Language Learners

[Jo498]

There is a free version and a paid version of Duolingo. The latter has some additional functions. The smartphone and PC versions are also somewhat different. I am not sure one can really learn a language there. Some things are not bad but the "gamification" got worse in some respects and is clearly designed to get people to subscribe the paid version.

E.g. in earlier version one could make many mistakes but got rewards for few mistakes. Now one needs to avoid mistakes, otherwise one has to spend a lot of credits to keep doing exercises. And because one can "peek" in most exercises one will do this to avoid the mistakes avoidable by peeking (word order and some grammar mistakes cannot be avoided by that).

I also think that many exercises are bad in their mix of too easy and too hard. E.g. one could have to fill in 2 words (with options on the bottom) in a sentence which is often very easy. Or one could have to write/translate a moderately complex phrase, at worst even including idiomatic expressions without any options/help given. Of course, such demanding exercises are good in general but they are also bad if one must not make many mistakes and one will often have a trivial mistake that is unrelated to the grammar concept that is practised in the unit.

E.g. a unit about French verbs using auxiliary être vs. avoir in complex tenses. One will concentrate on getting this choice and the proper form correct, for which "fill in blanks" is best. But in free translation one might make a trivial error elsewhere and then "loses one heart"(like in a computer game and in the paid version you have infinite, otherwise about 5 per day)) despite having gotten "Je suis (not J'ai) arrivé" correct

But it's not too bad to refresh a language one has already some knowledge of or to get some taste of a language. However, I think one needs both more grammar and a different kind of speaking practice to reach even a basic level of proficiency.

[Karl Henning]

There is a free version and a paid version of Duolingo. The latter has some additional functions. The smartphone and PC versions are also somewhat different. I am not sure one can really learn a language there. Some things are not bad but the "gamification" got worse in some respects and is clearly designed to get people to subscribe the paid version.

E.g. in earlier version one could make many mistakes but got rewards for few mistakes. Now one needs to avoid mistakes, otherwise one has to spend a lot of credits to keep doing exercises. And because one can "peek" in most exercises one will do this to avoid the mistakes avoidable by peeking (word order and some grammar mistakes cannot be avoided by that).

I also think that many exercises are bad in their mix of too easy and too hard. E.g. one could have to fill in 2 words (with options on the bottom) in a sentence which is often very easy. Or one could have to write/translate a moderately complex phrase, at worst even including idiomatic expressions without any options/help given. Of course, such demanding exercises are good in general but they are also bad if one must not make many mistakes and one will often have a trivial mistake that is unrelated to the grammar concept that is practised in the unit.

E.g. a unit about French verbs using auxiliary être vs. avoir in complex tenses. One will concentrate on getting this choice and the proper form correct, for which "fill in blanks" is best. But in free translation one might make a trivial error elsewhere and then "loses one heart"(like in a computer game and in the paid version you have infinite, otherwise about 5 per day)) despite having gotten "Je suis (not J'ai) arrivé" correct

But it's not too bad to refresh a language one has already some knowledge of or to get some taste of a language. However, I think one needs both more grammar and a different kind of speaking practice to reach even a basic level of proficiency.

The wall I hit in learning Dutch was a matter of idiomatic use of "little words," and Duolingo would give me the buzzer for getting it wrong, but seemed not to be designed to instruct me in getting it right. My feeling has been that if the free version fails me, why should I think the paid version would serve me any better? So, I've since basically used it to brush up the French I had not formally studied since High School. 

[Kalevala]

There is a free version and a paid version of Duolingo. The latter has some additional functions. The smartphone and PC versions are also somewhat different. I am not sure one can really learn a language there. Some things are not bad but the "gamification" got worse in some respects and is clearly designed to get people to subscribe the paid version.

E.g. in earlier version one could make many mistakes but got rewards for few mistakes. Now one needs to avoid mistakes, otherwise one has to spend a lot of credits to keep doing exercises. And because one can "peek" in most exercises one will do this to avoid the mistakes avoidable by peeking (word order and some grammar mistakes cannot be avoided by that).

I also think that many exercises are bad in their mix of too easy and too hard. E.g. one could have to fill in 2 words (with options on the bottom) in a sentence which is often very easy. Or one could have to write/translate a moderately complex phrase, at worst even including idiomatic expressions without any options/help given. Of course, such demanding exercises are good in general but they are also bad if one must not make many mistakes and one will often have a trivial mistake that is unrelated to the grammar concept that is practised in the unit.

E.g. a unit about French verbs using auxiliary être vs. avoir in complex tenses. One will concentrate on getting this choice and the proper form correct, for which "fill in blanks" is best. But in free translation one might make a trivial error elsewhere and then "loses one heart"(like in a computer game and in the paid version you have infinite, otherwise about 5 per day)) despite having gotten "Je suis (not J'ai) arrivé" correct

But it's not too bad to refresh a language one has already some knowledge of or to get some taste of a language. However, I think one needs both more grammar and a different kind of speaking practice to reach even a basic level of proficiency.

Interesting to read your thoughts (and thank you for them).  If learning from the get go (as in the basics), I'd rather attend a class.  The things that I enjoyed and thought were important were not just the grammar structure, but also learning about the culture and way of thinking, etc. [For example, in French vs. in English, the concept of boredom.  In English, there's more of the sense that things bore someone--like an outside influence vs. in French, it's said that one finds things boring to onself].

K

[foxandpeng]

There is a free version and a paid version of Duolingo. The latter has some additional functions. The smartphone and PC versions are also somewhat different. I am not sure one can really learn a language there. Some things are not bad but the "gamification" got worse in some respects and is clearly designed to get people to subscribe the paid version.

E.g. in earlier version one could make many mistakes but got rewards for few mistakes. Now one needs to avoid mistakes, otherwise one has to spend a lot of credits to keep doing exercises. And because one can "peek" in most exercises one will do this to avoid the mistakes avoidable by peeking (word order and some grammar mistakes cannot be avoided by that).

I also think that many exercises are bad in their mix of too easy and too hard. E.g. one could have to fill in 2 words (with options on the bottom) in a sentence which is often very easy. Or one could have to write/translate a moderately complex phrase, at worst even including idiomatic expressions without any options/help given. Of course, such demanding exercises are good in general but they are also bad if one must not make many mistakes and one will often have a trivial mistake that is unrelated to the grammar concept that is practised in the unit.

E.g. a unit about French verbs using auxiliary être vs. avoir in complex tenses. One will concentrate on getting this choice and the proper form correct, for which "fill in blanks" is best. But in free translation one might make a trivial error elsewhere and then "loses one heart"(like in a computer game and in the paid version you have infinite, otherwise about 5 per day)) despite having gotten "Je suis (not J'ai) arrivé" correct

But it's not too bad to refresh a language one has already some knowledge of or to get some taste of a language. However, I think one needs both more grammar and a different kind of speaking practice to reach even a basic level of proficiency.

This is helpful, thank you. It confirms my suspicions. When my kids were at school and language learning, even basic grammar was never covered and this makes any real competence impossible.

Some further investigation required!

[Jo498]

Duolingo does have some brief explanations of grammar and some very basic introductory sections. It's not completely bad but I have been playing around with it since 2016 and I don't think it improved as much as they claim. For whatever reason, maybe not to scare people, they also name many sections after the fairly trivial content apart from grammar.

So one often has to discover for oneself that a section "talk about family/childhood" is actually to learn distinctions and forms of two types of past tense (habits/recurrent actions (as in I used to go to Grandma's farm after school) vs. events) as well as a bunch of new vocab.

I've been studying foreign languages since I was 10 years old (although never professionally) and I am surprised at the obvious weaknesses Duolingo still has after 10 years or so.

[Madiel]

The big problem with Duolingo is that a lot of people don't actually know where the grammar tips are.

Especially if people are using the app. I initially used Duolingo on a desktop PC and the grammar tips were much more visible (and there also used to be more discussion available). On the app, you have to make sure you click the relevant spot at the start of each lesson section. I know plenty of people who simply had no clue it was there, because there's nothing on the app to force you to look at it.

The quality of the courses does vary. For instance I think some things in the Portuguese course would have mystified me if I hadn't encountered equivalent concepts in the Spanish course first.

But, I did the whole Danish course before finding an actual Danish teacher, and she was surprised and impressed by what I already knew. She told me, most people who said they'd been learning on the internet, she essentially had to start from scratch. But with me she skipped the first book she used because I already knew all that.

Add to that the comments I got in Spain and Portugal, and it's my firm view that you can learn a decent amount of language on Duolingo. But it will depend a fair extent on you and how you use it. And if something is sufficiently unclear, do a little bit of googling (but I've done that quite rarely in the Spanish course).

[foxandpeng]

Duolingo does have some brief explanations of grammar and some very basic introductory sections. It's not completely bad but I have been playing around with it since 2016 and I don't think it improved as much as they claim. For whatever reason, maybe not to scare people, they also name many sections after the fairly trivial content apart from grammar.

So one often has to discover for oneself that a section "talk about family/childhood" is actually to learn distinctions and forms of two types of past tense (habits/recurrent actions (as in I used to go to Grandma's farm after school) vs. events) as well as a bunch of new vocab.

I've been studying foreign languages since I was 10 years old (although never professionally) and I am surprised at the obvious weaknesses Duolingo still has after 10 years or so.

This is useful, thank you.

[Madiel]

PS I simply wouldn't use Duolingo if it didn't cover grammar (and punish you for getting it wrong, however frustrating I might sometimes find that). There are plenty of things out there that will just teach you tourist phrases with no sense of grammar, which means you can never construct your own sentences.

I like Duolingo because it alternates between teaching new vocabulary and new grammar - even if most of the grammar lessons don't hit you over the head and announce "this is a grammar lesson" (though every now and then in the Spanish course, which is the lengthiest one, there's an explicit grammar lesson). But an attentive student can work out that's what is going on.

I entertain my friends by posting on Facebook the most ridiculous sentences that Duolingo has, divorced from context. But the context is almost always to teach a concept. The Danish course was particularly good at having silly sentences, actually, and I seem to remember the German course was rather lacking them...

[foxandpeng]

The big problem with Duolingo is that a lot of people don't actually know where the grammar tips are.

Especially if people are using the app. I initially used Duolingo on a desktop PC and the grammar tips were much more visible (and there also used to be more discussion available). On the app, you have to make sure you click the relevant spot at the start of each lesson section. I know plenty of people who simply had no clue it was there, because there's nothing on the app to force you to look at it.

The quality of the courses does vary. For instance I think some things in the Portuguese course would have mystified me if I hadn't encountered equivalent concepts in the Spanish course first.

But, I did the whole Danish course before finding an actual Danish teacher, and she was surprised and impressed by what I already knew. She told me, most people who said they'd been learning on the internet, she essentially had to start from scratch. But with me she skipped the first book she used because I already knew all that.

Add to that the comments I got in Spain and Portugal, and it's my firm view that you can learn a decent amount of language on Duolingo. But it will depend a fair extent on you and how you use it. And if something is sufficiently unclear, do a little bit of googling (but I've done that quite rarely in the Spanish course).

Again, really appreciate this. I'm fortunate enough to have a fair bit if French & Spanish, and did A levels back in school for Latin and Portuguese, so I have a bit of a start on knowing the necessity of a decent grammar base. I at least know the importance of the functional nuts and bolts, even if I don't know anything about them yet 🙂

I am a bit of a perfectionist, but I'm not intending to become a EU or NATO translator. I might not be able to direct a light opera or lecture at a physiology class, but asking directions to the beach in loud voices might be in my reach 🤔

As you indicate, being able to construct my own relatively complex sentences in the correct tense with a level of accuracy is the goal, rather than shouting, 'Oi, Håkon!' at passing waiters.

[Jo498]

yes, I was a bit ungracious because I think Duolingo got worse, not better in some respects. As I had learned Latin and Spanish long before Duolingo I deemed my general knowledge of (romance) languages sufficient to get the grammar of Italian and French in passing. And this mostly works because they are quite similar.

I still think French sucks (I am grateful I never had to take it at school), it's the worst language ever to become a global second language, and I have no clue how it ever got the reputation of logic and clarity as it seems the worst of the main romance languages in these respects (and by far the worst in the discrepancy of spelling and pronunciation) with stuff I find emotionally repulsive. Like the negation, the gender alignment or lack thereof for the participle etc.
It's as if they had taken all that was logical in Latin and at least partly is in Italian and mixed it up to make it maximally confusing. It also has worst both of the languages with a lot of verbal forms to learn (like Latin) AND the others with few/simple forms (like English) where word order is important. Usually there is a tradeoff that seems missing in French.

[Florestan]

I still think French sucks (I am grateful I never had to take it at school), it's the worst language ever to become a global second language, and I have no clue how it ever got the reputation of logic and clarity as it seems the worst of the main romance languages in these respects (and by far the worst in the discrepancy of spelling and pronunciation) with stuff I find emotionally repulsive. Like the negation, the gender alignment or lack thereof for the participle etc.

I really don't get that. How can a language be emotionally repulsive? Do you have fits of anger whenever you hear, or read, "Je ne sais pas" or "Elle est arrivée"?

If you hate French that much, how come your signature line is in French? 

[Jo498]

The second phrase is among the logical ones (once the distinction between verbs going with être vs avoir is accepted, although it is confusing that in one the participle is treated just as part of a complex verb form whereas the other retains the Latin agreement like "Maria benedicta est") but there are others when the participle suddenly has to agree with an object not the subject, despite not being used as direct modifier of the object, iirc sth. like "les documents, on les a oubliés".

But yes, I literally get angry when I do a Duolingo exercise and have to bother with the double negation, forget the "pas" or place it incorrectly or have to consider that the "pas" goes away when there's "rien" or "jamais" (not sure) instead, the confusing word order etc.
Or especially when I read that a language where "personne" means nobody is the most elegant, clear and logical in the world!
Languages have of course every right to be confusing (I openly admit that German is, but nobody claims it was logical and elegant!). But please stop claiming that French is logical and elegant! I have dabbled in/looked at about 8 languages (although I cannot read/understand more than 3-4 and speak less) and I honestly think that French is one of the worst.
But it's also an important language, so I feel I should get to basic/intermediate reading/understanding.

[Florestan]

when the participle suddenly has to agree with an object not the subject, despite not being used as direct modifier of the object, iirc sth. like "les documents, on les a oubliés".

I don't understand your objection: oubliés agrees with les documents, which are masculine; if you replace them with les paroles which are feminine, you'll have to say on les a oubliées. This is actually very logical to me.

[Karl Henning]

I simply wouldn't use Duolingo if it didn't cover grammar (and punish you for getting it wrong, however frustrating I might sometimes find that).

It doesn't cover the Dutch material on which I've barked my mental shins. (The use of "om" and "te" with objects and the infinitive.) And then, in one of their genius re-designs, if they do have any pertinent grammatical tips (of which I am not sanguine) they're in earlier units which they've made inaccessible.

[Kalevala]

I wish that I had kept my textbooks and notes; unfortunately, I didn't have the room to take them with me when I moved. 

K

[Madiel]

It doesn't cover the Dutch material on which I've barked my mental shins. (The use of "om" and "te" with objects and the infinitive.) And then, in one of their genius re-designs, if they do have any pertinent grammatical tips (of which I am not sanguine) they're in earlier units which they've made inaccessible.

I don't know anything about earlier units ever becoming inaccessible.