This was a fantastic article, Autodidact. I have come to the conclusion, even though my thesis might have suggested otherwise, that every "method" has its value, and switching it around here and there is a worth while endeavor. Immersion without grammar can become problematic, and grammar without immersion likewise. I have yet to try AI, but perhaps I should.
Thanks for your wonderful comments, Nicholas. The series you have been publishing based on your thesis has been awesome and it's so great to better understand how we have been acquiring language historically, pedagogically and even biologically! I totally agree, every method does have value and, in fact, what we might eventually need to acknowledge is that "switching it around here and there" is essential to keep the mind sharp and tackling language from different angles!
As for AI, I've definitely been a longtime resister, kicking and screaming especially as I've seen a different blog I run on a different platform suffer from that platform's complete inability to crackdown on AI-generated articles. And, of course, as I said to another commenter, the mistakes it can make are quite egregious, but I did find it useful for very specific "activities." Would I have any faith in it to accurately translate a text or even instruct me on that translation? Not in a million years, but there are probably "safe" ways to use it strategically and with an eye towards saving time in certain areas.
A wonderful article, honestly. You’ve covered so much (I even took notes 😂).
The way you’re applying your knowledge of language acquisition to classical languages offers such a valuable perspective—it really helps illuminate the mechanics behind what makes certain methods “effective.”
I especially appreciated these insights:
• Comprehensible input is essential—but, of course, it's largely absent in languages like Old English.
• Output practice is key (I love Skehan too 🤍), yet it's often overlooked in classical language study—after all, who are you going to speak Old English with?
• Being an autodidact means the responsibility of addressing these challenges falls squarely on your own shoulders 😅.
I agree that tools like ChatGPT can be a useful—if imperfect—support on the language learning journey. You’ve shared some great ideas for how to interact with its output and stay mindful of its limitations. (I also get into cyber arguments with it all the time!)
That said, I think really benefiting from these tools requires a certain level of metacognitive awareness. Learners need to reflect on what’s actually working for them and adapt accordingly. You clearly draw on both theoretical and personal experience when crafting prompts, but I wonder if the “average” learner would approach it the same way. (Or maybe I’m selling the “average” learner short! 😂)
What a wonderful comment to open Substack to! Thank you for taking the time to read this piece!
Fair point about the “average learner”! A hobbyist or pleasure-learner might not necessarily be fussed at their rate of acquisition; instead, their priority might simply be learning the language at a rate that suits them and without all the bells, whistles and attempted hacks that are out there (or in the article)… in which case my colour-coded tracker will definitely not be first on their list of tips to takeaway! LOL!
Oh yes! The technology is far from perfect and definitely lacks reliability. Though the recognition of its fallacies seems like a useful learning tool, too! Kind of like a "spot the error" sort of game. All kidding aside, I do think that its grammar comprehension often sucks, but vocab training gets a decent pass. Though one time I did ask it to cull the internet for particular words used in sentences for my flashcards and to avoid using De Bello Gallico (which, for some reason, seems to be a ChatGPT fan favourite) and all it spat back were sample sentences referring to the Belgae and the Aquitani and it became evident that ChatGPT didn't understand the assignment!
This was a fantastic article, Autodidact. I have come to the conclusion, even though my thesis might have suggested otherwise, that every "method" has its value, and switching it around here and there is a worth while endeavor. Immersion without grammar can become problematic, and grammar without immersion likewise. I have yet to try AI, but perhaps I should.
Thanks!
Thanks for your wonderful comments, Nicholas. The series you have been publishing based on your thesis has been awesome and it's so great to better understand how we have been acquiring language historically, pedagogically and even biologically! I totally agree, every method does have value and, in fact, what we might eventually need to acknowledge is that "switching it around here and there" is essential to keep the mind sharp and tackling language from different angles!
As for AI, I've definitely been a longtime resister, kicking and screaming especially as I've seen a different blog I run on a different platform suffer from that platform's complete inability to crackdown on AI-generated articles. And, of course, as I said to another commenter, the mistakes it can make are quite egregious, but I did find it useful for very specific "activities." Would I have any faith in it to accurately translate a text or even instruct me on that translation? Not in a million years, but there are probably "safe" ways to use it strategically and with an eye towards saving time in certain areas.
I personally use ChatGPT to curate exercises in my target language or give me ideas of topics to talk about or write about
Oh, those are great uses!!
A wonderful article, honestly. You’ve covered so much (I even took notes 😂).
The way you’re applying your knowledge of language acquisition to classical languages offers such a valuable perspective—it really helps illuminate the mechanics behind what makes certain methods “effective.”
I especially appreciated these insights:
• Comprehensible input is essential—but, of course, it's largely absent in languages like Old English.
• Output practice is key (I love Skehan too 🤍), yet it's often overlooked in classical language study—after all, who are you going to speak Old English with?
• Being an autodidact means the responsibility of addressing these challenges falls squarely on your own shoulders 😅.
I agree that tools like ChatGPT can be a useful—if imperfect—support on the language learning journey. You’ve shared some great ideas for how to interact with its output and stay mindful of its limitations. (I also get into cyber arguments with it all the time!)
That said, I think really benefiting from these tools requires a certain level of metacognitive awareness. Learners need to reflect on what’s actually working for them and adapt accordingly. You clearly draw on both theoretical and personal experience when crafting prompts, but I wonder if the “average” learner would approach it the same way. (Or maybe I’m selling the “average” learner short! 😂)
Please, keep sharing articles like this!
What a wonderful comment to open Substack to! Thank you for taking the time to read this piece!
Fair point about the “average learner”! A hobbyist or pleasure-learner might not necessarily be fussed at their rate of acquisition; instead, their priority might simply be learning the language at a rate that suits them and without all the bells, whistles and attempted hacks that are out there (or in the article)… in which case my colour-coded tracker will definitely not be first on their list of tips to takeaway! LOL!
I am often frustrated by AI translations into Latin. I'm a rank novice and I end up thinking things like "NO, that's the accusative!"
Oh yes! The technology is far from perfect and definitely lacks reliability. Though the recognition of its fallacies seems like a useful learning tool, too! Kind of like a "spot the error" sort of game. All kidding aside, I do think that its grammar comprehension often sucks, but vocab training gets a decent pass. Though one time I did ask it to cull the internet for particular words used in sentences for my flashcards and to avoid using De Bello Gallico (which, for some reason, seems to be a ChatGPT fan favourite) and all it spat back were sample sentences referring to the Belgae and the Aquitani and it became evident that ChatGPT didn't understand the assignment!