Benny Lewis' 3-month quest to become fluent in Mandarin

[creamyhorror]

Here, I'll engage in some hopefully newish discussion (also I want to get my piece in on this semi-legendary thread):

Your love for Chinese and its complexities is killing other people's chances to even get started when you present it as so impossible. It's true that you aren't my audience, since I'm trying to encourage language learning, and you don't need that encouragement. But the message you share is the kind of damage I'm trying to undo with my blog, and you all probably don't realise how many times you may have prevented someone from learning Chinese in the first place, or helped them to give up early, if you've talked to any optimistic and enthusiastic learners like me in the same way.

You should realise that there are different opinions here, and the most respected (ones like renzhe's) are really quite encouraging in tone. (I'll ignore the ones that directly attack you or express only doubt and disagreement.) The difference is that some of us believe that realistic advice beats constant "supportive" optimism directed at new/potential learners. Telling someone it will take some years of dedication to get fluent in Chinese but that the individual steps are easy and it's a rewarding journey is not discouraging, not unless the listener is particularly impatient. I don't know which particular advice you find "damaging", but if you don't like the realistic time/effort estimates some have supplied (based on their varying experiences), then I think you might assume people are too easily discouraged.

Our expressing doubts about your ability to achieve the goal you've set yourself is no doubt discouraging to you, but 1) it's based on solid experience by many people and on FSI/other reports; and 2) it certainly doesn't discourage or "damage" people who didn't set similarly overambitious goals.

"you all probably don't realise how many times you may have prevented someone from learning Chinese in the first place" - is this really a bad thing? A realistic appraisal of the time and effort required to learn Chinese only helps the learner make a better decision whether to (continue to) learn the language. If the appraisal weren't realistic, you might have a point. But you haven't shown (yet) that you can learn the language significantly faster - much less that most/all learners can as well.

One point I agree with you on is that there's no need to foist very high expectations or goals on learners. Not every learner will feel it necessary to be able to understand Chinese shows fully (especially not the period dramas), or read long/literary novels comfortably. Being able to speak in everyday situations fairly well and get the gist of news articles and maybe some TV shows is probably a pretty satisfactory proficiency goal for most.

edit2: I actually liked Khatzumoto's All Japanese All The Time blog, which I found inspiring. His goal was very ambitious as well (Japanese in a year or somesuch?), but he achieved it, and he did it with a somewhat rare/distinctive method. He also didn't engage the naysayers in argument before he achieved his goal - AFAIK, anyway.

[abcdefg]

This has been a brief but bizarre and unpleasantly revealing ride. I'm unsubscribing now.

[roddy]

I think what I'll do is leave this open over the weekend so people can get their last words in over the weekend, if they feel it necessary, close it early next week, and then in ten weeks or so open it up so we can see what's happened. I'd really rather avoid a blow-by-blow rolling news type topic on every one of Benny's updates. If anyone objects, speak now, etc.

[jbradfor]

OK, last word time.

1) I've been a bit embarrassed by some (well, maybe a good number) of the negative comments on this thread towards Benny.

2) Benny writes "You've done a terrible job at welcoming me here and at setting me on a path that would encourage me to learn Chinese better". Take a good look in the mirror. Your attitude caused a good part (but not all) of it. You have really been dismissive of the language learning experience of a lot of people here, without really understanding.

[Silent]

I think there's an instructive contrast between the two of them. Kenny is all about talking as much as possible from the start and avoiding what he calls anything "academic". Kaufman pushes comprehensible input (reading/listening) as the priority instead. I can see how Kenny's approach would motivate someone who thought all foreign languages were impossible, or who didn't like hard work. And the "talking lots" approach is great to impress people in a bar short-term.

I suspect the difference is not as big than you make it out to be. I think the only way to learn a language is comprehensible input. The main difference is the choice of comprehensive input. Talking to people willing to communicate with you will give you a lot of comprehensible input. Without it communication would fail. The same is true for a coursebook. It will give you lot's of comprehensible input as it's disigned to do so.

The most effective method will be the one that one enjoys most. I think motivation is a very important if not deciding factor. Only when the level becomes higher it becomes harder and harder and eventually impossible to achieve it by talking to people alone. as in general written language is more advanced than spoken language. Spoken language is meant for quick information exchanges. This usually means without all the nuances, less elaborate and more primal. Written language is created to store the information. Consequently written language will on average be more thought out and less impulsive. This means a bigger vocabulary, more complicated structures etc than spoken language. With only spoken language this vocabulary and higher level structures are virtually inaccessable.

So, yes, in the long run the acadamic with his books will win. This does not mean that low level/short term this is true too. For a beginner the higher levels of written language is completely inaccessable. Books are likely inaccessable unless specifically designed for learners. Oral language has the huge advantage of being closer to the level of the beginning learner and more likely to provide the desired comprehensible input.

[pancake]

I guess the following Orson Scott Card quote sums up my attitude to Benny's 3-months to fluency project: "Good luck. If you turn out to be a genius after all, remember that I never once for a moment believed in you."

Oh, and if following the Benny method™ requires the ardent and unwavering support of random Internet strangers, maybe it's just not a very good method? Like, possibly?

[Patrick_ChineseForum]

Question. After closing this topic, how would Benny post his weekly/monthly (or whatever schedule he picks) progress updates? Even though I'm seriously doubt that he could accomplish his goal (fluent in Mandarin in 3 months), I think it's only fair to have him prove it (hey I'm a newbie here and love to see some encouraging examples :-) Maybe we all have to go his website to see the progress? Just curious...

[renzhe]

Actually, I agree with many things Benny says: it's important to get rid of fear and "just do it", it's important to practice and speak, it's important to base studying on things you enjoy doing, and it's also important to go where it hurts, it's important to aim high, motivation is important, anyone can learn languages, etc. I also firmly believe that Chinese can be learned with enough effort and motivation, and that it's far from impossible.

I think that he'll need a bit more dirty work than he expects, and he's underestimating the time needed, but he'll figure this out on the way. He simply does not know yet, and motivated people tend to tackle challenges as they appear. Mandarin C1 in 3 months is an inhuman feat, but he brings everything he needs to progress faster than most learners.

In the meantime, 锵锵三人行 is waiting for you, Benny. You can only claim to be fluent if you can fully understand this, and not a moment sooner. We'll wait for you to return in April and honestly evaluate your fluency. If you come back and admit that, despite having learned a lot, you still cannot understand native programmes, I will respect you much more than if you actually reach C1.

Good luck!

[realmayo]

Silent, I kind of agree with you but I reckon a speaking-only approach would see you stuck on some very basic conversations after a few weeks, whereas a 50-50 split (say) between speaking and classroom/textbook would see you, amongst other things, capable of more advanced conversations. This might be less true for a language that's similar to one's own, where you can guess the meaning of words enough to get the gist of a sentence and so on, but for an English speaker learning Chinese it's hard to see how you're going to just "pick up" vocab through chat until you're at the stage where you can ask for and receive an explanation of unknown words or syntax all in Chinese. I know this thread is mainly about explaining to Kenny why everyone thinks he's mistaken in his idea of what is possible in three months, but there's also this issue about focussing on speaking and by extension making everything fun which I think is less applicable to Chinese than it might be to a more familiar language.

[Silent]

Silent, I kind of agree with you but I reckon a speaking-only approach would see you stuck on some very basic conversations after a few weeks, whereas a 50-50 split (say) between speaking and classroom/textbook would see you, amongst other things, capable of more advanced conversations.

I think you're a bit pessismist about getting stuck after only a few weeks. But yes, you will hit a few spots where it feels hard to improve as you're able to do simple tasks but know too little to move on to the 'next' level. Nevertheless you may be able to achieve a lot when you have the right attitude and keep going.

This of course does not dismiss your point of splitting your time. I think it's always a good idea to mix ways and methods language skills are interrelated. Speaking vocabulary benefits from reading, grammar facilitates speaking etc etc. Also, it's better to learn/experience something in 2 or 3 different ways than it is to get the same thing presented 3 times in exactly the same way.

O thinks that's just another argument for the vocal method. In my experience many academics 'lock' themselves away with books with very little oral practice. Learners by interacting usually get also input on grammar etc as many will get a book too and ask people about how things work. I think on average they have a more balanced approach then the academic. But of course, these are my images and not balanced scientific observations. Fact is that a balanced approach is best and that the optimal balance is decided by many factors such as personality, knowledge and skills.

[c_redman]

Fact is that a balanced approach is best and that the optimal balance is decided by many factors such as personality, knowledge and skills.

... and location! I find his approach interesting, but it pretty much requires living in the country for 3 months. Personally, with few native speakers around and little time to Skype, I tend to read and study vocabulary because it's the most accessible method. However, to tell the truth, I would probably do the same in China, simply out of social aversion. Benny (not Kenny ) has written on his site about becoming more socially adventurous, which has given me something to think about.

One note to Benny if he's still reading- As pancake hinted above, the loanword bonus that exists in other languages isn't much help in Chinese. Any loanword (except maybe abbreviations) adopted in Chinese takes a native form, which means characters, tones, and modified syllables to learn for it. For example, "logic" is 邏輯 luóji， and trying to guess "lao ji ke", "lou zhi" or something else approximating the English word (with whatever tones you make) won't be understood. This is also true of Western names and other transliterations. For those transliterations there are some rules and common conventions that are sometimes followed, but they are not applied consistently enough to be relied on.

[abcdefg]

@jbradfor said:

1) I've been a bit embarrassed by some (well, maybe a good number) of the negative comments on this thread towards Benny.

(2) Benny writes "You've done a terrible job at welcoming me here and at setting me on a path that would encourage me to learn Chinese better". Take a good look in the mirror. Your attitude caused a good part (but not all) of it. You have really been dismissive of the language learning experience of a lot of people here, without really understanding.

My sentiments exactly. What a nasty "feeding frenzy" this has been. Some overly touchy sharks smelled blood in the water and absolutely went wild. Watching this unfold has definitely not raised my opinion of this forum.

Under Roddy's signature there is a quote which says:

This is the most comfortable forum you have ever run into. You will feel like writing in it all the time

Whatever happened to that benign and friendly philosophy?

[realmayo]

abcdefg: given that other posters here don't get treated the same way I think it may say more about Benny than it does about the forums.

[Meng Lelan]

Whatever happened to that benign and friendly philosophy?

But I'm benign and friendly to you, aren't I?

[simplet]

I realize that I'm beating a dead horse, but I just finished last year my diploma as a FLE teacher (Français Langue Etrangère - French as a foreign language) for which I had to learn the descriptors for all the CECR levels, and I thought I'd put this whole discussion about reaching "C1" level in three months to bed. It is nonsensical. Even as a french polyglot working on it 24/7 there is no possible way I'd reach a C1 level in Italian in three months, never mind chinese.

Here are some of those descriptors for the C1 level that I picked randomly, pulled straight from my textbook published by the european center for languages :

At the C1 level you should be able to :

-> listening :

- Understand complex technical information

- Follow an entire movie containing extensive use of slang and idiomatic expressions

- Understand a long speech even though it's only implicitly structured, dealing with complex or abstract specialized subjects.

-> read :

- Perceive stylistic differences

- Understand long technical instructions (even outside of your domain of competence)

- Identify fine details (attitude, implicit opinions...)

-> speak :

- Develop different points of view extensively, making use of secondary arguments, justifications and relevant examples

- Transmit subtle nuances of information, with the right accent and pronunciation (and I guess tones in Chinese)

And so on so forth...

[Shelley]

In response to the "feeding frenzy" comment, i don't think that the sharks were after Benny himself only his "fluent in 3 months" statement.

I also think that this was actually a very interesting disscusion about learning expectations.

I have no bad feeings towards Benny.

I just disagree with him, and lets be clear here I don't think anybody could learn chinese fluently in 3 months, not just Benny. I am not trying to get at him personally. Why would i?, I don't know him.

My experiences here on chinese forums has always been good, sometimes disscusions get heated but never out of hand that i have seen.

I wonder if Benny realized the reaction he would get, did he dangle the bait and did we bite? Maybe this lively disscusion was what he wanted. How many of us now know about him who didn't before. Just a thought.

Thank you Simplet. Maybe this will clarify things (but I doubt it )

Hoping for a peaceful and harmonious end to the whole sorry mess

Good luck Benny

Shelley

[abcdefg]

abcdefg: given that other posters here don't get treated the same way I think it may say more about Benny than it does about the forums.

But I'm benign and friendly to you, aren't I?

I certainly have no complaints myself and deeply appreciate the way I was accepted as a newcomer.

Another look at Benny's website yesterday convinces me beyond doubt that he is sort of an evangelist for all languages being learnable if one proceeds without fear of failure and uses his "hacks." He is also heavily invested in being a brash but likeable role model and cheerleader to 加油 other beginning learners.

[李白]

Evaluation: I got a 4 for listing 3 for reading and failed the grammar and writing section of the old HSK intermediate exam after studying Chinese for 3 months, 2 weeks of holidaying climbing 3 sacred Chinese mountains and 2 weeks of exam prep. During the first 3 months I also learnt how to smash a brick in half with my hand, in a park for free.

During this 3 months I worked through volumes 1 – 6 of the New Practical Chinese reader and part of a BLCU News Paper reader. I didn’t take formal language classes, and didn’t have a computer. I did have a one on one tutor, 3 hours a week. This was August 2010 to October 2010.

After the first 3 months (including the holidaying and exam prep time, I traveled overland from Jiamusi, to Laos, my Mandarin was good enough to negotiate the same prices in the 2000 edition of the Chinese lonely planet (this book was 10 years old), get free things given to me everyday (Mainland Chinese are very generous counter to a lot of things you will read and hear), deal with differing mainland accents as I traveled south and of course travel effortlessly get to know people along the way.

Back to the exam, the exam prep did not make me speak better.

In addition, since I studied for the HSK intermediate new exam and found out the day before I’d actually be taking the old HSK intermediate exam, I am uncertain if that study improved my performance in the exam. In terms of language learning I wasted 2 weeks of my life but it was fun. The HSK exam was the only form of objective evaluation I could find. I recognize there is a difference between HSK performance and language proficiency. I am obviously not the sharpest tool in the shed and I have meet people who learnt (in terms of the HSK) far more than me. I’m also dyslexic.

I used a meta-methodology of reflective practice and convergent interviewing to structure my learning method.

I find this thread ironic because I gained a lot of practical information from both this site and Bennies book the language hacking guide that helped me learn faster. Now there seems to be conflict between both. Additional information on learning language came from meeting polyglots and or those who had learnt to speak Chinese. I also did research on the internet on how polyglots learn. I’ve written something about Harold Williams method on this forum.

I tried to post some of the things I learnt on this forum to be constructive but it required reading the entire threat (which I’ve done here) and then arguing with people which I find useless. Ill try to make some comments that are useful to Bennie and others starting from scratch here with regards to this thread;

1) Renzhe’s post 12 Jan 2012 regarding the TV show evaluation is correct, at C1 level (which is arguably defined as HSK 5) watching and talking about a TV show or movie that uses conversational style langue should be doable and seems to me to be a valid form of evaluation. Incidentally, I think watching TV in general is not a good way to learn a language because it is too passive.

2) The value of using learning methods, neuro-plasticity (the brain getting fitter) and the effects of total emersion are not being recognized by many people on the forum. The difference can be exponential.

3) I agree that Bennie hasn’t formulated a precise learning method, for example I don’t know what he does everyday so I can not try to emulate his method myself but I still found things he says helpful. For example, speak as much as possible and real strategies to achieve this. Many people think they understand this, then watch TV and attend classes where you are lectured at both are passive and should be avoided.

4) Imron’s comments on focusing on words and not characters is the most salient in this thread. In the forums somewhere the distinction between reading Chinese and deciphering Chinese is made. I could decipher but not read well. This results in a poor HSK score and not enjoying reading in general because reading is too slow. There are threads on reading learning methods on this forum which are worth looking at. Characters are meaning parts that rarely have meaning on their own in a text. So learning to read Chinese while learning to read and speak is something like learning to write Latin (the parts) while simultaneously trying to learn to speak Spanish at the same time learning a pictorial writing system which represents the symbol meanings. A book that is recommended on this forum is TK Ann’s cracking the Chinese puzzle. It looks good although I’ve never used it.

5) If I where to do it again I wouldn’t use the new practice Chinese reader again I’d try Ann’s book. Finishing volumes 1-6 means you have covered about 4,500 words, many of these words are not on the HSK level 4 or 5 new exam, in addition these 4,500 words are not everyday words for communication. So there was wasted effort in using the NPCR. I’d also try to work through and activate the HSK word lists from A1 to C2, ie finish A1 then do A2 then B1. These are down loadable on the net.

6) Bennie your decision to learn to write using a computer is good because it is consistent with your method of learning which I would call acquire and activate. Meaning you use new words as soon as you learn them. You can actively use new words in sentences more rapidly on a computer because you do not have to learn the stroke order and train the stroke hand reflex. This should help your reading speed as you review your own writing and is the way many people write Chinese now anyway. Incidentally, I spent 2 hours a day writing new words into sentences. The limitation of this is resorting to simple grammar and not getting all of the daily target words covered. In volumes 5-6 of the NPCR there can be more than 100 new words (not characters) a day.

7) In my one on one tutorials which I arranged through my couch surfing friend putting an add in Ganji (which cost 20rmb an hour from a professional language teacher with a masters degree) I used this technique. Basically using new words (from the vocab lists of NPCR) in a sentence then was corrected on grammar and pronunciation. Something like a small kid and his mother. Next time, I’d do more than 3 hours of tutorial time a week. In the last two weeks I did 7 hours a week i.e. an hour a day.

Bennie your idea to take yoga class is a good idea. I am a certified yoga instructor and I taught some yoga in Mandarin. Not all that impressive cause they can see your actions. I also ran 10-12 km a day between my 4 hours of free Kung Fu classes in temperatures that got down to freezing. This countered the avalanche of carbs which is blue collar Chinese food (ie beef noodles which I love). I ate paleo in other parts of China which gives you a steady level of concentration.

9) I must mention my U of T alum Da Shan. I think language learns who have a background in acting have an advantage. I learnt Portuguese with Anna Klumsky (from my girl) and ran the hash with Elisy from the I heart Beijing blog. Their language ability was excellent. I think it’s because they can act out a new word like they are saying it in a real conversation. It’s a form of pretend acquire and activate that works. Anyone can take acting classes or pretend they are saying something.

10) In addition I notice that most foreigners who learn Mandarin whisper into their faces. If you learn to act you learn how to project your voice. I found if someone didn’t understand me and I spoke louder (not better) I would be understood.

11) There is no oral HSK5 exam there is an advanced which is somewhere between the HSK5 and 6 new. The advanced exam is difficult. I suggest taking the HSK intermediate new oral exam and the HSK advanced new oral exam if your target is conversational fluency. I think you can take these exams with out the reading, writing and listing parts. Bennie you seem to be aiming for a level between these exams but closer to the advanced.

I hope sharing my experiences helps you Bennie and others starting from scratch. As I said I’m not the smartest person out there and I think most can do better than me. So an oral B2 or C1 (as defined by HSK5) is very doable.

[realmayo]

Interesting post in itself.

But diving back into the context of this thread, I don't think many people think HSK5 = oral C1.

[pancake]

I don't think many people think HSK5 = oral C1

Agreed. C1 is a very, very high standard. I don't think it would be possible to reach in three months even for, say, an English person studying Dutch. The new HSK has been severely nerfed anyway, an oral HSK5 pass should be well in reach for even "threshold" intermediate students.