Re: [lojban] The New Method

[Matt Arnold <matt.mattarn@gmail.com>]

Wow. I am very encouraged to see this. Well done.

-Eppcott

On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Jameson Orndorff <jtorndorff@gmail.com> wrote:
> coi lo tadni .e lo ctuca mi'e .kribacr.
>
> Greetings! As some of you may already know, myself as well as others have
> been teaching lessons on IRC for the last couple months with some pretty
> encouraging results, and I wanted to share some thoughts with the community
> about the method and "path" I/we use in our lessons. There is a Google Wave
> that is being compiled of our work, which I hope can be used as the
> foundation not only for a new learning hard copy text (incorporating xorlo
> and dotside) but as the basis for an online interactive lesson, the details
> of which I'd like to outline here and open for questions and comments.
>
> The biggest change in teaching methods and the one thing that I've noticed
> having the best impact is the up-front teaching of terminators; their use,
> and why they are important and necessary. Only after establishing this basis
> do we teach {cu} and elision, and this method has produced stronger
> understanding in when they are needed and why they are useful. I am also
> putting a stronger emphasis on teaching only the necessary terminology when
> absolutely needed. We basically go through as much as we can using only the
> terms {selbri}, {bridi}, and {sumti}. This has allowed more ground to be
> covered earlier, which then provides more of a basis and contrast for the
> student to then better grasp the more complex forms and terminology that
> comes later.
>
> Without further ado, this is a rough outline to our new methods, in the
> order in which they are taught:
>
> General introduction - a bit on "thinking lojbanically", the terms sumti,
> selbri, and bridi, a few sample bridi using only simple KOhA like {mi} {do}
> and {ti}, and trying to convey the differences between English and lojban
> and why selbri, sumti, and bridi don't really exist in English.
> A more detailed look at place structure, and how to play with it - the rules
> for sliding sumti around, and also introduce FA.
> Simple tanru, using as diverse of a vocabulary as we can muster. We teach
> with great emphasis that ANY time two selbri are adjacent in text, they form
> a tanru. This emphasis and the fact that no terminators have been introduced
> as of yet turns out to be a great aid in getting tanru formation and proper
> sumti termination / {cu} usage correct.
> {lo ... ku} and possibly {la} (brivla version only) - No specific mention
> that {ku} may be left out is made. Stress the openness of xorlo {lo} and its
> specific use, and give examples that are contrary to English thought - {lo
> cnino ku}, {lo xunre ku}, etc.
> At this point, a brief on {ko}, {ma}, {mo}, and maybe a brief mention of
> attitudinals and vocatives. (It's hard to put these off since they are so
> frequently used, but I'd make the case that they can wait a bit.)
> {be ... bei ... be'o} - Again, making the case that the terminator is
> necessary. Strong examples help here. Usually the idea of nesting these
> within a tanru is easily taught and understood. Make a connection with the
> earlier lesson about place structure in that the "first" sumti after a
> selbri is going to be the x2.
> SE. State that you are essentially creating a new selbri with a new place
> structure - this is a good time to potentially introduce the terms {gismu}
> and {brivla}.
> {NU ... kei}. I only really mention {du'u} and {nu} since they are the
> simplest and by far the most common. {su'u} is potentially worth a mention.
> As always, strong detailed examples help.
> {cu} and terminator elision. By this time, the user is going to start seeing
> very bulky phrases with 3, 4, 5 or more terminators at the end of their
> jufra. What a mess! {cu} becomes a lot easier to teach in terms of the
> "levels" it can cut through by teaching it right after NU.
> {fi'o ... fe'u} and BAI. Since this lesson comes after terminator elision,
> {fe'u} should be mentioned but shown that it can be elided.Teaching {fi'o}
> first opens up a lot of options and gets the students more comfortable with
> tags in general.
>
> Clearly there is still a lot to teach at this point: tenses, aspects,
> connectives, fu'ivla, lujvo, etc. But I think the outline above covers a
> strong majority of the structural aspects of lojban and have had great
> success and reasonable retention when teaching students using this method.
>
> As for the web-based lessons, I had the idea of writing out lessons in this
> form (teaching more or less the full grammar in its basics) with one pass
> and branding it "Level 1". "Level 2" will then be available to the user as a
> direct overlay on the existing material. That is to say, that by checking a
> box on the website or something, they can cause new text to mix in with the
> existing lessons (probably of a different color). So the introduction
> chapter will have the same Level 1 text, but will also expand upon those
> ideas and possibly introduce more terminology for level 2. The {lo} / {la}
> chapter can expand to detail {le} and the other use of {la} as well as inner
> / outer quantifiers in level 2. The NU chapter can explain some of the finer
> points of NU and some of the other ones, {ni}, {ka}, {se du'u} vs. {du'u},
> etc. Level 3 will just be another overlay with the absolute full detail of
> the language.
>
> I await your comments and suggestions.
>