I do agree with a lot of what you write. I maintain that Duolingo is the wrong approach to actually learn a language (even though there are differences between the various languages covered by Duolingo). However, I did somewhat successfully use Duolingo to refresh some intermediate-level Italian grammar (not grammar training, but I could observe various grammatically different sentences), after having been away from the language for fifteen years. This was some twelve years ago, and Duolingo has changed so much for the last few years (mostly for the worse, while I was still wasting time on Duo for for another language), so I don't know the state of the Italian course now.
You've twice written about what is the wrong way to learn a new language -- what's your right way? Why did you use Duo' instead of 'the right way'? Perhaps that explains why one might create a OSS version of Duo.
Comprehesible input. find something basic you can understand and immerse your self in it. Often this is childrens books/shows or similar level designed for adults.
at the start you use a translation dictionary to look up ever word which is boring - which is why approaches like duolingo where they give you around 2000 common words to memorize quickly are useful. However the goal is to learn just enough of that list that you can find something you understand to start the real learning on.
Maybe “immersion” works if you already know the language and are going for fluency, but I don’t see how it can get you from zero to one. I’ve tried as an adult and failed to learn my wife’s native language and no amount of “input” at any speed or level helps. It just washes over me and I don’t understand anything.
I'm like three days from my one year Duo streak. I've gone from understanding none of my wife's native language to being able to eavesdrop on phone conversations a bit, and to have short exchanges. I've probably spent half an hour daily on average. Sometimes a lot more.
I had no prior exposure. This website is weird, the comments never reflect reality for me on any topic.
Comprehensible input works really well and was popularized by a video that went viral a few years ago entitled “How to acquire any language NOT learn it!” [0]
The method described in the video involves focusing on listening for the first year by having someone read magazines and books to you in the target language, pointing and using other gestures to convey the meaning of words you don’t understand. This method works quite well but it is very difficult to find anyone who will consistently meet with you and practice like this before you have reached a certain level of understanding, and very few people want to learn this way because they see it as a waste of time.
One of the key aspects of this model is that you should not be translating between your native and your target language, which is what you usually do on apps like Duolingo. This has led to a subset of comprehensible input evangelists to fixate on insisting that Duolingo doesn’t work. The reality is that the method that works is the method you use consistently over time. Once you get to a certain level of fluency, you can have actual conversations to reinforce your learning, at which point drill methods like Duolingo will usually plateau while exposure methods like comprehensible input will still be useful for improving grammar and pronunciation.
I don't think your experience here is weird - just seems like you had a good environment for practicing a bit with your wife, which I think is more important than any other aspect of the learning methodology. Now, nitpickers might argue that "better" methods would have achieved much more in less time, but eh.
Try to force some more exchanges with your wife. Make a day of the week the day you only speak her language (for at least a few hours, but don't give up from the frustration when vocabulary runs short - keep it going even if you need to point and sign).
> It just washes over me and I don’t understand anything.
Things you don't understand are not comprehensible to you, so this was not experience with comprehensible input. If you don't know anything at all, you can at least collect words.
Look into "graded readers." They're basically children's books, except native children are fluent and would find them primitive.
What you're looking for is a situation where you understand 98% of what is going on, and you're baffled by the last 2%. If that situation is two- and three-word sentences spoken slowly, then that's the input you should be looking for (and which Duolingo isn't bad for.) The goal is to walk away from that thing you knew 98% of, but now with the last 2%.
Anecdotally, download comic books in your target language. The pictures help enormously in getting you to that 98%.
I’ve been studying Japanese for over a year now with the ultimate goal of being able to have basic conversations, and have been using the immersion method.
My way of dealing with the fact that hardly any input is actually comprehensible is to actually translate, at leas in the beginning. I got a couple of vocabulary books and a grammar book (aimed at passing the N5 and N4 [A1 and A2 equivalent] language exams), and drilled the vocabulary and grammar with a redsheet and an anki deck. The thing is though, that I only need to translate the word/grammar concept the first couple of times I see it, after that it is much quicker (and better for remembering) to judge if how well you intuitively know the word/grammar concept from the anki deck (or if you are able to fill in the blank with a red sheet). Over time you can build up your vocabulary and grammar and the input gets gradually more comprehensible.
While drilling vocab and grammar I also listen to pod-casts, usually while walking my dog, or at the gym. It is helpful even if you don’t understand most of it. Usually—at the beginning—I am able to pick up a couple of words I know, which reinforces them, but also I get used to the pronunciation and the rhythm of the language. After a year I am able to comprehend maybe 60-70% (on a good day) of some pod-cast episodes aimed at beginners. But at the beginning it was maybe 5%.
I think what Duolingo gets wrong is that after you are introduced to the word or a grammar concept, you keep translating it. This is at best a waste of time, and at worst, prevents you from getting an intuitive understanding of the word/grammar. I think another mistake of Duolingo is the fact they spend too much time on learning a single word or grammar, repeating it too many times at the beginning. What I prefer is to dedicate some time with the word/grammar, find connections (also with the kanji spelling of it), and then move on. Most likely I will remember it after a couple of exposures that session, and if not, SRS should do the trick the following weeks.
The method that worked for me: A 90 day course for learning the basic of the grammar and some thematic vocabulary (better than duolingo as it has whole conversation, both written and spoken). An awful lot of reading book, listening to shows, sporadic speaking and writing. Learned English that way without ever travelling to an English speaking country.
I've learned English by scrolling endless memes on Imgur (back when it used to be an image storage for Reddit), and watching a lot of Youtube videos on the topics that interested me (tech and car reviews - like LTT and Doug DeMuro). But that only developed my passive vocabulary (reading and listening). I only really learned speaking English once I started working remotely for an australian company, and further improved the fluency after moving abroad (to the Netherlands).
I'm currently doing German lessons on Duolingo, and what I dislike the most is that it keeps shoving "useless" words into my face (the words that are irrelevant for me and that I'll most likely never use) - I wish there was an option to choose the topics that I find interesting so that it'd mix the words that more relevant with the everyday use words to better taylor the vocab for me. Another shortcoming is that it never actually explains the grammar rules, you can only try to analyze the examples yourself, trying to notice any patterns. Some are good in that, others are bad - so why don't they spare us that mental gymnastics and provide at least minimal explanation?
