Meldinger: 14
Språk: English
Alkanadi (Å vise profilen) 2016 8 23 07:08:18
Altebrilas (Å vise profilen) 2016 8 25 22:46:50
bryku (Å vise profilen) 2016 8 26 12:07:36
bryku (Å vise profilen) 2016 8 27 06:19:28
Roch:Well Bryku, if we take the Altebrilas' 20 minutes a day, you got 60 days to make the famous 20 hours... In other words 2 months! That has already been claimed that someone learned esperanto in that lap of time....Well Roch, what really matters is not the length of time during which the learning is taking place occasionally, but the actual immersion time during which one really learns the language, uses it and makes the nervous system to adopt it. I might be learning Chinese for three years 20 minutes a day still lacking the ability to speak it. And if I went to China, I would be speaking the language just after one year due to full immersion (actually I was there and after a month I could speak simple sentences).
It is true that Esperanto is simple compared to a national language like English, but it is not that simple and requires a decent time for learning - they say: 200 hours (for instance, to get the same level in English it is required to study it for at least 1500-2000 hours).
Vestitor (Å vise profilen) 2016 8 27 19:50:04
"in 20 hours.." "In a week..." "In three months..." is advertising talk.
bryku (Å vise profilen) 2016 8 28 16:41:17
Vestitor:Even when you do an official study period (15 or 20 minutes a day, or an hour or whatever) you still think about it at times during the day, probably subconsciously too. If the official "20 hours" is spread over two months, it's really a lot more than 20 hours of being acquainted with the language during the learning period.Yes, if you have time for that. But what if you have to "break your back to earn your day of leisure". But after all, as you write, it would turn out to be much more than just plain 20 hours, wouldn't it?
"in 20 hours.." "In a week..." "In three months..." is advertising talk.
Vestitor (Å vise profilen) 2016 8 28 21:04:41
bryku (Å vise profilen) 2016 8 30 17:49:11
An average English-speaking young man , say, 17 years old has been exposed to the English language for
15 x 10 x 365 = 54750 hours (I assume that he really starts using the language at the age of two or so)
Now a foreigner, for instance a Polish student at the same age:
10 x 5 x 30 = 1600 hours (he starts at seven and learns 5 hours a week for 10 years up to the age of 17, if he is diligent, of course)
Now we see:
a native = 55 thousands of hours of language immersion
a foreigner 2 thousands of hours of language immersion
It is as 1 to 27! A Pole has no chance with a native!
What is more - to maintain the acquired level of this language command he must constantly be using it, and if he does not live in an English speaking country, it is a bit of problem, and with time his language skills deteriorate. Fortunately it is not the case with Esperanto. Why? Try to find the answer yourself. If you can't, read the articles of Claude Piron.
Vestitor (Å vise profilen) 2016 8 30 21:13:35
bryku (Å vise profilen) 2016 8 31 07:09:36
Vestitor:Is this addressed to me, or is it a general reply to this thread? If it is the former, I can't imagine why.No, it its general. If I replied to you personally or to anybody else, I would quote your post. It was just some kind of reflection about the language situation in our world. It is English that makes such misunderstanding possible and the strong point for what I have written - my command of English is just not enough sophisticated to clearly express my thought.