Picking Up Abstract Terms

One thing that I was wondering about language learning is picking up abstract terms and their meanings like "free," "will," and "actually." I'm wondering, how do you eventually narrow these down to their bear meanings?

Isn't it true that if you're not wanting to use translation dictionaries or in fact dictionaries at all that you will have some level of obscurity about the language that over time is cleared? For example, the meanings of certain words or perhaps certain grammatical constructs--it might take time for you to clearly grasp the meaning of them.

Perhaps you had this same obscurity in your childhood when you were learning your native language, you just don't remember it? After all, when you were a child you didn't really had the power of the clear knowledge of your language, but you never had, so you don't feel the loss, but as an adult learning a foreign language, you notice that the power you have in your native language you don't yet have in the foreign language so you feel the loss more, right?

I was wondering about this.

You use a dictionary, and look at exemplars. But its not instantanious.

I'm sorry, What are exemplars? Do you mean examples?

Its the same probably.

Exemplar:
something to be imitated; "an exemplar of success"; "a model of clarity"; "he is the very model of a modern major general"

Franco,

OK, thanks. I was thinking about that too--you just have to live with a period of obscurity until you start to get everything sorted out.

<< Isn't it true that if you're not wanting to use translation dictionaries or in fact dictionaries at all that you will have some level of obscurity about the language that over time is cleared? >>

Why would you do such a thing, though, unless you were experimenting to see how far you could get that way (as in the "Norsk Experiment" described on Antomood)? That's OK to do for fun, but I'm sure it's inefficient and to some extent impractical as a serious study method.

I always have been curious about how we pick up abstract words as children, though. I think what we do subconsciously is that our brains form hypotheses about what certain words mean, and we adjust or reject those hypotheses as we hear the words in context. But we're not necessarily aware of those hypotheses, because it's subconscious... so to us it manifests itself as "getting a feel" for the word.

Sometimes this happens with concrete nouns, too. I remember when I figured out what exactly a "windowsill" was -- I was much older than I should have been when I realized it, I must admit. Nobody had pointed to a windowsill and told me, "That's a windowsill." Or if they did, I had long forgotten it. It just never came up, since whenever I heard the word "windowsill", the exact meaning never was important. But I was thinking, "So what the heck is a windowsill, anyway?" And I thought about it, and I concluded that the only thing it could possibly be was the little platform in front of/under the window. And that's what it was, of course.

- Kef

Yes, -windowsill- was not a word I much thought about either. But about these hypotheses, what do you think adults do with these? Are adults much less efficient than children in working with these hypothesis, or are they efficient because of the environment (in that they are not surrounded by the language so much) that they don't get enough input to narrow it down? Do you think such a method would be successful for adults?

I'm considering some words in Japanese (do not give me the answer!) that I've seen a bit. I will not give them because I do not want to tempt you into giving me the answer, but some words I have figured out more or less without looking at a translation: dame, as in "itcha dame!", meaning "don't (go)!" Another is choudai, which seems to add assertiveness to sentences and is used mainly by females.

One issue I know it took me a long time to figure out as a child was whether to answer a negative question with yes or no. By negative question I mean something like, "Don't you know that you can't do that?" Now, I know that if you answer that with yes, then that means you do know. But for the longest time, I thought that answering with yes meant that you did not (in other words you were agreeing with the sentence as spoken, that you don't know). Of course, this led to many hilarious misunderstandings (ha ha!) between other people and me.

BTW, my favorite comics right now are Chibi Maruko Chan, which are teh coolest. Plus, I think they show more of everyday Japanese life than most of the rough comics that always use words like kisama and old samurai forms.

Since I've been in Japan, I've been able to see the show on TV (on Animax every weeday morning at 6 30 and again at noon and it shows 3 different episodes on Sunday) and it comes on with new episodes on Fuji TV 6 pm every Sunday night, just before Sazae san. I've been able to buy the DVDs too, and went to Chibi Maruko Chan Land in Shimizu (Shizuoka Prefecture), which has been so cool.

<< (as in the "Norsk Experiment" described on Antomood)? >>

...How the HECK did I end up typing "Antimoon" as "Antomood"?? Sigh. I'm a good speller, but a horrible typist.

Anyway...

<< Are adults much less efficient than children in working with these hypothesis >>

Hmm. It would seem so. There have been rare cases where feral children were found... children who grew up "in the wild" rather than civilization. Past a certain age, such children were generally unable to acquire human speech. Their brains just weren't wired that way anymore.

When it comes to learning a second language without the aid of a dictionary, in addition to that, there's also the problem of interference from your own language. We have a tendency to want to equate words in a foreign language with words in our own language. (We might intellectually know that this doesn't always work, but we try to do it anyway.) This is particularly troublesome when the concept in the other language just doesn't exist in your native language. I've heard that Russian doesn't have a word for "fun", for example. I'm sure the concept is translatable in context, but there isn't a single one-size-fits-all word for "fun". When you think about it, that may not be as surprising as it sounds, considering the flexibility that the word has... it could describe watching TV, riding a bike, playing video games, reading a thrilling book, dancing, partying, even having sex. And we put that all into a single syllable: fun!

Russian might have a word like "entertainment" -- I can only conjecture, as I don't know a word of Russian -- but that doesn't quite mean the same thing as "fun". TV, books, and video games might be called "entertaining"... but saying that riding a bike is entertaining sounds odd. It's not quite the same idea.

Now let's consider Spanish... the Spanish way to say something is fun is to say that it's "divertido". But the Spanish concept doesn't exactly match the English concept... in Spanish, you can say that a joke is divertido, but if you say in English that a joke is fun, it will sound odd; we say that it's "funny". It might be that the Spanish concept of "fun" is even broader than the English concept, but I don't really know for sure because I'm far from an expert on nuances like these in Spanish. I just know that the meanings overlap, but not entirely.

I imagine that just about any time you're dealing with an abstract concept, particularly adjectives and adverbs, you'll find many cases where the concepts in two languages just don't match up. Even things that seem pretty concrete to us may not be as concrete as they seem. Some languages consider blue and green to be shades of the same color, for example. When you think about it, the difference *is* somewhat arbitrary. Even though we can see with the eyes whether something is blue or green, the distinction is only made in our heads.

The only way to fully understand these things is to see lots of examples in context, and then you will get a feel for how the word works and how it doesn't work... it may not be a perfect grasp at first, but you'll get it. But it really helps to have an idea of what the word means before you try to figure it out from context, so you have an idea of what to look for when the word is used. You can concentrate on fitting the word into the context rather than trying to do that at the same time as figuring out the basic meaning.

- Kef

furrykef,

<< Hmm. It would seem so. There have been rare cases where feral children were found... children who grew up "in the wild" rather than civilization. Past a certain age, such children were generally unable to acquire human speech. Their brains just weren't wired that way anymore. >>

I've heard of lots of these cases too. But as for learning it as your second language, as opposed to your first, after puberty, I do wonder. I've seen counterexamples to the assertion that people can't absorb language after puberty, such as a Mexican woman who came over to the States at age 19 not speaking a word of English, married an English speaking husband, and over time just got more and more of a grasp of the language. (Additionally, studies do mention cases of second language learners after puberty becoming so fluent as to become indistinguishable from native speakers.) So because of that, I doubt that there is necessarily a biological stopping point for second language learning, despite many academics disagreeing.

I think the reason why we don't see a lot of adults do well with language learning might have to do more with environmental factors: Children growing up in a country don't have to use the language of that country immediately and can have a period of play in that language, in addition to being in an environment where they are surrounded by that language and receive hours and hours of input in a multitude of situations and experiences in that language every day for months and years. How many adults can get both factors as well as that in their environments? If an adult moves to a foreign country, often they will either slip into a community with co-linguals (people who speak the same language they do) and spend their time maintaining bonds there and not getting much practice in the language of the country, or they'll be forced to start using the language in business (serious) contexts from the get-go, and as the author of antimoon.com said they will make lots of mistakes, but not have much to go on correcting them and they have to keep using the bad forms for survival reasons (it works and gets them what they want). Of course, there are issues of identity too.

I think the issues are much more complicated than, "Well you're past puberty, so you might as well give up on the idea of ever becoming like a native speaker." Of course, you may not doubt that someone past puberty can be like a native speaker, but you think they must do it knowing the translation first.

<< When it comes to learning a second language without the aid of a dictionary, in addition to that, there's also the problem of interference from your own language. We have a tendency to want to equate words in a foreign language with words in our own language. (We might intellectually know that this doesn't always work, but we try to do it anyway.) >>

By dictionary, I'm assuming you mean a translation dictionary, not an in-language definitions dictionary, correct? (Please correct me if I'm wrong and disregard my following points assuming you're talking about a translation dictionary on this matter.) If you are talking about using a translation dictionary, then would not that increase the influence from your native language, in that you're spending too much time looking for equivalent words? You mention a "tendency to want to equate words in a foreign language with words in our own language," so wouldn't using a translation dictionary help fuel this tendency?

For example, the way I was able to figure out choudai on my own, I know of no English equivalent for that term, but I was able to grasp the concept behind it over time.

<< I've heard that Russian doesn't have a word for "fun", for example. I'm sure the concept is translatable in context, but there isn't a single one-size-fits-all word for "fun". When you think about it, that may not be as surprising as it sounds, considering the flexibility that the word has... it could describe watching TV, riding a bike, playing video games, reading a thrilling book, dancing, partying, even having sex. And we put that all into a single syllable: fun! >>

Of course, if you spend time looking for such a word, you would be frustrated as you could not find it. I think the best way with receiving language input is to just sit back and accept it and find out what you can, rather than spending so much time hunting down a word that is equivalent to one in your language and that may not even exist.

<< Now let's consider Spanish... the Spanish way to say something is fun is to say that it's "divertido". But the Spanish concept doesn't exactly match the English concept... in Spanish, you can say that a joke is divertido, but if you say in English that a joke is fun, it will sound odd; we say that it's "funny". It might be that the Spanish concept of "fun" is even broader than the English concept, but I don't really know for sure because I'm far from an expert on nuances like these in Spanish. I just know that the meanings overlap, but not entirely. >>

And that can be difficult for a Spanish speaker learning English, as they might be doing something they think is right, but isn't. That's why I think Antimoon's advice is best--try not to assume anything about the language and continue to receive input and try to imitate that input as closely as you can, and if you don't know how to express something yet in the language, shut up until you can receive input that shows you how. If you go over to another country for business and not for play, however, I realize that this could be difficult to follow.

<< I imagine that just about any time you're dealing with an abstract concept, particularly adjectives and adverbs, you'll find many cases where the concepts in two languages just don't match up. Even things that seem pretty concrete to us may not be as concrete as they seem. Some languages consider blue and green to be shades of the same color, for example. When you think about it, the difference *is* somewhat arbitrary. Even though we can see with the eyes whether something is blue or green, the distinction is only made in our heads. >>

True.

<< The only way to fully understand these things is to see lots of examples in context, and then you will get a feel for how the word works and how it doesn't work... it may not be a perfect grasp at first, but you'll get it. But it really helps to have an idea of what the word means before you try to figure it out from context, so you have an idea of what to look for when the word is used. You can concentrate on fitting the word into the context rather than trying to do that at the same time as figuring out the basic meaning. >>

Perhaps, but I still don't think it's impossible. Still, abstract words are much harder to figure out, and I believe it takes even children much longer to figure out abstract words than it takes to figure out concrete words.

To clarify, the Mexican woman would with time and repeated exposure, without ever taking classes or dealing with translations, become indistinguishable from a native speaker. Grammatically she does not make mistakes and phonetically she pronounces words correctly, though she seems to have a slight Mexican tone overhanging them, which I only noticed when it was pointed out by others. (I wondered about this though as she spent most of her early years in the States in southern California, and I notice a lot of Hispanic people from there with the same sort of accent, even though they speak English as well as a native speaker. Perhaps it's just a developing accent in the region?)

(Additionally, she is able to point out the grammatical mistakes of others in English. In one case, a coworker, who is a native English speaker, had typed up something as instructions, but it was chock full of grammatical and typographical erros as to be totally hilarious. She was able to point out the errors herself to me.)

Because adults are vain and stuck in their ways that they cant learn languages. Not because they are physically incapable.

<< By dictionary, I'm assuming you mean a translation dictionary, not an in-language definitions dictionary, correct? (Please correct me if I'm wrong and disregard my following points assuming you're talking about a translation dictionary on this matter.) If you are talking about using a translation dictionary, then would not that increase the influence from your native language, in that you're spending too much time looking for equivalent words? You mention a "tendency to want to equate words in a foreign language with words in our own language," so wouldn't using a translation dictionary help fuel this tendency? >>

I meant dictionaries in general... trying to learn a word without dictionaries, i.e., solely from context.

But as for your point, I don't think interference from one's native language is a big deal when using a bilingual dictionary, as long as one is aware that simple translations are seldom exact unless you're talking about universal concepts or concrete nouns. You still need to see how it's used in context, but having an idea of what it means can help you see how the word is used in context without worrying too much about its meaning. It reduces the work that your mind has to do, except for those occasions where the translation leads you astray, but I would guess that if you're careful, it will help more often than it will harm.

<< Of course, if you spend time looking for such a word, you would be frustrated as you could not find it. I think the best way with receiving language input is to just sit back and accept it and find out what you can, rather than spending so much time hunting down a word that is equivalent to one in your language and that may not even exist. >>

What I mean is that if you try to learn a word from context, you're more likely to try to correlate it with an English (or whatever) word. If no equivalent word exists in your native language, then the meaning of the word might continue to elude you as you try to pick it up from context. Since I've never dealt with the problem myself, I can only conjecture, though...

- Kef

"BTW, my favorite comics right now are Chibi Maruko Chan, which are teh coolest. Plus, I think they show more of everyday Japanese life than most of the rough comics that always use words like kisama and old samurai forms.

Since I've been in Japan, I've been able to see the show on TV (on Animax every weeday morning at 6 30 and again at noon and it shows 3 different episodes on Sunday) and it comes on with new episodes on Fuji TV 6 pm every Sunday night, just before Sazae san. I've been able to buy the DVDs too, and went to Chibi Maruko Chan Land in Shimizu (Shizuoka Prefecture), which has been so cool"-beneficii

Chibi Maruko Chan and Sazae-San are good cartoons for anyone learning Japanese. It's ordinary Japanese. Good comments. K. T.

You can get videos of both cartoons at some Japanese groceries.