I seriously question what the suggested alternative to some amount of memorization is for people starting out in a language. If I speak English natively and am attempting to learn Mandarin, what is the recommended comprehensible input for day one? How do I acquire the language in less time than the ~10 years it took to have decent listening and speaking skills and know how to read at a basic level. This is the part of SLA I need broken down before I'm willing to give up my Anki decks for good, especially as a busy adult with a job and family to support.

Hi Professor McQuillan. As someone who's been teaching English in Japan for the past 25 years, I'd like to make a few quick observations. First, I am appalled at the paucity of studies that have been conducted in this area, and at their methodological flaws. You said there had been only three or so studies in the past 120 years: one by Thorndike in 1908, one by the Bacharachs (hope I've got the spelling right) in 1924, and one by Holstein in 2016. Furthermore, none of these studies compared people learning the same set of unknown words by two independent methods (rote memorization vs. incidental learning), with a random assignment of the study participants into each method, and with a follow-up after a considerable length of time (six months or a year), in order to ascertain which method was more efficient. That would be the proper scientific way to do it. I have to ask: why is linguistic research so unscientific, even in the 21st century? Second, I readily grant that most of the English words and phrases that I know I learned incidentally. One phrase that comes to mind is "fleet of foot," which I learned from reading "The Adventures of Robin Hood" by Roger Lancelyn Green as an eight-year-old. I didn't have to look up a dictionary to learn that phrase: I just guessed it from the context. However, what works for a first language doesn't necessarily work for a second. Had I encountered a similar phrase while reading a French novel in high school, I would have looked it up in the dictionary, simply because my best guess for the meaning of a foreign phrase might well have been wrong, and I don't like being wrong. As it happened, I learned about 4,500 words of French in six years of high school, and I reviewed my vocabulary regularly during the school holidays, by covering up one side of the page in my vocabulary notebook, and testing myself to see if I knew the words on the other wide. I don't use French now, but I managed to get through Agatha Christie's "Death on the Nile" in French (with the help of a dictionary), and I'd estimate I still know about 2,500 words of French, despite not having studied it for 47 years. While I was backpacking the world 30 years ago, I was able to converse with a French-speaking woman in Quebec. So my point is: rote memorization can stay with you for a very long time, if it's reinforced frequently in the first few years. Third, let's say you're right about people only learning 10 words an hour through rote learning. That's still not bad. Most online sources I've looked at say you need to know about 4,000 word families in order to reach CEFR B2 level. That's 400 hours, assuming that one can learn the main word types in a word family simultaneously. More generously, assuming that the average word family has 1.6 words (I think Paul Nation says that somewhere), and that each word has to be learned separately, that would mean it takes 640 hours to reach B2 level. At one hour of study a day, that's less than two years, which is quite fast, compared to high school learning. But if you can show me someone who reached a B2 vocabulary level in a shorter time using incidental learning, I will gladly eat my words. Finally, are you seriously claiming that ALL of the words in a second language can be learned incidentally? Let's say I open a book written for people learning French, which is written entirely in French, but which is copiously illustrated. On page 1, I see a picture of a man, with the caption, "C'est un homme" written underneath, and another picture of a woman, with the caption "C'est une femme" written underneath. Now, I might reasonably guess that "homme" means "man" and "femme" means "woman," but would I guess that "un" and "une" mean "a," and that "C'est" means "This is"? Probably not. Sometimes, direct translation really can save people a lot of time, when learning a language. That said, I'm all in favor of extensive reading and incidental learning as a supplement to rote memorization. Cheers.

So what's the point of spaced post test, they also forget it after longer period, so how is it better than immediate post test?

@14:04 Schools don't do immediate test or exams

Btw, the name of the book is Hgpᴉfƨ ∀foɯᴉc (^_^)

You have to work on your interviewing skills. It was an exposition to the other guy, who had to interrupt you now and then. By the way, I use Anki for all sorts of things and is invaluable to me. The algorithm is effective, and is based on sound science.

All I know is that I was getting nowhere with reading Chinese before using flashcards.

Miss your videos, James! They were always a delight for me to watch. ALWAYS interesting and thought provoking. One of those special KZbin channels where I can click on one after the other and not stop. Hope you're doing well!

Fully agree ❤ and studied spanish like this. But now I have problems with written chinese, I am looking for a good system.

About 10 years ago, I attended the Defense Language Institute and went through the Korean Basic course. In 15 months, I went from 0 knowledge to a 3/3 on the DLPT (Defense Language Proficiency Test.) This was accomplished using study, flashcards, and all of those other traditional methods that supposedly don't work. This video, and the genre of video to which it belongs, appear to me to be simply a way to excuse laziness. "Don't bother actually trying or putting in hard work. Not only is it unnecessary, it actually doesn't help at all!"

Great interview. I've seen it probably a dozen of times but it is still as exciting as it was the first time

This is a really fascinating topic. It seems the fluid use of language surely comes from implicit memory, though possibly can be refined somewhat with explicit rules if trained (I know that I speak differently as an adult after learning some language rules for example). It is really worth exploring how the two might work together even if explicit learning can only indirectly affect what is ingrained through implicit learning

I agree with the most part - but still, to become a polyglot is a great feat, isn't it? We're not talking about knowing a couple of languages in your region, but about languages of the world. This idea of language visa pass, if you will. Being able to speak with anyone in the world, is the main goal of polyglots, with people you don't live with, people who you are not at all familiar with.

I think SRS is like jamming your foot in the door to be able to acquire words while reading or listening faster. You memorize the meaning in your own language - understand it immediately when you see it in context - and then through continuous exposure it gets ingrained in you. I also think with things like lingq the ability to immediately click on a word instead of straining to try and remember actually does hurt you. For me at least there seems to be something vital to acquiring a word in the act of racking my brain for its meaning.

Both of you couldn't have been more wrong. The best approach is to frontload with rot memorization (I'm not recommending a specific strategy here) and then follow it up with what the guys in the video are suggesting. It is the ultimate game changer. It's shame these language acquisition channels are like religion now.

I'm convinced. So where do find understandable language materials when you're starting to learn a foreign language?

I started using Duolingo to learn Italian as a hobby, and six months later, I joined the voice rooms on HelloTalk as a passive listener. After another six months, I began speaking Italian spontaneously. Now, I listen to native Italian speakers and watch TV shows and movies with ease. I should be at a B2 or C1 level. I have to be thankful to Duolingo, since it was my starting point.

"learned spanish" can mean different stuff. he obivously didn't become fluent in spanish. but he indeed did learn the spanish that was in the movie.

But we'll for me kids shows helps me with my language learning..... Mostly simple words like where r u going.... What u doing..... There.. This... Theirs..... Simple sentences u know...... They not going to make u fluent but in one show u can pick out a lot..... Repetition also helps

Thank you for sharing this - I really needed it. I notice this a lot during language lessons. Constantly being stopped and corrected disrupts the flow of the conversation and only makes me more self conscious. I’m always fixating on the the most correct way to say things and it almost makes me too afraid to speak! I knew I was perfectionist in other areas of my life but hadn’t realised just how much it had been affecting my progress with language learning.

I spent 7 years learning a second language the conventional way, some in school and some as individual hobby. And even though i did well in school, realistically my final level was barely a beginner. ( A1-A2, as was confirmed by a comprehensive test) Then as a 19 year old i was a part of this experiment. I was placed in a foreign military academy with very strict guidelines. Foreign students were only allowed to use L2, it was absolute 100% immersion 24/7. (Kinda similar to Middlebury Language school or French Foreign Legion approach) And even though i was already an adult, i learned a second language to a near native level within a year. I could physically feel the development of a second language. After 3 months i was thinking in L2 full time, i had complete listening compression in 6 months. And obviously i wasn't studying a second language exclusively, I was learning science, engineering, humanities, doing sports. I was having a rich learning experience while acquiring a second language at a rate that seemed magical. There are very important conditions that allow adults to learn on par with immigrant kids. One condition really. Temporarily abstain from native language and dedicate all the remaining time to a second language. Regarding delibete study of grammar. Nobody was teaching me any of that. Well, I had a tutor for a few sessions, but then a school decided to forgo tutoring because our progress was too fast to keep track of. Yes, our progress, because there were 5 of us. And we all exhibited remarkable rates of improvement. We were physically separated in different battalions (dorms) and we weren't allowed to communicate. As far as explicit knowledge of L2 grammar, I FORGOT everything I knew as a beginner. I ACQUIRED grammar the same way native speakers do and I was reasonably grammatically correct. A Grammatically correct sentence SOUNDS right, incorrect sounds funny. I don't know any of the textbook grammar explanations. That being said, studying L2 grammar ENTIRELY in L2 at a more advanced level could be a USEFUL tool, though not entirely necessary. Studying L2 grammar (or vocabulary) using L1 is a colossal waste of time.

What a breath of fresh air! Subscribed.

After switching to MONOLINGUAL dictionaries it seems I never forget a word I look up. When a word appears in content that I LIKE, I look up it's definition and usually never forget it. My memory was terrible when I was using translation.

I will provide a dissenting opinion. 1. Nobody would suggest that the decontextualised knowledge you get from vocabulary flashcards would lead to the same kind of rich understanding of words that you get from reading books or conversation. This is a bit of a strawman. It's been mentioned a few times on your videos, so I won't go on too much about this, but a lot of direct vocabulary learning that's talked about online (especially wrt Japanese learning) includes contexts via sentence decks or sentence mining. To me, this is somewhere in between "real" input and traditional flashcard memorisation, and I would expect it to have different results. Anecdotally, I certainly learn plain vocabulary cards differently to sentence cards. I think this is out of the scope for most SLA people, who while "experts" don't seem to have their finger on the pulse. 2. We should be careful drawing analogies between vocabulary instruction between native speakers and second language learners. An adult second language learner might learn language very differently from children learning their first language. What McQuillan is saying here could just simply be irrelevant because of that. This seems like a bit of a blindspot for him to be honest. 3. The research he discusses where test subjects are given a definition of words before a comprehension exercise is also possibly irrelevant to how most people do direct study of vocabulary, because it isn't how flashcard study works. For example if I learn the word 演奏 in a flashcard, I am unlikely to immediately read it right after I have 'learned' it on day 1, I am more likely to see it later on after I have been learning it for a while via spaced repetition (where I typically answer quicker and more accurately). It's basically the same critique that he has towards Irina Elgort's research - the study mightn't actually dis/prove what he thinks it does. 4. Opportunity cost. I think this is an interesting argument but it ultimately rests on McQuillan's claims about efficacy which I think we have reason to doubt. If it's more efficient than he is saying, then it might be that language learners are seriously missing out on faster language gains by ignoring direct vocabulary instruction. In the SRS space, the FSRS algorithm(s) seem to be much more efficient than previous Anki algorithms. Perhaps the efficiency and costs are in flux and more complex than McQuillan is giving them credit for - perhaps the benefits/costs aren't monotonic i.e. maybe up to a certain point, flashcards are effective, but past that they are detrimental due to the opportunity cost of missing out on good input. To similarly economicize the discussion, I would counter and conclude by saying that it's best to hedge our bets and do some direct vocabulary instruction alongside reading/listening. I think we should all take a step back and look at the situation we're in. All of this talk about 'semantic geography' and 'implicit mental representations' - are these tangible things that we can measure and test? Is there really a consensus about much of what you or McQuillan are saying, or are there dissenting views amongst highly respectable SLA researchers? Do any of McQuillan's mentioned studies directly test the main claim, or are they just evidence that he is combining with inferences (e.g. that they generalise from native speakers to second language learners, or from children to adults) to make conclusions? When we say flashcards are less effective because they're boring, aren't we just making a value claim, that should be left out of the discussion? Do these results generalise across languages, even with very different written representations? Do these papers even replicate the ways that people are actually studying? I think we should be a lot more humble when it comes to language learning and stop pretending we have all the answers.

As someone who enjoys reading about SLA research, I am going to be a bit of a devil's advocate. There are a lot of interesting techniques and tools that learners/practitioners are using/creating to help learn and teach languages that the research community don't seem to have looked into with great depth. I think this shows we should have a bit of humility and caution towards relying solely on more staid research. For example, AnkiMorphs is a pretty great tool, and as far as I can tell there isn't any research on it's efficacy, or of the algorithm it relies on, but I don't think this should mean it be dismissed, it means we should be open-minded about the limitations of SLA research's ability to keep up with the times. SLA researchers don't synthesise ideal learning methods from first principles, they'll be making hypotheses and testing them (as well as being informed by theory) about existing techniques, so I think the sensible for us to do is the same, really. Anyway, the more I interact with "experts", the more I realise it's an occupation rather than a quality, if that makes sense. Also, what do we do when there are contradictions in the advice from experts? What if there is no consensus? In your interview with McQuillan, he gets his figures from an SLA researcher to show that reading is more effective than direct instruction for acquiring vocabulary. But that very same SLA researcher's metanalysis of direct instruction showed that as being more effective! What do we do in cases like this? I think we have to have an open-mind and 'diversify our risk' by spending our time on a range of activities that we know are at least effective. And, we should use self-reflection (even though bias or cognitive distortions or whatever are possible) and feedback to inform us as to whether some methods are more or less effective. Have a bit of humility, really. Just because someone's learning method doesn't accord with your preferred researcher's opinions, it doesn't mean they're subconsciously misguided. Perhaps the research is incomplete! Isn't that what they're always telling us when they panhandle for research grants?

So true. I tell my students to get closer to the language, to bring it into their lives, spend several hours every week in contact with the language. That's for English - huge challenge for Brazilians. French is a lot easier.

I've taught ESL in Brazil for over 35 years. I believe people's active vocabulary, the words they actually use in speech is 10% to 20%. There is clearly an emotional component - learners tend to actively use words they feel are 'nice' or 'interesting'.

20:20 what was the interview you were referring to?

Hi. Can you please give a link to your video about knowledge transition from one area of the brain to the other area because of fluency

What’s that stupid ranting against each other?! It worked for me. 10x in with one movie with incredible results. It’s not the only thing I’m doing and neither he said he was. Stupid pointless video

Would it be possible to point me in the direction of sources which show that learning styles (for SLA) are not well supported by research? One source, or even keywords that I could search? I want to confirm this before I start making the claim myself. But I don't even know where to begin searching.

Las personas no definen sus gustos sino que los gustos definen a las personas, una simple pero brillante reflexión

Cheers mate, well spoken & well taken, I asked myself what's wrong with Procrastination & found your video, a moment spent listening to you was a breath of fresh air, Best Regards from Bavaria, Pete Kilkenny ❤

"War is a harsh teacher, but it is the only one that instills true wisdom." LOL! Simply hilarious. 😂 Great video mate! You're awesome! 😊

Dreaming Spanish says not to use subtitles but I think they can be good

You're taking the title way too literally dude. Yes, the title is clickbaity, but he says in one of his videos that it didn't make him fluent. What he claims it did was help with his comprehension and retention of some words. And I'm inclined to agree with him. It's like listening to a song in your target language. On the first listen to, the words and speed may be difficult to pick up and understand. After X number of replays though, you can tell what is being said. Yes, you need to figure out what the words mean, but once you do, you're going to have a much easier time interpreting when you hear said word in a conversation.

"A lot of the time, technology isn't freeing up time and allowing us to pursue our interests." Sure, that's true. But you're just adding to the sludge of online "content" with your videos. None of them is in any way meaningful, passionate or worth anything at all other than making you feel better.

This my genuine question: do you have a video in which you speak positively about anything? I understand that things need criticizing but you seem to only ever talk trash. Even The Critikal Drinker whose whole channel is about critiquing bad movies and shows occasionally does things about how good a movie was. You just talk bad about one thing and then move onto something else... unless theres a video of yours thats positive that I havent seen?

I am interested where in the languge lerning comunety started doing sentence mining (I am hering this more often) what it is, is taking word from shows, movies etc. that you watched or are currently watching taking word that you don't know and making a flash card (anki card) and keep it in a sentence of movie etc. So they are useing SRS method for sentence to learn word the only difrence is you take it from shows or movies that you watched or are currently watching. so you waste time on making flash card and then reviweing they say I dose work but the think is they are using input (immersion) for lerning beside SRS so they say it works becous they put a lot of time intu it. Anyway I saw good proggres now that I am close to 1 year most basic word and some more are almost all there if I go watch kids shows and tv I can now understand almost everythink and for reading becous it's japenise I only have problem whit kanji that I don't know or am seeing for the first time. And for people that are wondering I only did comprihansable input and some input aka. immerson whit shows that have a lot of expresion (kids tv) ocasanely some show that are for adduldt whit subbtitles (not that much), listeing to music, podcast and playing video games in japenise most of the time when I played games on pc. I had week when I probebly did only around 5 hours in the week it depended on how much time I had but it is going slovely but surly and it works it feels like magic. I never used SRS but I did look up some ruels mostly becous of personal interest.

In essence life without passion isn’t real.