Wednesday, September 1, 2021

Language-learning aptitude

Language-learning aptitude

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Second language learning aptitude)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Language learning aptitude refers to the "prediction of how well, relative to other individuals, an individual can learn a foreign language in a given amount of time and under given conditions".[1] As with many measures of aptitude, language learning aptitude is thought to be relatively stable once a person matures.

Language learning disability[edit]

Some high schools, universities or other institutions will interpret low language learning aptitude as a sign of a language learning disability. A pattern of evidence from several sources can help to diagnose a foreign language learning disability. Evidence can come from scoring poorly on language learning aptitude assessments, like the Modern Language Aptitude Test, Pimsleur Language Aptitude Battery, Modern Language Aptitude Test – Elementary or Defense Language Aptitude Battery, while attaining average or above-average scores on aptitude assessments in other areas, like general intelligence. A history of scoring poorly on an array of language aptitude tests taken at the appropriate time (MLAT-E for grades 3–6, PLAB for grades 7–12, MLAT for adults) can provide even stronger evidence for a language learning disability. Evidence can also come from comparing a poor past performance in foreign language courses with above-average performance in other courses unrelated to language learning.

Language aptitude is one of the important factors that determined L2 later learners' ultimate achievement, but it has less effect on L2 early learners.[2]

John B. Carroll[edit]

John B. Carroll, an influential psychologist in the field of educational linguistics, developed a theory about a cluster of four abilities that factored into language learning aptitude, separate from verbal intelligence and motivation. Using these four distinct abilities (phonetic coding ability, grammatical sensitivity, rote learning ability, and inductive learning ability), Carroll developed the MLAT, a language aptitude assessment for adults.

The four ability components are defined as follows:

Component Definition
Phonetic coding ability ability to perceive distinct sounds, associate a symbol with that sound and retain that association
Grammatical sensitivity ability to recognize the grammatical function of a lexical element (word, phrase, etc.) in a sentence without explicit training in grammar
Rote learning ability ability to learn associations between words in a foreign language and their meanings and retain that association
Inductive learning ability ability to infer or induce rules governing the structure of a language

Paul Pimsleur[edit]

Paul Pimsleur, also known for the Pimsleur language learning system, spent time researching four factors that he believed to be related to language learning aptitude. Pimsleur included grade point average as an indication of general academic achievement as well as motivation in his factors. In addition, the verbal ability factor indicated how well a student would be able to handle the mechanics of learning a foreign language and the auditory factor indicated how well a student would be able to listen to and produce phrases in a foreign language. To test these four factors, Pimsleur developed the Pimsleur Language Aptitude Battery, which is available through the Language Learning and Testing Foundation.

Uses of aptitude measurement[edit]

Measurements of language learning aptitude are used in many different ways. The United States Department of Defense uses a measurement of language learning aptitude, the Defense Language Aptitude Battery, to help place employees in positions that require them to learn a new language.

Governmental agencies use the MLAT as a tool to select and place employees in intensive language training programs. Businesses and missionaries use the MLAT to select, place and plan for language training. Universities, colleges and high schools use the MLAT to help in the diagnosis of foreign language learning disabilities. Although each institution has its own policy, many will waive a foreign language requirement in cases of a foreign language learning disability in favor of a history or linguistic course.

Schools use the PLAB and MLAT-E to place students in suitable language courses, build a history of a foreign language learning difficulty, identify especially gifted students in respect to language learning and to match learning styles with instructional styles.

Aptitude tests[edit]

Aptitude Measurements
Measurement Description
Modern Language Aptitude Test mainly authored by John B. Carroll, appropriate for adults, mainly used by government and military institutions to select and place employees for language training
Defense Language Aptitude Battery developed and used by the United States Department of Defense to select candidates for jobs that will require them to attain fluency in a foreign language
Pimsleur Language Aptitude Battery authored by Paul Pimsleur, used to assess the language learning aptitude of students in grades 7 to 12
Modern Language Aptitude Test – Elementary mainly authored by John B. Carroll, appropriate for children in grades 3 to 6
Cognitive Ability for Novelty in Acquisition of Language - Foreign developed by Grigorenko, Sternberg, and Ehrman in 2000, using a new concept of language aptitude as a theoretical base

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ Stansfield, Charles W. "Language Aptitude Reconsidered." ERIC Digest. Washington DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics, 1989.
  2. ^ Ortega, L. (2013). Understanding second language acquisition. London : Routledge, 2013

Resources[edit]

  • Carroll, John B. and Stanley Sapon. Modern Language Aptitude Test: Manual 2002 Edition. Rockville, MD: Language Learning and Testing Foundation, 2002.
  • Carroll, John B. and Stanley M. Sapon. Modern Language Aptitude Test – Elementary: Manual, 2002 Edition. Rockville, MD: Language Learning and Testing Foundation, 2002.
  • Pimsleur, Paul, Daniel J. Reed and Charles W. Stansfield. Pimsleur Language Aptitude Battery: Manual, 2004 Edition. Bethesda, MD: Language Learning and Testing Foundation, 2004.
  • Stansfield, Charles W. "Language Aptitude Reconsidered." ERIC Digest. Washington DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics, 1989.

External links[edit]

User talk:86.82.85.198

User talk:86.82.85.198

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

I see you have been experimenting with Wikipedia. Your change was determined to be unhelpful, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. 15:58, 18 July 2006 (UTC)


Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cluster Resources, Inc.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cluster Resources, Inc.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Talk:Pons asinorum

Talk:Pons asinorum

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Mathematics (Rated B-class, Mid-priority)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-priority on the project's priority scale.
 

Quote source[edit]

This article quotes Aristotle "There is no royal road to geometry", but googling for the phrase in quotes provides many attributions to Euclid, not Aristotle.

Since the quote, however interesting, is not essential for explaining "Pons asinorum", the entire paragraph should be deleted.

No difference[edit]

Comparing triangle ABC to triangle ACB is comparing a thing to itself. D021317c 15:02, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it just shows how good Pappus proof is. If you look in Elementa http://aleph0.clarku.edu/~djoyce/java/elements/bookI/propI5.html it looks 'more' complicated. When Pappus mirrors the triangle it becomes so obvious. It should be rewritten by someone that can write English
Not quite. When we assert that triangle ABC is congruent to triangle ACB, we are also asserting that the vertices correspond in the given order (A to A, B to C, and C to B). 98.240.230.81 (talk) 18:54, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Um, if there were no difference, then all triangles would have two equal angles ... in fact, all triangles would be equiangular. -- 96.248.226.133 (talk) 23:53, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Content fork[edit]

There is some duplication of material between this article and Theorem on isosceles triangles. Perhaps a merge is in order but I think there is a distinction between the mathematics of the theorem and the Latin phrase and it's meaning in culture. The other article should have the mathematical material and this article should have the non-mathematical.--RDBury (talk) 17:23, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

While reading this article a lengthy alliteration describing "separating daft from dalliers" or something of the sort struck me as particularly, needlessly, and un-tastefully pseudo-eloquent. Flowery, as it were, and tacky too. In a similar tone as this comment itself (but without my shameless deployment of sentence fragments). The ... aroma of the language was imprecise and not entirely good, like the smell of milk. (Which should not have much of one at all). I hope I've made my point. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.119.233.112 (talk) 09:28, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Original diagram of pons asinorum[edit]

I think this article should at least have a diagram of pons asinorum as done in Euclid. That is integral to the original meaning. It is not enough to point to another article which treats it as a mathematical proposition and solves it using a later method. In fact I think probably the whole original proof is notable in itself and not particularly for the final result. Dmcq (talk) 11:52, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I'm planning to add a proof or two to the other article and it would be pointless to duplicate them here. Everything by Euclid has been hashed and rehashed for two millennia so there is a huge amount of material to sort through.--RDBury (talk) 14:35, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
There is
Byrne Preface-15.gif
picture in commons. I'd prefer a less gaudy one. Dmcq (talk) 15:21, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Merger proposal[edit]

Pons asinorum and Isosceles triangle theorem talk about the same theorem. Isosceles triangle theorem presents proofs, while Pons asinorum is more about the metaphorical use. I don't see why they have to be separate: since the articles are not very long, everything about this theorem (statement, history, proofs, etc...) could be in the same page until some sections become too long to justify sub-articles (for example, there isn't yet the page History of the Pythagorean theorem, because it's just fine for it to be in the main article: Pythagorean theorem#History). Chen10k2 (talk) 21:07, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

See my comment above under Content fork. Neither article is so stubby that it's a candidate for a merge because of article length. --RDBury (talk) 14:15, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
I agree that article length isn't a good reason for a merge in this case, but content is (both are on the same theorem). For this reason I have carried out the proposed merge. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:11, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pons asinorum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:56, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Pronunciation[edit]

I'm not sure whether the pronunciation given for in Latin for the Latin term was supposed to be a narrow or a broad transcription. The transcription used /ʊ/ for short-u but /i/ for short-i. It didn't specify if it was the Ecclesiastical pronunciation or classical pronunciation either. I regularized the transcription to a narrow classical transcription, but if a different change is needed, please comment.Nayrb Rellimer (talk) 00:14, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

My memories of the details of Latin pronounciation are shaky. Does the narrow classical transcription really end in a nasalized vowel rather than a consonant? So that (although Latin does not have such endings) -um, -un, and -ung would all be indistinguishable? No touching of closed lips (m), front of tongue to palette (n), nor back of tongue to palette (ng), just an open mouth? —David Eppstein (talk) 01:31, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Question about the name[edit]

The English name seems strange. If it means that people who can't grasp the proof are asses, and the proof is a bridge to the harder stuff, then how can it be a "bridge of asses" if asses can't "cross" it? Perhaps there's a subtlety in "Pons asinorum" which is lost in translation. Can any Latin experts comment? KevinBTheobald (talk) 22:20, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

User talk:BirdmanGhost

User talk:BirdmanGhost

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia by creating the nonsense article CJSS (band). Your test worked, and has been or will soon be removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Please also see Wikipedia:The perfect article to learn more about appropriate article creation. Jon513 15:57, 18 July 2006 (UTC)