Unlock with PatreonThe Problem with CI
To view this content, you must be a member of Ben’s Patreon at $10 or more Unlock with PatreonAlready a qualifying Patreon member? Refresh to
VanPatten Live
Share:
Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
LinkedIn
Ben Slavic
Get The Latest Updates
Subscribe to Our Mailing List
No spam, notifications only about new products, updates.
Related Posts
CI and the Research (cont.)
To view this content, you must be a member of Ben’s Patreon at $10 or more Unlock with PatreonAlready a qualifying Patreon member? Refresh to
Research Question
To view this content, you must be a member of Ben’s Patreon at $10 or more Unlock with PatreonAlready a qualifying Patreon member? Refresh to
We Have the Research
To view this content, you must be a member of Ben’s Patreon at $10 or more Unlock with PatreonAlready a qualifying Patreon member? Refresh to
2 thoughts on “VanPatten Live”
A lot of key comments in there, but crucial one: “grammar is what you END UP with.” What we call “grammar”– e.g. h to conjugate a verb– is not how the brain does this. The bottom line: sentence come as input, we use universal grammar to process the “data” in the words and the “properties” of the word (e.g. what does it do/not do, where can it/ can it not go, case, aspect etc) and the brain from that “builds” something like language competence.
Your grammarian colleagues who insist on their verb charts yadda yadda are, simply, wrong. As Krashen pointed out 34 years ago.
I was reading “Against Rules” last night and I love the way this is articulated…
“The problem is, from a pedagogical standpoint, if one teaches surface rules, then one is not getting at the at the underlying issue, and that is mental representation”…”mental representation only comes about from interaction with input.”
“…the result (of teaching rules) is the perpetuation of the myth of ‘teach rules and practice rules, and that’s how you get language.'” (p.22).