Thursday, 24 February 2011

Learning Mandarin Chinese: Babyhood and Rosetta Stone

Thinking Without Words

I'm not a person who thinks in words. I'm conscious of the translation between how I think and language. I can hear a word in English and it sounds wrong, despite being correct, because my brain has decided it's not doing language anymore today. In short, language is not one of my natural talents.

This isn't always obvious on the outside. I speak well and I've had stories published. But it doesn't change the struggle that goes on under the surface. Nor does it change the fact that language courses aren't usually designed for me. They're designed by and for people who think in words. Products are reviewed and recommended on that assumption, by people who can speak ten languages and would learn whatever course you threw at them.

The result is I've failed to learn a second language. I took French lessons for years and left unable to speak French. I attempted Welsh and Swedish using tape courses and had a phase of collecting bilingual dictionaries. I wanted to learn, but the way courses were set up put it out of reach.

I realised the only way I'd learn was immersion, because it'd let me make the connections without having to use English. At the time, the only way to do an immersion course was either to spend large amounts of money or to move to another country. Neither was possible. So I was interested when I heard about the idea of computer courses using immersion methods. Someone else in my family was already using Rosetta Stone to learn Mandarin Chinese and I figured I'd give it a go. It was a lot cheaper than moving to another country.

This post, and any followups, are about learning Mandarin from my perspective: that of a non-verbal thinker who is also dyslexic. Hopefully it might help others in my position, and perhaps be interesting to those who do think in words.




Rosetta Stone (Mandarin Chinese Version 3: Level 1)

Simplified Versus Traditional

By default, the software displays pinyin - a way of writing out Chinese using roman characters. It can also display either simplified or traditional characters. I chose simplified, as this is used in China and a lot of books for learners. The eventual answer is to become familiar with both, but simplified seemed like a good place to start.

Whichever way, I think it's important to get the actual Chinese characters on the screen as soon as possible. Not only does this help in learning to read Chinese, but I found the Chinese characters easier to follow than pinyin. I have difficulty telling apart the tone markers on pinyin, which makes it hard for me to read.


Overview of the Course

The course is broken down into a series of short lessons. The early lessons introduce a few nouns by showing a picture and saying the word. Then it moves on to a few basic verbs, again shown through pictures. This carries on with increasingly complex sentences and concepts.

It was obvious after the first lesson that it was going to work. I started remembering words immediately. After a few days, I've learnt some basic grammar rules, have a basic vocabulary and can read some of the Chinese characters. I can tell the tones apart, though still have difficulty speaking them. In French at this stage, I was able to repeat a few sentences parrot-fashion, with a vague idea what the whole sentence meant. I had no actual understanding (and never gained it... I had traditional grammar lessons in French, but the only thing I can tell you is the colour comes after the noun. This wasn't a triumph of traditional language teaching).

Rosetta is optimised for people who deal in the abstract. I can see someone who thinks in words struggling and feeling frustrated because they don't have a direct translation. Some of the negative product reviews suggest this is the case. The temptation to reply with "now you know how I feel on your language courses" was strong, but I resisted.


Weak Points

Rosetta Stone isn't really designed to teach Chinese writing. I'm already learning to read it, but the writing lessons are typing in pinyin. Once I get past the baby stage, I'm going to need some handwriting lessons from elsewhere.

It's culturally specific to America. This means it's missing some words that'd be useful in China (such as Chinese food items) and concepts useful for a British person (how to ask for tea with milk in it).

Neither of these things is a dealbreaker, as relying on one piece of software would be silly anyway. They are handy to know when planning lessons for the future.




Other Resources

Preschool Entertainment

I went searching for preschool stuff in Mandarin. There are a lot of YouTube videos of Western programmes dubbed into Mandarin, from Disney to Dora the Explorer. Actual Chinese programmes were thinner on the ground. Even so, this'll be useful. The children's videos use simple words, but at a faster pace than the language lessons.

I also tried to find wallcharts - the sort of thing you put in a nursery, with a picture and the word underneath. There are plenty of language flashcards, but I'm not looking for pictures with translations. I'll probably have to make my own wallcharts.


Music

I found a number of Chinese pop songs online, which I've added to my playlist. I was hoping to find some dance music for my exercise playlists, but so far they've all been slower. These are a little advanced for a baby vocabulary, but handy for the future. If anyone knows of any Chinese music with a faster beat, recommendations would be great (it doesn't have to be pop... fast folk music would also be fine, but it does need Mandarin words).


Dictionaries

I wanted to get a Chinese dictionary, so I could work on my vocabulary away from the computer. Adult dictionaries were a bit word based and mostly in English. The children's dictionaries looked perfect, as they had pictures with the words in Chinese. Children get all the best visual learning stuff. I narrowed it down to two, which were cheap, so I've ordered both:

  • First Thousand Words in Chinese - Heather Amery (Amazon UK)
  • Chinese Berlitz Kids Picture Dictionary (Berlitz Picture Dictionary) (Amazon UK)

Each one has about 1000 words (which is the average vocabulary of a 3 to 5-year old in English, depending on the child). They use simplified Chinese characters and pinyin. Once I've had time to work with both of them, I'll post a comparative review of their strengths and weaknesses.




Thoughts and Plans

So far, I'm finding Mandarin easier than English. I obviously have many more years of experience with English and can speak it daily, so I'm unlikely to ever be as fluent in Mandarin... but it's more logical and the written characters are easier to memorise.

My current plan for the baby stage is to keep using Rosetta Stone daily. I'm also going to work in some basic vocabulary building using the dictionaries. Once we both get a bit further along, I do have another learner in the family to talk to. Our current conversations have mainly consisted of the word for tea, because we see lots of tea and it's an easy word. This is not far off a baby's first conversations, so we're on track!

I'll consider myself at toddler level when I can understand preschool entertainment.

Monday, 14 February 2011

2010 Nebula Nominations

Happy Yellow StarThis was my first year of nominating for the Nebulas (and Ray Bradbury Award), so I had to come up with a method and all that. My method was to think of stories that stuck with me (in a good way), list them out, then split them into the award categories. Though I could nominate five in each, if there weren't five things I wanted to nominate, I left empty slots.

I've linked to any with online versions, so at least other people might read them (even if they don't make it to the final ballot).




Short Story

Novelette

  • Pishaach, Shweta Narayan (The Beastly Bride [anthology])
  • Plague Birds, Jason Sanford (Interzone) - Link is a PDF on the author's site.



Novel

  • The Hundred Thousand Kingdoms, N. K. Jemisin



Bradbury Award

  • Being Human: Episode 1 (Series 2), Toby Whithouse - This is the BBC series, not the American remake.
  • Doctor Who: The Time of Angels/Flesh and Stone, Steven Moffat
  • Doctor Who: A Christmas Carol, Steven Moffat
  • Iron Man 2
  • Toy Story 3



Update 22 Feb 2011: The official nominees have been announced. From the ones I nominated, these got through: Pishaach (Shweta Narayan), The Hundred Thousand Kingdoms (N.K. Jemisin) and Toy Story 3. Doctor Who has a nomination for another episode (Vincent and the Doctor), which I suppose'll do. Yay for everyone who got through!

Sunday, 6 February 2011

Inspired by Nature: How Evolution Doesn't Work

Evolution is a huge topic and the source of many potential story ideas. It's no wonder that science fiction loves evolution. Unfortunately, there are a lot of misunderstandings going around. These are a few of the most common in science fiction stories.



1) My character can carry twenty extra sacks of potatoes, so natural selection would choose him - Many people have heard the phrase 'survival of the fittest', but don't really understand what fittest means. It's a common mistake to think it means the strongest, fastest or best at dancing. What it actually means is the best suited to survive*. Sometimes the best suited is the weakest, slowest and has no rhythm.

How does this work? Everything has a penalty. Big muscles use a lot of energy to maintain, so if the environment doesn't need great strength, it's better to be weak and save energy for making babies. Complex brains and intelligence are also energy guzzlers, so again, if being smart isn't needed, smart people are the least fit.

A good sci fi example of weaker being better suited was an episode of Farscape. An alien influenced the crew using a special light. The human member of the crew had the poorest eyesight, so was the least affected. In an environment full of these aliens, humans would be the fittest.



2) She's evolving! - Science fiction is full of individuals evolving. The episode of Star Trek: Voyager where some of the crew evolve into water-dwelling thingies is a classic. There's only one problem: individuals don't evolve. Evolution acts on populations, not on individuals.

This isn't to say that an individual couldn't go through a process that looks a bit like evolution. Your non-sciency character might call it evolving. But your scientists should know better.



3) Nature decided to wipe them out - Evolution doesn't have an end goal or a path. It didn't decide that dinosaurs had to go extinct (sorry Doctor Malcolm**). It doesn't plan for the future or look back at the past. An outside force could manipulate the environment or add in some new genes, but evolution itself is simply a process. Unless a character believes that Nature is a deity, Nature didn't select anyone for anything.

Many authors do realise this to an extent. There are plenty of stories where something changes, so dinosaurs survive. However, there's often a failure to apply the same logic to alien worlds. In Star Trek: Enterprise***, they decide not to help a disease-ridden species because they're destined to go extinct (so that the other sentient species on the planet can take over). There's no destiny or set path with evolution... and the ship's doctor should have known that.



4) He's deevolving! - How science fiction loves deevolution. It may be an individual deevolving (Super Mario Brothers movie), which has the usual evolution-not-acting-on-individuals thing. Or it could be a population (the strangely popular belief that the working class will deevolve and become less intelligent).

Unfortunately for the writers, deevolution doesn't exist. The term probably comes from not understanding what fittest means. If you believe that evolution always means becoming the strongest, fastest and smartest, it might appear to have a backwards setting. But as said before, that's not how it works. Evolution always go forwards, regardless of whether it means the population ends up more intelligent or less intelligent.

Again, the average person on the street may call it deevolution. Your scientist will know deevolution doesn't exist****.



5) We're more evolved! - I'm sure this one is because people don't like to think, "hey, that amoeba is just as evolved as I am". It's time to break the news: amoebae are just as evolved. Those amoebae have had exactly the same amount of time to evolve and been out there becoming the best amoebae they can be for the environment.

Of course, this isn't really what people mean. What they're trying to say is humans have lots of cells and sprangly bits. Their brains allow them to feel inadequate because an amoeba is just as evolved as them. The amoeba only has one cell and it doesn't have any feelings to hurt. Humans are more complex than amoebae.

This is one where scientists do slip up in their language use, but they know in their heart-of-hearts that it's about complexity rather than who is more evolved. Maybe scientists feel a little inadequate too*****.




As a basic rule of thumb, if you saw it on Star Trek, it's probably wrong. Popular culture really doesn't understand evolution. Unless you want scientists to point and laugh, reading a biology textbook from the library is highly recommended.

[ Inspired by Nature Index ]




-

* In this context, survival doesn't just mean staying alive. It's about having more babies (and passing the awesome trait to them), than anyone else in the population.

** In fairness to Jurassic Park, the two scientists don't agree that he's right on the specifics... just the generality of messing with stuff you don't understand. But they could have given the trendy mathematics guy a dark look or rolled their eyes or something. And I don't recall the selected for extinction speech in the original book, though I may be misremembering.

*** I love Star Trek. Really I do. But their science is there in fairyland and is not a good source of all your sciency knowledge. I'm also using them as an example because a lot of people have seen Star Trek.

**** Microsoft Word also knows it doesn't exist, as highlighted by the angry red lines it put under the draft of this post.

***** Personally, I'm happy to be just as evolved as an amoeba. My only regret is they got the pseudopodia and I didn't. Amoebae don't have trouble with not having enough hands. Need a new extremity? Pop out a new pseudopodium and you're sorted.