Self- Directed Language Learning

Learning a language is always challenging regardless of a person’s skill. The idea of submerging into a language that is completely alien can be daunting, especially when there has been very little exposure to the language. However, that does not necessarily mean it is impossible for a person to learn a language on his own, as proven by the students in the Self-Directed Language Learning class. The class has not only exposed us to various skills needed to learn a language, but it also enabled us to pay special attention to details while keeping in mind the factors associated to language learning,  such as culture, heritage, history etc. The class in itself was a very unique opportunity for me, not only as a student but also as a language partner who was helping another student learn a different language.

As a Language Learner

As a language learner I was able to reflect on my own experiences of learning English and improving on the skills I have attained over the past five years.  The book that was used for the class, How Language Works, was an essential part of the class because it contained information such as how to treat body language, cultural dimensions of language learning, the origin of languages, the social class, and taking conversation turns. I was intrigued to see how surprised I was with some of the information presented because I had never thought of it while I was trying to learn English. As a language learner, I mostly focused on the technical aspect- the reading, writing, and speaking aspects of language learning but paid very little attention to other factors such as the use of metaphors and slangs or the role of culture in the framework of a language; however, these factors are as essential to language learning as the technical aspects. 

Understanding the culture of the place helps to understand why people approach the language in certain way, and understanding the slang often helps to assimilate to the place smoothly. The fact that I was able to reflect on my own experience and understand the implications of language learning was one of the reasons the class was an exciting yet rewarding experience for me.

Likewise, as the semester progressed and we started learning more about language histories, culture, and framework, I started questioning my own knowledge of my native language - Nepali. I was fluent in reading, writing, and speaking, but I knew very little about the history of the language. As a result, I decided to do an extensive study of the history and origins of the Nepali language. The class also encouraged me to draw a parallel between Nepali and English, and explore the role of social class in Nepali. I believe the knowledge I have received through the class and the book will not only help me in learning a new language in the future, but it will also provide me with much needed inspiration and motivation to look at learning differently.

As a Language Partner

As a language partner I worked with a student who was trying to learn Hindi. Although I am fluent in Hindi, I cannot recall how I learned the language; it is neither my native language nor a language commonly spoken in Nepal. However, growing up I was exposed to Hindi often because most of the television shows and movies were aired in Hindi. Working as a language partner for Hindi was an exciting opportunity for me because it challenged me to go back to the basics of the language I could not recall learning. While working with Kaitlyn, I realized that although I was able to speak the language fluently, I could not explain certain concepts properly. I found it challenging to explain certain things in a way in which it was easy for her to understand, and that made me realize how knowing a language and being able to explain the basics of the language are two different things. Despite some challenging meetings, we met frequently throughout the semester, and it was interesting to see her develop from a mediocre speaker to a decent one. Since she had spent some time in India while studying abroad, she already possessed the basics of the language. Thus, we mainly worked on speaking while paying careful attention to verbs, adjectives, and vocabulary. One of the most interesting things about working with her was exploring the differences between two different languages. When we tried to translate a paragraph of English to Hindi, it almost took us three hours. The differences in the two languages are so big that there are many instances where there are no literal translations. Also contributing to the difficulty was the sentence structure of Hindi, which is completely different from English.

Working with her for the entire semester has also made us both aware about the importance of vocabulary. Although she knew the tense very well, along with nouns and pronouns, the lack of verbs and adjective often made it difficult for us to have long conversations; however, as time went on, I was amazed to see how proficient she had become in Hindi. At times, I would often tell her I could hardly notice any difference between her saying a word and a native person saying the same exact word. I always felt that language learning is only efficient if there is enough exposure to the language, and through my experience with Kaitlyn, I cannot agree more with it.

Overall, the class has been a different yet rewarding experience for me in the sense that I have contributed to someone learning a new language and have gained valuable insights on learning in the process.

The chapter how conversation works describes the basics of conversation. The author compares conversation to the game of chess as he believes in chess people often make moves and seem to follow certain rules as the dialogue proceeds. Similarly, when people talk, they take turns to respond to each other comments and try to add some insights in what they are talking about. Similarly, they should also be aware of when to speak; when to remain silent; when to proffer information or hold it back; when to stay aloof or become involved. Although the general rule of conversation is followed uniformly throughout the world, there are differences in the some aspects of the rule. One of the aspects is “Taking conversational turns.”

In United States, people take turns while they are speaking. Often people wait for the other to stop speaking and take turns to share their thoughts. There are often explicit markers showing that a speaker is about to yield the floor, and indicating who should speak next (I think Tyler should speak now). Often signal such as finally, last but not least are used to indicate the speech is coming to an end. However, in other cultures the way people speak differs significantly. In Nepal and India, people tend to not wait for the speaker to finish and jump right in between the conversation. People often tend to speak together overshadowing the comments of the person and creating a sense of heated conversation.

It is quite interesting how the reading for this week covered something I have always wondered about. In Nepal social class has a lot to do with how people speak. People in higher class often tend to speak politely and use the polite version, where as people in lower class often tend to speak the impolite version. Similarly, women are often required to use the polite version while speaking to men, where as men can speak as they wish. I always wondered how social standing creates differences in the way people speak.

The book explains how social standing plays a role in the way people speak. The author writes, “people exercise several roles: they have a particular status in their family (head of family), and another in their place of work (supervisor)… Each position will carry with it certain linguistic conventions such as distinctive mode of address… During the average lifetime, people learn many such linguistic behaviors”

In Nepal, the lower class- Vaisyas, Sudhras and Dalits are often heard talking in impolite version of the language. They use the words such as Ta instead of Hajur for you, Ja instead of Gaisyo for go while speaking. So, it was automatically assumed that people speaking in such a manner are lower class people. Children from the higher class were not allowed to play with them or even it next to them because of the fear of being corrupted. While, the higher class people – Brahmin, Chettri used words such as Sutsyo instead of Sut for Sleep, padhsyo instead of pad for study. They were automatically assumed to be higher class and were respected in the society. Although the way people speak has changed significantly over the years, the general idea of people towards the difference in speech is the same – impolite way of speaking is often associated with the lower class and polite way is associated with the higher class.

            Another important thing as the author mentions in the book is the Gender and the role it plays in the Nepali society. As a male-orientated society, Nepal still falls behind in equality between men and women and this particular aspect can clearly be seen in the tone of a person. A woman is never allowed to speak in a impolite version. She is always asked to talk in polite version especially to the family of her husband. However, the men can speak as he wishes. He can use the impolite or the polite version. Although this particular trend is changing in Nepal, it still exists in rural part of Nepal. 

The reading for this week was very compelling in the sense that it made me reflect on the history of my own language. Having spoken Nepali every since I was born, I never thought about the origins of Nepali, and how it came about to become the national language of Nepal.  However, this week reading encouraged me to do some more research on Nepali, while describing how language families work. The most common way of studying language families are through the comparative method - a way of systematically comparing a series of languages in order to prove a historical relationship between them.

The book describes the proto-indo-European language as the earlier language and explains how Sanskrit, the oldest attested language of the Indian subcontinent has been noted as early as 16^th century. He writes, “The Sanskrit language has a wonderful structure; more perfect than the Greek, more copious than the Latin, and more exquisitely refined than either, yet bearing to both of them a stronger affinity, both in the roots of verbs, and in the forms of grammar than could possibly have been produced by accident, so strong, indeed, that no philologer could examine them all three, without believing them to have sprung from some common source, which, perhaps no longer exists.”

The book then explains how Indo European family is organized by comparing similar vocabulary, and draws a conclusion about the geographical origins and life styles of the people. It describes the roots and origins of various language including Albanian, Armenian, Anatolian, Celtic, Germanic, Greek, Indo-Iranian, Italic and Tocharian. It depicts the history, family and organization of various languages. Reading about the different languages made me wonder about my own language and I ended up doing research on Nepali.

Nepali mostly spoken in Nepal, Bhutan, India and Myanmar is a language in the Indo-Aryan branch of the Indo-European language family. Spoken widely throughout Nepal, the language is regarded as the Pahari language - a language spoken across the lower elevation of the Himalaya range. The language although has similar roots with Hindi – Sanskrit, is more conservation with more Sanskrit derivations and fewer Persian or English derivations. Written in Devanagari script, Nepali became prominent language when Prithvi Narayan Shah, the ruler of Gorkha, unified divided Nepal into a single country in 1769 A.D, and announced the language of Gorkha- Nepali, to be the official language of Nepal. 

The debate over the origins of language always fascinated me. This week reading particularly interested me as it not provided various theories regarding the origins of language but also focused on the evolution of the languages. Otto Jespersen (1860-1943), a Danish linguist has been a revolutionary figure in linguistics. He grouped commonly held theories and divided them into four group while create a fifth group of his own. He believed these five theories described the essence of languages while describing the origins.

The bow-wow theory refers to a theory which suggests that speech arose through people imitation the sounds of the environment especially animal calls. Word such as splash, quack provides evidence to this theory.

The pooh-pooh theory believes speech arose through people making instinctive sounds caused by pains, anger or other emotions. Words such as Ouch, ooh provides evidence to this theory.

The ding-dong theory argues that speech arose because people reacted to stimuli in the world around them, and produces sounds which in some ways reflect or were in harmony in nature.

The Ye-ho-ho theory believes speech arose because, as people worked together, their physical efforts produced communal, rhythmical fronts, which in due course developed into chants, and thus language.

The la-la theory which was developed by Jespersen himself believed if any single factor was going to initiate human language, it would arise from romantic side of life such as the sounds associated with love, play etc.

Although the theories are essential in understanding the origins of language, I believe one theory cannot be regarded as the most effective theory. All the theories presented by Otto Jespersen, if combined together provide a better understanding of how languages began. 

The reading for this week focused on reading, writing and speech. The chapter How writing and speech differ analyzes the importance of speech and written text and assess whether one can be substituted for another. The author concludes that although writing and speech are now seen as alternative equal system of linguistic expression, there are various situations when one cannot be substituted for other. He draws on the example of memory and learning where he believes speech cannot be substituted for writing as written records are easier to keep and scan. Reading the chapter about importance of speech and writing, I began to wonder if one was more important than the other.

As a language learner, it is always important to have the written skills; however, the written skills will yield no result if speech is absent. There are various arguments which state that written skills will improve the speech aspect. This is where I differ to most of the arguments. Although I believe it is essential to be able to write and read, I don’t think it will have much of an effect on speaking aspect. As a beginner learner of English, I was able to read and write. I grew up learning how to read and write in English but that did not make me a proficient speaker in English. I struggled often at time with the speech aspects. I lacked the much needed knowledge of pronunciation and also fluency in conversation. I often fell behind during a conversation not because I did not what I wanted to say but because I was not sure of how to say the word. 

Learning a language can be tricky at times. One cannot be considered a fluent speaker of a certain language by only knowing the structure of language; there are various other aspects that have to be considered before one can be proficient. Factors such as the use of body language, slangs, idioms, culture, and expression play a vital role in learning. Each language has its own attributes and is distinct from another language.

            One of the most essential aspects of learning a language is utilizing the “slangs” and “idioms” that exist in the language. When I first came to the United States I was astounded by the fact that English language was full of slangs and people often used slangs to convey their message. I then began to wonder if I used Nepali slangs while speaking Nepali. Soon I realized I was not speaking proper Nepali – it was the combination of commonly used slangs and Nepali words. Words such as “Jhyau” meaning bored is often used in Nepali, however, that word doesn’t have a literal meaning. Similarly, English contains slangs and idioms that are used frequently while speaking. Slangs and idioms such as kill time, bored till death, boo boo, cheesy, chicken etc. when heard by a non-native speaker could make very little sense to them. However if the same language was used in front of a proficient speaker, it would be a part of a normal conversation. Factors such as these contribute highly in making language learning experience challenging. 

Although the reading for this week focused on sound and how it is acquired, the chapter losing your voice made me think about something I have noticed in many non-native speakers of English. Macquarie University is a very diverse University with students from all around the world. The University has large majority of Asian students including students from Indonesia. As I walked passed a group of Indonesian students, I realized how the tone of their voice was louder when they spoke Indonesian. The tone dropped suddenly as soon as they started speaking English. I went to the dining hall and sat near a group of Asian students and listened to how they spoke. While speaking Chinese their tone was loud. I could clearly hear them from another table. But, while speaking English their tone was significantly low. I wondered if such trend is seen among all the internationals students.

As I came back to University of Richmond, I started noticing similar trend among many international students. Although I could hardly tell the difference in some, there were many whose tone of the voice got louder as they spoke their native language. I was curious if I fell in the same category and I asked my friend to notice the difference next time I was talking to my parents. I was surprised to find out I fell under the same category. I wondered why was there sudden change in the tone when switching from one language to another. Although, I believe the answer to that question depends on each language and how they are spoken, there are few things I feel has contributed to the trend.

            It is not necessary for people to raise the tone of their voice while speaking Nepali. However I tend to raise the tone of my voice very frequently. I believe the comfort level in the language has a key role to play in the phenomena. I am very comfortable in Nepali as it is my native language while in English which is an acquired language, I am semi-comfortable. I would much rather speak Nepali with anyone than try to speak English and my confidence is clearly highlighted in the way I speak. Also, adding to the comfort label is the self-belief. If I believe I understand the language well and speak it properly, I am more inclined on speaking with more confidence. However, if I believe I am a learner, I am often hesitant on speaking, and even if I do say something, the tone of my voice would be low. 

Body Language is always an interesting aspect of learning to assimilate in a culture. It plays essential role in being able to speak a language properly. The Chapter how to treat body language provides a general overview of the differences that exists in understanding different languages. The author believe we use gestures , vary our facial expression, make eye contact, and alter our body posture to perform various functions ranging from giving clues about our personality to stating an emotional states. However, body language differs from one country to another. A perfect example of differences in understanding body language would be the use of eye contact.

            Eye contact is often viewed to be essential in communication in the United States. Lack of eye contact can create a sense of discomfort during conversation often leading people to draw parallels to lack of attention. However, lack of eye contact can be seen as a sign of respect in different societies. In Nepal, a younger person is not supposed to maintain eye contact with the older person while talking. If one looks at the eye and maintains eye contact it could be deemed disrespectful and often consider manner less. Also a student barely maintains eye contacts with their professor in order to show their respect to their teachers.

Another example of difference in body language is the use of the sign “thumbs-up”. Normally, in most of the societies the sign thumbs-up refer to something positive. It has a positive connotation and is often associated with “all is well” or “I am winning”. However, in Arab world, as well as parts of West Africa and Asia, it is a symbol of insult, equivalent to giving someone the finger in the West. So it is essential for a language learner to take in consideration the use of body language in different cultures before learning the language. 

Going through the reading assigned for today, I was intrigued by a chapter, how names work. It was fascinating to see how the concept of name varies in different places. The chapter introduces the concept of naming - a place or person, and highlights the two major headings in name studies – personal names and place names. The author reflects on the use of personal names in different cultures and shows how naming system differ greatly from language to language. He refers to a general misconception of using first and last name as the standard form of using names and highlights how different culture use different naming system. In United States of America, Last name is often given importance over the first name and there is a frequent use of middle name which is not the case in Europe where middle name is acquired through special occasions (such as the Catholic ceremony of Confirmation).  The use of middle name is not very common in countries such as Nepal, where people acquire middle name by their choice. When a person is born, their name hardly resembles their parents and the concept of using the same name with different suffix such as Jr. doesn’t exist. Also, the first name is given more importance than the last name and often a person is identified by their first name rather than last name.

            One thing I have noticed after coming to the United States is that the name used in America doesn’t have a literal meaning. The name can be derived from a word similar to the name; however, the name itself doesn’t carry any meaning and is not used while creating a sentence. However, in Nepal a person’s name usually means something and the name itself is used while formulating a sentence. For e.g. Prayas is a word in Nepali which mean “Try again” and it is very common to create a sentence with the name Prayas in it – “Ma padhne prayas gardai chu,”  which if translated in English would be “I am trying to study.”

            In terms of naming place, the author mentions how there are similarity in naming places as the names people give to their surrounding often provide a unique source of information about a society’s history, culture, beliefs and values. For e.g. the name of natural features such as hills, rivers often give information about the hills, rivers – Honolulu (safe harbor). A similar concept is seen in Nepali culture. For e.g. Sagarmatha (Mt. Everest) refer to a highest point. 

Growing up in Nepal has provided me with a unique opportunity to learn languages. I grew up as a native speaker of Nepali however it didn’t take me long to realize I could speak another language as fluently as Nepali. I was in fourth grade when a number of students from India came over to my school in an exchange program. They knew very little of Nepali, which compelled most of the students in the class to communicate with them in Hindi. It was quiet awkward at first to speak Hindi not because I didn’t know the language but because of the similarity between the two languages. There are various words that can be interchanged - For e.g. in Nepali tea is chya and in Hindi it is chai.  Within the span of few months I was able to speak Hindi fluently.

            My first language learning experience was learning how to speak English. As a kid, studying in private school in Nepal, we were taught the basics of English. I knew how to read and write, however, speaking was something that was completely different. One of the biggest challenges I faced while speaking was the differences in pronunciation. Nepal and the United States had very little in common in terms of how people pronounced words. Even the basic words such as hour, geometry, salad, etc are pronounced differently. On top of the differences, it was already hard enough to form sentences and carry out a normal conversation. Factors such as these contributed to my first experience as a language learner.

            As I spent more time in the United States I became more comfortable in speaking. The fact that I was talking mostly to American people helped me immensely in the sense that I could learn from the way they spoke. I realized the best way to learn speaking  is to listen others speak and try to pay close attention to phrasing of the sentences, use of vocabulary, pronunciation and hand gestures.   Soon, I became more confident in speaking however, till today whenever I have to say something I find myself thinking about it in Nepali, and later translating that in English. Although this has helped me become a better speaker, it has also slowed my response time.

            Despite being an Ok speaker, I consider myself a student of English all the time. Every day I yearn to learn something new – a new vocabulary, phrase, pronunciation, etc. After speaking English for almost 5 year, I believe the only way to improve your speaking ability is to speak more and try to leave behind the feeling on not being a native speaker. In order to become proficient in speaking, I have to start communicating more and take confidence from my improvements and express the confidence while I am speaking.