Glossika method

[chuugokugo]

@Tomsima Congratulations on completing it! Valid points, indeed. However, I still stand by my judgment. This was only one example out of many others that I didn't bother with screenshots. A premium price tag mandates premium quality, especially when made by an actual linguist who genuinely cares about languages and not some random corporation worried about their bottom line.

 

The second annoyance I forgot to add because new members on this forum don't have editing privileges for their posts (another strange choice) is the overuse of foreign names. Ostensibly, if you're living in a Mandarin-speaking environment, the probability of using "Vanessa" or "Tamara" or "Malika" or "Jamaal" in daily speech is very low. No idea why actual Chinese names were ignored, which would make logical sense. To that end, Glossika would have to record the most common names in each language/culture and that would be time-consuming. Again, if you're a dedicated linguist I think you'd care about such things instead of adopting a cookie-cutter approach wholesale.

 

I'm only critical because because I want Glossika to outshine the competition and put out quality work. I hold someone like Mike to a higher standard. Ironically, he points out the same issues, and rightfully so, with his competition. I just don't waste my breath constructively criticizing the lazy, garbage content put out by rival companies that are solely driven by profit and gamification for customer retention. I hope Mike earnestly takes in such feedback and polishes up this diamond in the rough.

[Moshen]

Quote

the overuse of foreign names. Ostensibly, if you're living in a Mandarin-speaking environment, the probability of using "Vanessa" or "Tamara" or "Malika" or "Jamaal" in daily speech is very low. No idea why actual Chinese names were ignored, which would make logical sense. 

In Rosetta Stone, that occurs because the company uses a standard set of sentences for all languages, rather than sentences particularly tailored to each language.  Thus the absurdity of having no chopsticks or jiaozi in a Chinese course and instead, tennis and roast beef.  Could it be the same for Glossika?

[chuugokugo]

@eddyf I feel like I parroted your criticisms of Glossika. They don't even provide 3000 sentences in the original PDF days (a number of sentences repeat verbatim). Bad translations (untranslated words or unnaturally sounding English abound). So what could be a solution? Step one, find a corpus frequency list for the grammar and vocabulary (HSK/TOCFL). Step two, create audio sentences using said grammar and vocabulary from native sources (dictionary sentence examples, newspapers, articles, TV shows, etc.). Step three, arrange the sentences in a difficulty progression order. Something along these lines would be a good start. The number of sentences will depend on fully grasping the meaning of a word/grammar point, therefore, multiple sentences for a single word/grammar point in different contexts might be required. Just brainstorming.

[mouse]

Or just do what Mike did, find a Chinese book of English sentences that has both the Chinese and English audio, and go through it.

[Tomsima]

@chuugokugo I think this is why Glossika works as a business model, so your criticism is misplaced. How many people have the drive, commitment and time to build a meticulous database unique to their own learning requirements? For the majority, what they want is a simple corpus of sentences they can start studying immediately and then correct their mistakes later if they turn out to really fall in love with the language. Yours is not a solution to Mike's business model, it is a solution on how to study Chinese better. In this respect, your study method is infinitely better, but the cost is in time not money. Go do it, and if you are willing, share it here when you hit 3000! Maybe there will be some willing to pay you for your services if you do it with high enough quality, and you can show Glossika how we all wish it was done from a students perspective.

[mouse]

I don't really understand this perspective. Why should a consumer's criticism of the effectiveness of a product be seen as misplaced? None of us work for Glossika - it's their business (quite literally) how they make their money.

[Tomsima]

That was actually my point, I obviously didn't word it very well. I meant that while you can criticise, it is their business how they make their money, while it is our business how we decide to study.