Steve Kaufmann is WRONG about Input and Output in Language Learning

Summary

In this video script, the speaker critically examines the input and output hypotheses in language acquisition, challenging the traditional emphasis on input alone. They advocate for a balanced approach, highlighting the importance of output through speaking and active learning for better language acquisition. The speaker disputes the effectiveness of passive learning methods like watching videos or reading extensively, arguing instead for the necessity of deliberate practice, feedback, and the use of language islands to improve both speaking and understanding in a new language.

Takeaways

• 🗣️ Speaking is not just communication but half of it; understanding is the other half.
• 📚 The Input Hypothesis by Stephen Krashen emphasizes the importance of receiving slightly challenging, yet comprehensible input for language acquisition.
• 🔍 Krashen distinguishes between 'learning' and 'acquisition', with the former being deliberate study and the latter a subconscious process.
• 🏋️‍♂️ Language, like any skill, benefits from deliberate practice for faster improvement, contrary to passive exposure alone.
• 🛡️ The Monitor Hypothesis suggests that focusing on grammar rules can hinder spontaneous language use.
• 🌱 Krashen's Natural Order Hypothesis posits that language structures are acquired in a set order, regardless of teaching methods.
• 🚫 The speaker criticizes the idea that only input is sufficient for language learning, arguing for the necessity of output.
• 🔄 Merl Swain's Output Hypothesis highlights the importance of output for noticing gaps in knowledge, hypothesis testing, and gaining a sense of language structure.
• 🤔 The speaker questions the effectiveness of traditional classroom settings for language learning, suggesting they may not provide enough meaningful input or output.
• 📈 The speaker advocates for active learning methods such as retrieval practice and listening/repeating exercises for more efficient language acquisition.
• 🎯 The emphasis should be on meaningful communication, not just on producing language without understanding.

Q & A

What is the main argument presented by Steve Kmman in the video?

Steve Kmman argues against the idea that mere speaking equates to communicating, emphasizing that understanding is also a crucial part of communication. He discusses the input hypothesis and the output hypothesis in language acquisition, suggesting that output, if done correctly, can be more effective than just input.

What are the five main points of Krashen's input hypothesis?

The five main points of Krashen's input hypothesis are: 1) We learn from meaningful input that is slightly difficult, 2) The distinction between learning and acquisition, where learning is deliberate study and acquisition is subconscious, 3) The monitor hypothesis, which states that grammar instruction can make language use less spontaneous, 4) The natural order of acquisition, where language structures are acquired in a set order, and 5) The affective filter, which suggests that anxiety or stress can hinder language production.

What is the output hypothesis and what does it propose?

The output hypothesis, proposed by Merl Swain, suggests that output, or speaking, is important for language learning because it helps learners notice gaps in their knowledge, test their hypotheses about the language, and gain a better overall sense of the language structure through active use.

How does Steve Kmman view the efficiency of language learning through input alone?

Steve Kmman believes that learning a language through input alone, such as watching videos or reading, is inefficient and a waste of time. He argues for the necessity of output, like speaking and writing, to achieve fluency in a shorter amount of time.

What is the difference between 'learning' and 'acquisition' according to Krashen's theory?

In Krashen's theory, 'learning' refers to the deliberate study of language, often involving grammar instruction and conscious effort, while 'acquisition' is the subconscious process of absorbing language naturally, similar to how children learn their first language.

How does Kmman critique the effectiveness of grammar instruction in language learning?

Kmman critiques grammar instruction by pointing out that it can make language use less spontaneous and may not necessarily reduce the number of errors learners make. He suggests that active practice and output, such as speaking and writing, are more effective for learning grammar.

What is the role of the 'affective filter' in language learning according to Krashen?

The 'affective filter' in Krashen's theory represents the emotional barrier that can hinder language acquisition. High levels of fear, stress, or anxiety can make it more difficult for learners to produce language and thus impede learning.

How does Kmman suggest using technology to improve language learning through output?

Kmman suggests using technology for activities like listening and repeating sentences, translating into the target language, and getting immediate feedback. This active use of language, he argues, is more effective than passive input like watching or reading.

What is the 'noticing hypothesis' mentioned in the context of the output hypothesis?

The 'noticing hypothesis' within the output hypothesis posits that when learners attempt to produce language, they become aware of gaps in their knowledge, which they may not have noticed otherwise. This awareness can motivate them to learn and correct these gaps.

What is the 'hypothesis testing function' in the output hypothesis?

The 'hypothesis testing function' suggests that learners have certain hypotheses about how the language works, and by speaking and producing language, they can test these hypotheses to see if their understanding matches the actual use of the language.

How does Kmman define 'communicating' in the context of language learning?

Kmman defines 'communicating' as a two-way flow of information, where both understanding and speaking are essential. He argues that simply speaking without understanding is not true communication.

Outlines

00:00

🗣️ The Debate on Output and Communication in Language Learning

The speaker begins by addressing a request to discuss Steve Krashen's views on language output. They express initial uncertainty but decide to explore the topic, starting with the assertion that mere speaking does not equate to communication. The speaker outlines Krashen's Input Hypothesis, emphasizing the importance of comprehensible input for language acquisition. They also introduce the Output Hypothesis, suggesting that speaking is integral to learning and communication, and propose a relationship between output, genuine communication, and language acquisition.

05:05

🤔 Critique of Language Acquisition Theories and the Role of Output

The speaker critically examines Krashen's theories, particularly the distinction between learning and acquisition, and the Monitor Hypothesis, which posits that grammar instruction can hinder spontaneous language use. They challenge the idea of a natural order of acquisition, citing examples of individuals learning advanced language structures out of necessity. The speaker also criticizes the effectiveness of comprehensible input, suggesting that it caters to the weak and lazy, and instead advocates for deliberate practice and training for more efficient language learning.

10:05

📚 Merl Swain's Output Hypothesis and its Implications for Language Learning

The speaker discusses Merl Swain's Output Hypothesis, which emerged as a counter to the Input Hypothesis. Swain's theory includes three key points: the noticing hypothesis, which suggests that output helps learners identify gaps in knowledge; the hypothesis-testing function, allowing learners to test their understanding through speaking; and the metalinguistic function, which helps learners gain a better sense of the language's structure. The speaker agrees with Swain's emphasis on the importance of output in language learning.

15:05

📝 The Efficacy of Output in Language Acquisition and Classroom Learning

The speaker delves into the practical application of output in language learning, using the example of French immersion programs. They highlight the limitations of input in such settings and argue that output activities, particularly writing, are more beneficial. The speaker also addresses the issue of grammar instruction and its relation to output, advocating for retrieval practice and feedback as a means to improve grammar and vocabulary. They express skepticism about the effectiveness of traditional classroom output and suggest that technology can enhance the output process.

20:06

🎯 The Importance of Output for Active Vocabulary and Grammar Mastery

The speaker emphasizes the role of output in developing active vocabulary and mastering grammar. They argue that passive vocabulary, gained through extensive input, is insufficient for fluent communication. The speaker promotes retrieval practice and output as the means to convert passive vocabulary into active use. They also discuss the brain's process of output during conversation, stressing the importance of having a rich vocabulary and structure to draw upon. The speaker concludes by advocating for a balanced approach to language learning that includes both input and output.

Keywords

💡Output Hypothesis

The Output Hypothesis is a theory in language acquisition proposed by Merl Swain, emphasizing the importance of learners producing language (output) to notice gaps in their knowledge and improve their language skills. In the video, the speaker discusses this hypothesis as a counterpoint to Krashen's Input Hypothesis, suggesting that output is crucial for language learning and can lead to more efficient acquisition.

💡Input Hypothesis

Krashen's Input Hypothesis is a theory stating that language acquisition occurs when learners receive input that is slightly more advanced than their current level. The video contrasts this with the Output Hypothesis, with the speaker arguing that while input is important, it is not as effective as output for language acquisition.

💡Communication

Communication in the context of the video refers to the two-way exchange of information, which involves both speaking (output) and understanding (input). The speaker emphasizes that true communication requires not just speaking but also comprehension, challenging the notion that mere speaking equates to effective communication.

💡Acquisition vs. Learning

Acquisition and learning are differentiated in the script as two separate processes. Acquisition is the subconscious process of language learning, akin to how children learn their first language. Learning, on the other hand, is a more deliberate and conscious study of language. The video suggests that deliberate practice through output can enhance acquisition.

💡Retrieval Practice

Retrieval practice is a learning strategy where learners attempt to recall information from memory, which is then checked for accuracy. In the video, the speaker mentions this as an effective method for language learning through output, where learners translate, get feedback, and repeat the process to improve their language skills.

💡Language Islands

Language Islands refer to the practice of immersing oneself in a language without translation, often through listening and repeating exercises. The video script mentions this as a beneficial method for learning pronunciation and vocabulary, which can be enhanced by output activities.

💡Effortful Learning

Effortful learning is the idea that deliberate and effortful practice leads to better learning outcomes. The speaker in the video argues against passive learning methods like watching videos or reading, instead advocating for active learning through output and retrieval practice.

💡Natural Order of Acquisition

The Natural Order of Acquisition is a concept from language learning theories suggesting that learners acquire language structures in a predictable sequence. The video challenges this concept by pointing out that learners can focus on specific language areas relevant to their needs, rather than following a strict natural order.

💡Affective Filter

The Affective Filter refers to the psychological barrier that can hinder language learning, such as anxiety or lack of motivation. The speaker in the video criticizes the Input Hypothesis for potentially raising the affective filter by not encouraging enough challenging practice through output.

💡Grammar Instruction

Grammar instruction is the teaching of language rules and structures. The video script discusses this in the context of the Output Hypothesis, suggesting that while grammar can be learned through instruction, it is more effectively internalized and applied through active speaking and output practice.

💡Efficiency

Efficiency in the context of the video refers to the effectiveness and speed of language learning methods. The speaker argues that output-focused learning is more efficient than passive input methods, as it leads to quicker acquisition and better retention of language skills.

Highlights

Speaking is not the entirety of communication; it is only half of the process.

The Input Hypothesis by Stephen Krashen emphasizes the importance of receiving input that is slightly difficult but still meaningful.

The distinction between 'learning' and 'acquisition', where learning is deliberate study and acquisition is subconscious.

Language learning can benefit from deliberate practice, similar to improving in sports or any skill.

The Monitor Hypothesis suggests that grammar instruction can hinder spontaneous language use.

The Natural Order Hypothesis posits that language structures are acquired in a set order regardless of teaching methods.

The Affective Filter Hypothesis states that anxiety or stress can impede language learning.

The Output Hypothesis by Merl Swain suggests that producing language helps learners notice gaps in knowledge.

Output allows learners to test their hypotheses about language, leading to better understanding.

The metalinguistic function of output helps learners gain a better sense of the language's structure.

The debate between input and output in language learning, with a preference for a balanced approach.

The ineffectiveness of only using input methods like watching videos for language acquisition.

The importance of combining output with input for efficient language learning.

Critique of the Input Hypothesis based on the experiences of top performers in various fields.

The role of technology in enhancing language learning through output methods.

The misconception that output is only about grammar exercises and classroom activities.

The necessity of meaningful communication for true language learning, not just speaking.

The value of retrieval practice and feedback in building an active vocabulary.

The ineffectiveness of passive vocabulary without the ability to use it actively in conversation.

The importance of understanding both speaking and listening as part of the communication process.

The conclusion that a combination of input and output is essential for effective language learning.

Transcripts

all right we've got another

request apparently Steve kman is talking

about output now and someone in the

comments asked me about my opinion on

his video and I told him or her that I

didn't have one because I had watched

the video that's about to

change let's see what uh what all Steve

has to say about output today I'm going

to talk about speaking I'm going to talk

about output and I'm going to begin by

saying that speaking just speaking is

not communicating and oh I cannot really

see where this is going tell you what I

mean by that a number of people have

asked me to do a video about the output

hypothesis now you are familiar with

Steven crash's input hypothesis and I'm

a great fan yes yes yes we we've heard

about it a couple times shortly of

crash's hypothesis on how we learn and

let me just go over the five main points

of crash's input hypothesis and then I'm

going to talk a little bit about the

output hypothesis and explain what I

consider to be the relationship between

output or speaking and genuine

communication and learning in the

acquisition of a language crash So

speaking is not

communicating no speaking is half of

communicating communicating

means implies understanding and speaking

so speaking is extremely important in in

communication's theory of language

acquisition consists of Five Points the

first point is what he calls the input

hypothesis we learn from meaningful

input input that's just a little

difficult for us hopefully input of

interest and that this is a natural

process and this leads us to which I

don't necessarily disagree with yeah

it's just not the most efficient way to

do it especially if you want results or

need results in a reasonable amount of

time and you are busy Point number two

and that is the distinction that

crashion makes between learning and

acquisition learning is

a okay here we go acquisition and

learning deliberate study of the

language and in his mind it's completely

disconnected from the sort of

subconcious

process of acquiring a language then

there a language is like any other skill

a language can be learned and if you do

deliberate practice you improve faster

at any skill if you just show up on Spa

people in the boxing in a ring

daily just like no training no Technical

Training at all you get better at

fighting but not that

much if you actually do the training

you'll get good at boxing you know and

then you do better when you Spa people

languages are the same you learn by

talking to people you learn by listening

you learn by using the language but if

you if you train yourself

for for if you train to be able to

understand better by doing specific

exercises learning a lot of vocabulary

Etc do do an active

recall and you do specific speaking

exercises on your own you'll do much

better when you you actually have to

listen to and and speak with native

speakers there is the monitor hypothesis

which says that grammar instruction or

the rules of grammar that we study

become a monitor and if we speak trying

to use the language while referring to

this monitor it makes us less

spontaneous and less able to use the

language the fourth point in cr's theory

of Lang acquisition is the natural order

of acquisition which says that

regardless of whichever rules we study

or the effort put in by teachers to

drill us or test us on certain forms or

structures in the language we will

gradually acquire these according to a

natural order we will learn some faster

I keep hearing about that

I'm I'm not I don't know does Ste

matter um I know of people who learned

very advanced stuff first simply because

that was more relevant to them

uh for the purposes that they were

learning the language they just practice

those specific scenarios so they were

able to use Advanced language before

being able to say basic like they

wouldn't understand the Link mini

stories but they were able to

say like business a a bunch of business

stuff for

example uh or like diplomatic

stuff because that's what they prepared

that's what they learned yeah task based

learning

so

the the natural order

thing I I think these people just

approach it from a

very academic not cman but all these

like crashing all these people they just

yeah I think they live in their academic

bubble and

also more about this later but I don't

think they they

I I don't know which kind of people they

were experimenting

with but I don't think any of the people

they experimented with were top

performance they probably got a bunch of

very mediocre people for the tests

because there's no

way yeah there's no way they they got to

those

conclusions if if they had been

experimenting with top performance

unless they already had the conclusions

they wanted and then they just uh prev

engineer the whole process okay we want

to say that breathing is the best thing

to do so let's just make up all the I

don't know accusing anyone of fraud but

but a lot of Academia works like that

than others and I referred to this

before in my videos and finally crashing

refers to the effective filter which

says the more this is one of my biggest

problems with the compreh ible input

Theory and this is why uh this is why I

said this stuff about uh them

experimenting with mediocre people

because the effective PE filter and if

you if it's too difficult you'll you'll

feel anxiety and lack of confidence lack

of motivation

stress yeah anyone who's been good at

anything like competitive like top

performer in any sport any field

you have to deal with pressure yeah you

if you want get to get good really good

at something when you're doing something

difficult and you're struggling and

you're frustrating but you keep

going then is that is the time when

you're improving the

most so I think they just experimented

with the people who tend to avoid that

stuff because they lazy and they weak

and they the cowards and and that why

like you give me David Goggins and he

doesn't need this nonsense because I'll

give him super hard exercise and he'll

do everything and he'll learn Spanish

super fast yeah not necessarily Goin you

could give me anyone who's slightly

driven and and uh disciplined and and

they'll do way better

with no I just I I just want to do the

really easy stuff because otherwise I

get stressed grow up stress the learner

is placed under the more fear the more

sense of intimidation the harder it is

to produce the language this is called

the effective like the emotional the

effective filter obviously something

that we want to minimize now because

this Theory trash's theory of language

acquisition and the emphasis on input

had become very popular there was a

counter theory proposed by a Canadian

they've become very popular because

again it's for the weak the lazy the

mediocre and the cowards so if you tell

you tell people just watch videos binge

watch YouTube videos and you'll become

fluent eventually people want it's

basically telling people what they want

to hear yeah you can lazy the lazy way

effortlessly learn the

language and I'm not saying that it's a

lie uh it's just extremely inefficient

and you're wasting thousands of hours of

your time could have you could get much

better results with proper work much

sooner a language teacher called Merl

Swain and based on her experience with

uh English speaking kids in the uh

French immersion program in Canadian

schools so she said that there are three

sort of points in her output hypothesis

output is important because of the

noticing hypothesis that by outputting

Learners become aware of the gaps in

their knowledge where they might think

they know something when they go to

speak and it doesn't you know come out

the way they would like or they discover

err yeah that's what retrial practice is

try to say something get feedback and

next time you try to say it again you

probably say it better maybe not 100%

correct but that's

it I'm going to shock everyone by by

saying that you don't need to talk to

people

to get immediate feedback yeah you can

use flash cards translate from your

language into the target language and

then check and oh I got it right I got

it wrong it's hard work to do this over

and over

again but it works it's infinitely more

effective than just let's just read

3,000 more hours of of mini stories you

know but again you can't sell this to

people errors then this helps them

notice the gaps in their knowledge the

second aspect of the output hypothesis

was what she called the hypothesis

testing function and that is that

Learners would have some hypothesis

about how the language works and that by

speaking they're able to test whether

their understanding of the language in

fact corresponds to the way the language

works yeah again you you try you make a

mistake you get the feedback try again

later and you try again later until you

get all of them correctly that's it and

the third thing she talks about is

metalinguistic function which is

summability for the learner to gain

a better sort of overall sense of the

structure of the language through output

so there you have it the input

hypothesis and the that makes sense as

well um if I understood it correctly a

better sort of overall sense of the

structure of the language through output

so there you have it the yeah if I

understood that correctly and I have no

idea the L is but I think I

think from what I saw

here right

now what she's saying makes way more

sense so the last part I think it means

uh I think she means that by saying

stuff like actually producing language

you're learning from your mistakes and

also you you're uh learning it better

because you're internalizing the the

language

so if you're actively repeating things

aloud you're saying them

uh it's you much more likely to re

remember whatever you repeating allow

than simply watching it or simply

reading it that's a fact that's

obviously you remember it better if you

because it's much more

active so yeah this this all makes

sense it really makes sense it's

just it's just it let let's see how this

how he spins this now to make it look uh

ineffective and and say that

comprehensible inputs infinitely better

a learner to gain a better sort of

overall sense of the structure of the

language through output so there you

have it the input hypothesis and the

output hypothesis the output hypothesis

Merl Swain developed this Theory based

on looking at French immersion kids she

claimed that the the kids in French

immersion and she was doing this work in

the 70s acquired native like

comprehension in French but that certain

again let's go back is in French

immersion and she was doing this work in

the 70s uh acquired

was I wrong when I said a couple weeks

ago that these people are stuck in the

70s this hypothesis from 1853 when do

this and that

said it's

2024 it's the internet we've got CH GPT

we've got like d l

we

French kids learning French in school in

the 70s in Canada that's your like

that's what you're going to that's your

example now to say that outputs not

going to be effective

so yeah all those all those Concepts

there it all actually works that's

that's good yeah you you try to produce

language you make a mistake you get

feedback try to produce language again

get feedback constantly over and over

and over again and it's it's difficult

it's

hard but you get much better much sooner

than if you just just like a like a

brainless zombie just watch videos

and but it's hard work that's the

problem but again all those things you

can do them way more effectively now

with with the internet we've got we've

got all the technology you need native

light comprehension in French but that

certain errors in grammar persisted in

their output my three grand children who

went to school here in Canada they all

went to French immersion two of them are

not available so I spoke to my grandson

and got some more insight on French

immersion so first of all the input in a

French immersion class is largely what

comes from the teacher or their reading

uh because there's 25 30 English

speaking kids in a classroom the teacher

speaks them in French they reply to the

teacher in French or they're supposed to

they're supposed to speak French to

their class so the example to prove that

output is worse than input is that it's

a

classroom you you use in a classroom to

prove that output is it's worse than

input a

classroom come on askm and they don't so

the amount of input they get is is

somewhat limited it's nowhere near the

kind of input that we recommended link

that people need you know hours and

hours and hours of listening in order to

acquire a language so it's limited input

their major output activity is writing

true they don't get to speak very much

they might reply to the teacher my

grandson said it would have been a good

idea and maybe this is something that's

possible nowadays to have a zoom session

which with French speaking school kids

in Quebec

or outut you listen and repeat thousands

of sentences and you do retrial practice

with thousands of sentences translating

into the language and then getting the

feedback and repeating the sentence

allowed correctly you do both over and

over and over again with your language

Island your own sentences and with

sentences prepared to learn grammar like

every grammar point and all the basic

vocabulary or even Advanced

vocabulary and and that's it that's

output and you will in the same amount

of hours like if you do it for the same

amount of time you you're going to

destroy anyone who's doing just

input 100 hours of properly done

output if youve memorized vocabulary as

well yeah and and you're doing better

you're speaking better than a thousand

hours of input that's a fact in France

or Belgium or some FR speaking country

somewhere else but that was not the case

they didn't do that so writing but

writing is very good and they used to

write by hand and that was a very good

way to generate put and of course when

you're writing you have the time to look

things up and and work on your grammar

my life is just completely 360 you know

uh Del to developer is what the code

Institute call me and like I wake up

every morning they also had a lot of

grammar instruction however the net

result is they do continue making a lot

of grammar mistakes and I know from my

own experience when I went to school and

we did French we had a lot of grammar

instruction and I also continued making

a lot of mistakes so now he's talking

about studying grammar so what does that

have to do with output again retal

practice sentences from your native

language into the target language get

feedback and then try again and that's

how you learn the grammar why are you

now

like what does output have to do with

studying grammar rules it's just it

always goes back to the same thing until

I had had enough input because I became

motivated and I listened and I read

books and I watched movies and

eventually went to France this this is

what happens when like your only tool is

a hammer so everything looks like a nail

like I just need more

input so the thought that somehow a more

grammar focused or output focused you

know approach to teaching in the schools

is z is is

his because I became motivated and I

listened and I read books and I watched

movies and eventually went to France so

the thought that somehow a more grammar

focused or output focused so now he's

putting gram studying grammar and output

both in the same package who said they

have who said output means studying

grammar

roles nobody said that you know approach

to teaching in the schools is going to

how long have 17 minutes it's feeling

like I was already to reduce the amount

of errors that the kids make I'm

somewhat skeptical and I go back to

crash's Natural order of acquisition I

go back to the fact that people who are

very fluent in English that I've done

business with from different countries

they continue to make mistakes like we

continue to make mistakes that's just

part of the process of acquiring a

language and so this gets me to the

point of like what is output what is

speaking why we want to put pressure on

people to speak communicating implies a

two-way flow of information if you can

output something if you can say

something but you don't understand what

the other person is saying you are not

communicating so an emphasis on output

getting people to speak getting people

to speak

okay if you're doing again retrieve or

practice is output if you do retrieval

practice of course you understand as

well if you do listen and repeating

which is also output of course you

understand when people talk to you

because you've learned pronunciation

really well because you've been

listening and repeating sentences yeah

over and over again so you have learned

how the pronunciation works in the

language and if you've been doing output

with retrial

practice translating into the language

checking getting

feedback of course you remember all

those words and all all that grammar so

between those two you will understand if

you can say it you can understand it

yeah it's not that complic

speak in a non-meaningful way and that's

where my grandson's suggest you know

what what also is not

communicating understanding the language

pretty well because you've done a

million hours of dreaming Spanish but

not being able to speak because you

haven't trained your speaking skills

that's also not communicating that's

that's just like being

like y BL

uh these people having an exchange with

students from a French speaking school

is so good because then it becomes

meaningful communication however if the

teacher is then monitoring this

communication between school kids and

say Quebec and and West Vancouver and

the kids are aware of that that

introduces again this effective filter

the concern that they will

be again who says that output is

like that you need to be in a in a

classroom with 30 other kids and a

teacher to do it's just he just took his

uh grandkids or whoever as an example

and there in in a classroom that's

output so that invalidates that output

being good

and but

that's so basically according to C

output means go into classes and doing

grammar exercises which is extremely

inefficient and ineffective and boring

and also yeah just overall not good and

so that's

output but that's not output

it's just like this this this thing that

I don't like and I don't want to I I

want to prove that it doesn't work so

I'm going

to I I want to put it in the same group

of this other thing that it has nothing

to do with that doesn't work and then

I'll claim they the same thing so thing

a doesn't work either because it's in

the same group as as thing B which it's

just I mean people do it all the time

it's just if you don't like something

and you you don't you don't really have

good arguments against it it's just you

you you mis represent it and you put it

in

a uh yeah you you give it some of the

characteristics that it doesn't really

have and you pretend that it doesn't

work judged on how well they speak which

of course is counterproductive what you

want them to do is to engage in

communication try out what they can try

or what they they feel comfortable using

and gradually grow their language skills

in that way in fact from the research on

how the brain gets to Output it's clear

that the brain will throw something out

that's in its memory that's put there

either through listening or reading or

whatever speaking it's sort of thrown on

the wall so to speak and it gets a

conversation going if we're struggling

in a new language and then the second

thing the brain does is it goes to a

structure that we used before that again

sort of scaffolds the speaker who's

uncertain in the language into at least

being able to produce something and then

it'll pick up on what comes back but we

do need to have this treasure chest of

words and structures that we've heard so

often and read so often that we're

confident in trying them out and Beyond

the fact that we need to be able to

understand what the other person is

saying so here again just being able to

say something a limited number of things

not understand what's said back to you

is not communicating and the difficulty

with trying to pressure people to speak

before they're ready is that they can

only use a very limited range of

vocabulary this means that the other

party to

[Music]

the you know who has a very limited

range of

vocabulary people who only do inputs

because they've never tried

to actually use that vocabulary in

conversation so they understand a lot of

words if they've done thousands of hours

of

input but most of the vocabulary is

going to be passive vocabulary you know

how you train your active vocabulary how

you grow it fast you do retrieval

practice which is output into the target

language and you get feedback and if you

don't know a word you'll

immediately realize that you don't know

the word and then you'll get the answer

so next time you'll remember the word

maybe not next time but probably after a

couple of mistakes you remember it make

a mistake you try you make a mistake get

feedback you try again make a mistake

get feedback over and over and over

again and that's how you increase

your your active vocabulary not by

breathing more yeah you

can recognize a lot of obscure words but

can you use them in conversation 99% of

them you can't conversation can only use

a limited range of vocabulary at them so

the opportunity for growth and sort of

language knowledge there is quite

limited and finally grammar is not

communicating I played golf again the

other day with a young man who went to

the Royal

military so what does again what does

old have to with the grammar it's just

yeah I don't know

it's anyway I'm I'm tired of this um

thanks for thanks for watching I hope

this uh clarifies my stance on input

versus output of course input is also

useful you should listen to the language

um but just reading lots and lots and

lots it's not going to and I'll binge

watching lots and lots of videos It's

not the the most efficient way to learn

a language not even close and if you

want to get good at speaking in a

reasonable amount of time you need to do

a lot of output as well a lot of

speaking listening

repeating a lot of retrial practice Yeah

use language Islands especially yeah

listening and repeating with them and

then uh retrial practice with them you

learn all the grammar like that without

studying without going to classes all

the stuff he's talking about doesn't

make any

sense uh that's how you learn to speak

anyway thanks for watching see you later