Unfortunately I was not in class the day that we did the learning activity with Japanese but I've got an idea of how I would create my own way to learn a language.

I think the concept of picture/word recognition that Rosetta Stone uses is great.  Start off by taking picture of things around the house, at school, at work etc and find out what these things are called in your target language.  This way every time you see the dining room table you'll be prompted automatically by yourself to try and remember what it's called in the other language.  This is good for absolute beginners but if you want to move up in your skills I really don't think that Rosetta Stone's way of teaching grammar is the best.

Conjugations and grammatical rules need to be learned straight up. Use flash cards or whatever but simply by looking at a sentence over and over again in a different language is not going to teach you different cases, tenses etc.  I think the best way to learn these is through writing and repetition, which should then be followed by listening and then speaking.  There is no point in pushing speaking to the forefront.  Most people consider speaking the most important part of learning a foreign language, and it is.  However, it is also the last skill to be acquired when learning that language therefore, there is no point in focusing just on speech.  In the beginning, pronunciation is important and should be practiced but if writing and listening are studied intensely, then speaking will be more natural. 

This is the method that I have used to learn the languages that I know. When I sat down in my first class as a an exchange student at my high school in Germany I simply pulled out the dictionary (call me a nerd) and started reading it. I did this for about a month straight because once my vocabulary was strong enough, I was able to pick up parts of conversations and if you can get a few words from a conversation and understand body language, then you can pretty much get the gist of what's being talked about.  Finally came speech, but that only came after months of writing down new words every day, memorizing them and listening to conversations.  Everyone's method is different, but this is the one that works for me. 

Here is a list of some slang words I learned while in Turkey and here at Richmond (I have translated them in the order that they are spoken and added the grammatically correct version as well, if needed):

Napiyorsun? The correct way to spell this is, Ne yapiyorsun? (What are you doing?)

(Napan in Cyprus): This is comes from the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. It means the same thing as Ne yapiyorsun.

Naber? The correct way is, Ne haber? (Wassup, how's it going?)

Fistik: Haha, this one means peanut when translated literally but its a term guys use to refer to a pretty girl. Hey Fistik! Naber?

Demi? (Pronounced Dim, as in, "dim the lights" and "May" as in the month but spoken as one word. Dimmay ) The correct version of this is, Değil mi? (Isn't it? Bugün güzel,  Değil mi? It's a beautiful day, isn't it?)

 Naptin? Correct version is, Ne yaptin (What did you do?)

Hadi ya! Translated: Come one! Leave it alone!

Sağol Translated: Very informal for "Thanks"

Lan: Translated: Son, boy, mate. Used in a semi-derogatory sense. Example, "Listen here boy, I know a lot more than you do"

The first track under my music files is a short segment about my family where I say there names and how old they are.

PLEASE NOTE THAT ALL OF MY ARTIFACTS ARE UNDER THE MUSIC FILES ON THE NING.

Well, I just did my presentation on Meyhane but I figured I would but up a short blog post just in case anyone wanted to refresh their memories.

Meyhane is what a traditional Turkish restaurant is.  You usually pay a flat rate that gets you unlimited drinks and food all night.  It starts out with Ekmek (bread), yogurt, Kavun and Beyaz Peynir (Melon and white cheese, which go excellent together).  It is very similar to Tapas, in Turkish, Meze (appetizers).  Basically you're surrounded by different appetizers the whole time.  Stuffed vine leaves, Dolma, which is basically any stuffed vegetable dish. Like green peppers stuffed with rice), and aubergine salad (Patlıcan salat) are typical dishes you would see.  At the end they bring out a main appetizer which is usually some fish or a type of chicken dish but could really be anything. 

All the while, you will most likely be drinking Rakı which is the traditional Turkish drink.  Rakı is made from suma is the solid remains of grapes, olives, or other fruit after pressing for juice or oil. It contains the skins, pulp, seeds, and stems of the fruit.  Aniseed gives it its licorice flavor. Atatürk loved this stuff. One of the first buildings reopened after the 1923 revolution was a Rakı distillery.  Usually 45% but there must be something else in it. Other variants include Rakia in the Balkans region, Ouzo in Greece, and Arak or araki in the middle east.  The two most popular brands in Turkey are Yeni Raki and Tekirdağ. 

Usually only traditional Turkish music is played.  The three most common instruments used are the Oud, which is similar to the lute. The Darbuka, also known as the “goblet drum” has a much different sound than, say, a djembe. Very Crisp and loud. Usually made of metal. The kemence is a three-stringed bowed instrument. Not played like a violin but like a cello.  As the night goes on and the Rakı continues to flow, people tend to get a little wild and after about two hours into any Meyhane, everyone is dancing on the tables.  It is really a long event which can start anywhere between 6-8 and last till 3 in the morning. If you go to Turkey, Meyhane is an absolute must.

The Nargile (Waterpipe) is a very important cultural element in Turkey.  I remember before I even went there, people told me that I absolutely have to try it. I've smoked hookah in the States before but it was never really that good except for one time in New York where I went to, you guessed it, a Turkish hookah bar.  If you go out for Nargile (or invite your friends over to smoke one in your house), it can last up to 2 hours.  It's a great way to kick back, relax and spend time with some great company.  The Turks love Nargile, guys and girls.  Although you can get pure tobacco for it, typically you choose a flavored tobacco to smoke: Elma (apple), Mango, Şeftalı (Peach), Üzüm (grape) as well as many others were available.  The Nargile itself looks like this (sorry for the long link):

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.factini.com/uploads/hookah-diagram-1275695035&imgrefurl=http://www.factini.com/hookah.html&usg=__izsU675jP6MSBYyBo-94a3IL6LI=&h=600&w=400&sz=43&hl=en&start=0&zoom=1&tbnid=saoD7i8U8a1t_M:&tbnh=152&tbnw=101&ei=q4-vTcOUNpGWtwe_1ZykBQ&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dhookah%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26sa%3DN%26biw%3D1004%26bih%3D619%26tbm%3Disch&um=1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=529&vpy=97&dur=1983&hovh=275&hovw=183&tx=97&ty=122&oei=q4-vTcOUNpGWtwe_1ZykBQ&page=1&ndsp=18&ved=1t:429,r:3,s:0

There is not much to reflect on in this section since Crystal simply goes through all the different families of language from region to region.  The fact that linguists, scientists and archaeologists have been able to piece together a Proto-Indo-European language simply by comparing the sister languages together is remarkable.  It is also fascinating to learn that Bengali is in some ancient way related to Spanish.  A couple of interesting facts that I found while reading Crystals descriptions of all the languages: 1. No one knows where the Austro-Asiatic languages came from and when the people migrated to that region. 2. Korean is related to Altaic i.e. Turkish?? There are over 650 languages spoken in New Guinea.  That would be as if "Britain, one third of the size, would find itself containing nearly 200 languages, separated from each other by distances of only twenty miles" (395). 

As I posted earlier under my cultural posts, knowing the history of any language that one is learning is essential.  It helps one to understand why certain events are tied to that language.  If I had no knowledge of the history of the Turkish language, I would be confused as to why the Uyghurs in Western China have such a connection with the present day Republic of Turkey.  It is because they are connected through ethnic and linguistic ties.  Also, knowing that Ottoman Turkish had lots of Arabic words as well as Arabic influence will help one to understand why some words are pronounced the way they are. 

This has probably been my favorite section so far.  First off, I had no idea that there were so many language.  Second off, I had no idea that they were dying so quickly!  I love language and I think that the need to save dying languages is not only worthwhile but necessary.  Crystal says, "Language death is like no other form of disappearance.  When people die, they leave signs of their presence in the world, in the form of their dwelling places, burial mounds, artefacts - in a word, their archaeology.  But spoken language leaves no archaeology.  When a language dies, which has never been recorded, it is as if it has never been" (342).  Languages also help to define cultures so when a language dies it brings a culture with it. 

I also find the development of pidgin languages to be fascinating because they can essentially be created anywhere between any two languages AND if they are used enough for a long period they can actually turn into another language i.e. creole language.  However, as Crystal explains, pidgin languages develop out of necessity and when they are no longer needed (for bargaining, trading etc) they will die out.  There are two interesting things about creole and pidgin languages.  1. Pidgin/creole languages reflect the basic preferences in human language.  In a sense, they are the most simplified forms of language and by analyzing them we can find out just how much we can simplify a language and still considerate a legitimate form of communication.  What are the bare necessities of any language? Verbs? Nouns? Grammar?  2. This is just an interesting fact: Most all pidgin languages have traces of Portuguese.  Even, "early accounts of Chinese pidgin refer to mixed dialect of English and Portuguese" (348). 

Finally, how did language begin? Now one knows.  Why does language change? No one knows.  When does languages change? It is unpredictable.  We may be able to link thousands of languages together. Study them, analyze them and teach them.  However, in agreement with Crystal, I doubt that we will ever know the answer to these three questions.  People have lots of theories about how language began but to be able to pinpoint the exact time and location that language, as we know it, came into being is an impossible task. 

In this section of reading, we looked at, very generally speaking, reading and writing.  What's interesting to me is how different writing is from speaking.  Apart from the obvious differences, Crystal makes a point of showing just how divided language and speech actually are.  Spelling, abbreviations, capital letters, special symbols, punctuation and spatial organization are some of the ways in which writing separates itself from speech.  Just as we have phonemes, we also have graphemes e.g. <c>, <b> or <?>.  There are twenty six graphemes that makes up the alphabet in the English language along with many other special symbols.  Looking at the charts, it is intriguing to see how pictograms slowly developed into symbols and then letters.  I also find it fascinating how many similarities there are between the older languages.  Looking at the chart on page 114, we can see that from starting with Phoenician and going to Greek, almost all the languages in between have at least one similar character with another language in that group. 

I always thought that reading was a mixture of both sight and speech.  I did not know that there was a debate surrounding the two.  I think that to say reading it done exclusively by sight or exclusively by speech is incorrect.  Crystal makes legitimate points arguing for and against each view and I don't see why it is such a problem to simply say that they both contribute to reading.  Crystal makes the point that if we come across a word we have never seen before, we will most likely sound it out before continuing to read; however, I find that if someone is really trying to concentrate on reading a magazine, for example, they will whisper out every word.  If two strangers start a conversation near me while I'm reading a book, I will begin to sound out each word rapidly while I read to hold my concentration.  The again, maybe that's just ADD. 

Learning how to read and write are two giant tasks for young children.  When this is hampered by a disability it makes the process excruciating.  I found the topic of dyslexia towards the end of the reading quite interesting.  I have know what dyslexia was since I was young because my cousin has it.  I never really understood what it was other than that she lots of trouble reading.  After reading through the different types presented by Crystal, I know realize how serious of a problem it can be.  yet, what is there to be done about it.  How do we determine if someone actually has dyslexia or whether their intelligence level is simply lower and what treatments are there, if any?

In the last section, Crystal talks about the computer-mediated communication medium (CMC).  This book was written in 2005 and since then, CMC has developed exponentially.  I think that Crystal's analysis of CMC as a mixture of both speech and writing is correct.  He also classifies it as "a new species of communication."  I thought that speaking a writing were pretty much it but we truly have entered a new stage of communication.  Netspeak, texting, email etc.  These all represent a brand new form of communication and will shape new generations.  Any baby born after 2000 will more technological apt than any kid born in the 90's by leaps and bounds.  It will be interesting to see how CMC evolves in the next decade. 

I have not done an artifact yet but I do like the idea of using a Voki if I can figure it out.  Possibly reading from a children's book so I can document my progress on pronunciation. 

While reading this I tried applying some of the definitions to my culture and the Turkish culture.  I found that the American culture tends to be individualist, monochronic, internal and indirect.  My reasoning for this is that most children in America, since day one, has been taught that they are 'special' and can achieve anything (the American Dream).  This puts there locus of control within them.  Americans are constantly trying to find ways to make themselves different.  Personalizing this or that.  We have so many classifications of different types of alternative rock (kind of redundant) that I don't even know what the hell I'm listening to sometimes.  Until the announcer comes on and tells me that what I just heard belongs to the alternative/indie/electronica/dance genre.  Phew, thank god we got that cleared up.  In American culture, time is money making us monochronic.  We are work-a-holics.  Finally, we subscribe to an indirect method of communication because we don't really like confrontation.  I would not say this is due to high amounts of non-verbal communication, although this does play a role in American communication. Our current foreign policies may point to the contrary but peace over violence is the norm in America. 

It was a bit difficult for me to determine the 'settings', if you will, for Turkey.  I found it to be a mix of individualist and collectivist.  In Turkey, the family is very important.  The further East you go, the truer this is.  Acting against the family or openly defying a parental command is not as common in Turkey as it is in the States.  However, most young adults, when they are outside the family, act very individualistic.  From my experience, the males tend to behave more individually than the females.  Turks view of time is polychronic.  Nothing is on time and stores will close whenever they feel like it.  Classes started on time but teachers ran them however long or short they wanted to.  As far as communication is concerned, Turks are direct, very direct.  They tend to get close to you when speaking and get straight to the point.  Whether their locus of control is internal or external I do not know.  I heard the word "Inşallah" almost 5 times a day when I was there (it means, "God willing" e.g. Inşallah, we'll get my car out of the snow).  This makes me think that the locus of control may be more externally located but the use of "Inşallah" does not mean I can label Turks as external.  Perhaps professor grove would like to comment?

This article teaches us that there is much to learning a language than just vocabulary, grammar and syntax.  Body language and gestures, facial expressions, direct or indirect language, volume and distance when speaking and many other things must all be taken into account when learning another language.  The cultural dimensions of a language are just as important as the technical dimensions.  Knowing all the verbs, tons of vocab and the grammar rules is great but without understanding how they fit and are used within the culture, you're still only half way there. 

In this section, we learn the difference between phonetics and phonology.  This acted mostly as a refresher for me because of my previous experience with linguistics but it was nevertheless interesting.  Most people don't realize just how many sounds exist in the English language.  Most people feel that [a] [e] and [i] are pronounced the way that we see them.  However, if we take the word "begin" and compare it with "the", the pronunciation of [e] in both cases varies considerably.  It is also important to note that no two languages have the same tones.  Another interesting finding that crystal makes is just how important stress is.  For example, the word hot dog.  Place stress on 'hot' and we're talking about something you eat, but place stress on 'dog' and we're talking about a dog that is literally hot. 

I think that learning about about phonetics, phonology, stress, tone etc helps me to understand how and why certain languages develop.  It also allows me to appreciate the complexity of language much more.  I find phonology particularly interesting because a person who has no experience with Hindi, for example, can, through phonological tests (like minimal pairs testing), find out which language units are phonemes and how certain sounds are organized in the Hindi language. 

I think it is important to know how language develops in a baby but this section was pretty bland.  The one question I would ask Crystal is: What babies did he study or what studies did he draw on for his research?  Where they English babies? American babies?  What about how a Chinese or Indian baby develops its vocal tracts? Do they [ga] and [gu] when it reaches the babbling stage or do they make different sounds?  The one thing that I thought was interesting from this section was that if you try and talk to a baby in the way that it talks to you, it won't understand you e.g. the "fis phenomenon."  Perhaps when I have kids, and I hope that day does not come soon, I will open up this book and and browse through this section so I can know what to expect.

I found the author's in-depth analysis as to what actually constitutes language fascinating.  I've definitely contemplated as to whether or not animal communication could be considered language.  Also, to what extent body language could be considered "language."  I think that Crystal makes a legitimate point in saying, "human language is productive. Productivity is the capacity to express and understand a potentially infinite number utterances, made by combining sentence elements in new ways and introducing fresh combinations of words...new words are being invented everyday."  However, to completely remove body language (or body communication as he puts it) and facial expressions from the realm of language would be incorrect. 

I found the section on paralanguage to also be very interesting.  Most things that Crystal defines as paralanguages are gestures and sounds that we don't even notice but can have a great influence how proper language is expressed.  Hearing someone giggle or whisper automatically changes the way we interpret what it being said.  By themselves these paralanguages don't constitute much but when paired with proper language they become powerful tools. 

The rest of the sections were somewhat dry but nevertheless interesting.  The complexity involved in speech and hearing is unreal to me.  Yet, most people (people not affected by speech or hearing disabilities) carry out these functions everyday without the slightest idea of these complexities. 

For me, learning new words is all abou repetition.  Whether I see a picture of the word in Turkish or simply see the word listed next to the English translation ie. Çilek=Strawberry, doesn't matter very much.  As soon as I see the translation I simply begin repeating it in my head.  This way, I can learn anywhere at anytime because I don't necessarily need much to learn.  Things like Rosetta Stone definitely help but, again, if I'm given a table with a list of conjugations I will sit down and memorize it and then try and use what I memorized in a conversation.  I would say that my progress up to this point has been pretty good but I could easily digest more vocabulary and will try to do so.

Sorry for the delay on the blog posts.  I actually just got the syllabus so I will now begin my journal entries.

I think the thing that I like most about learning different languages is being able to connect them to each other.  Obviously not all languages connect--Japanese and German.  It's very easy to find similar words in languages that border each other (again,not always, but sometimes).  When I learned German and went to Alsace-Lorraine, there was a German-French dialect spoken there and I was actually able to understand most of it.  This got me interested in French so I started learning a little.  In Turkey, I had quite a few friends from the Middle East so naturally I started trying to pick up on some Arabic since some of the words overlap with Turkish.  Every time I come across somebody who speaks a language other than the ones I know I always try and take something away from them.  If I'm in another country I will try and learn enough to get around.  In my experience, if someone sees you at least trying, they will be more likely to help you than if you just start blabbering off in English.  I think I'm probably a mix of a Rational/Evaluative learner.  The best way for me to expand my learning activities is to travel.