Truth of Feeling".