Blogs

In Crystal’s article “How we mean”, she says “If we restrict our view to just one language-our own-we will never truly understand the distinction between sense and reference, because it is natural to think that ‘our’ way of talking about the world is the only one, or the most natural one. ”, a sentiment I totally agree with.

I am a Chinese native speaker with English as my second language. Now I extend my language learning to Korean, the third language. While I am learning English and study abroad in University of Richmond, I truly feel the differences between native speakers and internationals when we speak English. In learning second language, I have to recognized the clarifications in similar words and try to explain the sense of words under different situations and contexts.The more accurately I express the words, the more I aware of the relationship between words and entities or concepts. Hence, when I learn Korean, I would try to put Korean words in appropriate contexts(check with language partners) to feel the meaning of words.

It is interesting that the two articles give different perspectives on bilingualism. In the first reading, it emphasises on the way how bilingual people process things faster because of their bilingual system in their special environment as they grow up. I do agree with that. The second article argues about the vague correlation between bilingualism and intelligence. More importantly, I appreciate the point that the second article addresses at the end: “ It allows a person to understand a different way of thinking, with unique philosophies and assumptions built into how others see the world”(Ossola). Bilinguals have broader horizons and the habits to preserve the world in two ways. The increasing knowledge on different cultures cultivates their critical thinking skills and builds up brain’s new configurations.

In essence,  learning korean has been a great experience so far even though it is not necessary to make me smarter.  It would be even more wonderful for me if  learning a new language will be a way to enhance my intelligence potentially.

In the past when I have studied abroad, I have always picked up phrases orally better than by memorization. For example, my roommate from China once taught me "Wan-An" which means Goodnight, and after hearing it from her multiple times, I would repeat it back to her before bed. I still remember how to correctly pronounce the term with Chinese intonation. This example epitomizes my learning style: using oral techniques and practicing them socially. According to the learning styles inventory, I am an aural and social learner, and I ought to practice in audible and song form as well as recite and practice among people. Looking at the FIRE model, I realize that in the past I have attempted to learn languages mostly by route memorization - such as making lists, memorizing lists, and verb drills. However, it would be best for me to approach learning from the "insightful" method: that is, role-playing, problem-solving, diagramming, and framing activities, as well as the "evaluative" method: sharing thoughts and feelings with others, relating lessons back to real experience, and helping others as I learn. Knowing my learning styles, the only challenge now is to find adequate and efficient learning methods to practice learning Kannada.

I feel like I have good grasp on language learning. I speak another language called Kannada (it's a language spoken mainly in the state of Karnataka in Southern India). Actually, this was the very first language I spoke before I started speaking English. I learned this language when I was a child by listening and communicating with my parents who would only speak to me in Kannada. I also studied Japanese for three years in high school, but I had forgotten most of it by the time I signed up for a semester of it at the University of Richmond. In total, I've studied Japanese for three years + a semester. I have some understanding of the Korean language which I am starting to study through SDLAP. I taught myself how to read and write, but I still need a lot of practice to become proficient. I understand certain Korean words and phrases. 

I think I'm the type of language learner that learns by listening and repeating to communicate. It's how I learned Kannada and how I've been teaching myself Korean. The things you learn in textbooks might not always help in real life. Practicing speech and pronunciation is best for me. If I want to explore a language, I will start by watching movies and dramas or listening to music in that language because it gives me a better sense of the language than learning solely from a textbook. I think I should expand my learning activities through more listening and speaking exercises. 

My first meeting with Brigid, my language partner, was kind of just an introduction meeting. We mostly talked about what I already knew. We practiced a bit of reading since I knew how to read Korean already and we discussed what I wanted to accomplish by the end of the semester. I thought it was nice for us to actually discuss what I wanted to learn and how we would proceed with our coming classes. 

MLC 105 Learning Journal #2: Reflections on the Readings & Research on the Writing Systems of Hindi

With regard to the Hindi writing systems, Hindi has a really interesting writing system, as it is written in the Devanagari alphabet which is considered an "abugida," meaning that each consonant has an inherent "a" sound attached to it, but the sound can be changed depending on which other vowels are added to the consonant. If consonants are joined together, the inherent vowel is suppressed.  Devanagari is written from left to right, and the alphabet consists of 33 consonants along with 14 vowel sounds.  The sounds of Hindi also distinguish between "aspirated" and "unaspirated" consonants.  Hindi is usually written in print, so I've never seen any of the manuscript writing. There are related writing systems -- since Hindi uses the Devanagari alphabet, Hindi is also similar somewhat to Nepali and Sanskrit.  Additionally, certain letters in the Devanagari alphabet remind me of Punjabi letters (Gurmukhi), so it is somewhat tricky to remember the differences between the two.

Here are my thoughts on this week's readings:

1.  "How to investigate language structure" -- I thought this reading was quite interesting, especially in the beginning, where the author starts out by discussing all the things that are happening as we speak a short sentence -- such as focusing on meaning ("station" vs "beach"), the order in which the words appear, the tone of voice, and more. It's interesting to think about how much is going on when we use language.  I also found the idea of "levels" useful in helping us focus on understanding the different structures involved in utilizing language, particularly for people who have suffered brain damage and lose linguistic ability at one level, but not another.

2.  "How the brain handles language" -- Since I am majoring in biology, I really liked this reading about the brain's roles in language.  I thought it was quite important how the author emphasizes that we should avoid oversimplifying the contrast between the left hemisphere and right hemisphere (with regard to left-handed people or right-handed people).    I also found it interesting to read about the difference between damage to Broca's area vs. damage to Wernicke's area, because in a psychology class, I actually saw a documentary about the different types of damage and found it very interesting.  I also thought the section about slips of the tongue was also quite interesting, because I never realized that they were not random.  It was neat to see how tongue slips can also explain a lot about underlying neurolinguistic processes.

3.  "How we mean" - I found it quite interesting to consider how different languages have diverse ways of talking about the world.  For instance, as the author wrote, English doesn't differentiate in the words for "mother's brother" or "father's brother."  In many Indic languages, however, there are different lexical treatments given to these biological relationships, just as the author writes about the Australian language Pitjanjatjara.  In addition, it was also interesting to think about how we explain the "sense of the word" with other words (like how we would explain the word 'furniture' vs. the word 'wooden' if we were pointing to a wooden chair).

These readings will help shape my language learning process because I now understand the larger context in which I am learning a different language.  I now see how the different levels of language could also be used in understanding how I want to approach language learning, whether it's through first understanding grammar or sentence structure or focusing on the meaning of words.  In addition, I have also learned not to limit myself in thinking about the world primarily through the way English describes it -- such as thinking of the word "aunt" as a one-word concept.  In other languages, there are many different words for "aunt" (mom's older sister, mom's younger sister, etc).  So I would try not to limit myself when I am learning a different language.