vocabulary - I don't get it

[iwka]

Being that I am from another country and did not go through the American educational system, I have a hard time getting the whole "vocabulary" thing. We didn't and don't have nothing like that in our schools added on top of other subjects, except when introducing new terminology during given lessons. No need for special preparation before final high school exams.

 

So my question is, why and what for and how are people using "vocabulary" instructions in classical education? I thought that broadening one's vocabulary should come naturally, just from reading literature, other subjects in school, newspapers, using encyclopedias, dictionaries, from discussions etc. Why is there such emphasis put on vocabulary preparation before SAT?

 

thanks

[Matryoshka]

I think this quote could explain it:

 

"The statistics of English are astonishing. Of all the world's languages (which now number some 2,700), it is arguably the richest in vocabulary. The compendious Oxford English Dictionary lists about 500,000 words; and a further half-million technical and scientific terms remain uncatalogued. According to traditional estimates, neighboring German has a vocabulary of about 185,000 and French fewer than 100,000, including such Franglais as le snacque-barre and le hit-parade."

 

There are just a lot more words to learn in English. :tongue_smilie:

[dangermom]

Vocabulary is a big part of the SATs, I guess. But while a lot of vocabulary should come from reading literature and so on, it's quite easy to skim over words you don't know, and reading doesn't give you an idea of the roots of a word (Latin, Greek, French, Old English, what?). Given the huge number of words in the English language, partly because of our habit of borrowing lots from other languages, I suppose we just feel that we need to make sure we've got it covered.

 

Perhaps you've heard the quotation

“Not only does the English Language borrow words from other languages, it sometimes chases them down dark alleys, hits them over the head, and goes through their pocketsâ€

?

[iwka]

I think this quote could explain it:

 

"The statistics of English are astonishing. Of all the world's languages (which now number some 2,700), it is arguably the richest in vocabulary. The compendious Oxford English Dictionary lists about 500,000 words; and a further half-million technical and scientific terms remain uncatalogued. According to traditional estimates, neighboring German has a vocabulary of about 185,000 and French fewer than 100,000, including such Franglais as le snacque-barre and le hit-parade."

 

There are just a lot more words to learn in English. :tongue_smilie:

 

ha...that would be a good explanation...but I thought that English was not that "wordy"

http://www.askoxford.com/asktheexperts/faq/aboutenglish/numberwords?view=uk

[Matryoshka]

ha...that would be a good explanation...but I thought that English was not that "wordy"

http://www.askoxford.com/asktheexperts/faq/aboutenglish/numberwords?view=uk

 

It's probably not all that wordy, but it's still quite a bit wordier than most other European languages - a sub-link from the page you linked: ;)

 

http://www.askoxford.com/asktheexperts/faq/aboutenglish/mostwords?view=uk

 

It's really all the Latin and French that got added in the middle ages - they're not related to the Germanic "base" of English. So much, in fact, that there are those that try to argue that English is a Latin-based language - which from a linguistic standpoint is patently untrue, even though it has strayed farther from its roots than its brethren.

[iwka]

It's really all the Latin and French that got added in the middle ages - they're not related to the Germanic "base" of English. So much, in fact, that there are those that try to argue that English is a Latin-based language - which from a linguistic standpoint is patently untrue, even though it has strayed farther from its roots than its brethren.

 

And from here:

http://www.askoxford.com/asktheexperts/faq/aboutenglish/proportion?view=uk

it seems that native English speakers should learn not only Latin but also French....

that's why I asked why people are learning Latin

 

My native language, Polish, is known for being the queen of diminutives, and grammar is quite hard.

 

It is interesting that English is so "wordy' though...because the popular opinion in Poland is that English vocabulary is too poor to properly translate richness of our greatest literature, and if translated into English, it looses the "flavor" (some say that Joseph Conrad wrote in English, because he did not want to bother with the complexity of our language...)

 

Anyway, I like languages...:001_smile:

Edited May 15, 2009 by iwka

[Matryoshka]

My native language, Polish, is known for being the queen of diminutives, and grammar is quite hard.

 

I don't speak Polish, but I do speak German and Spanish, and I have to say English grammar is easy in comparison (especially to German). Though I think Latin is even worse (noun declensions? ouch.)

 

It is interesting that English is so "wordy' though...because the popular opinion in Poland is that English vocabulary is too poor to properly translate richness of our greatest literature, and if translated into English, it looses the "flavor" (some say that Joseph Conrad wrote in English, because he did not want to bother with the complexity of our language...)

 

 

LOL. :001_smile:. I think any work of literature loses something in translation - there are always subtleties of meaning that just don't translate.

 

Anyway, I like languages...:001_smile:

 

Me too. I think we're in good company here. :D

 

PS. Back to your orignial point - I could never understand the point of vocab studies, because I always picked up everything just by reading lots - but I'm seeing that my kids don't seem to be as intuitive as I am (though they also read a lot). We're doing Latin and Greek root studies to be more explicit. I do think English's tendency to be a Borg language has something to do with the need for vocab study.

[Ibbygirl]

Perhaps you've heard the quotation

Quote:

“Not only does the English Language borrow words from other languages, it sometimes chases them down dark alleys, hits them over the head, and goes through their pockets” ?

LOL I absolutely LOVED this!! Who is the quote from?

[Ummto4]

Don't compare English vs Polish, but you should compare American system vs UK system vs Australian system. Why do American put a heavy emphasis on vocab while others don't ?

 

The answer is: SAT.

 

SAT verbal is loaded with borrowed vocabularies which are rarely used in conversation. So do GRE (SAT for graduate study) and TOEFL (an English test taken by foreigners). Therefore, in order to do well on these tests, one has to memorize these vocabs. THat's why Latin comes handy because most of SAT's words have Latin roots.

 

In UK, as far as I know, the emphasize is more on the usage and practical aspect of language. At least, their version of TOEFL (called IELTS) reflects this very well. Instead of using multiple choice on the subject of reading, grammatical rule and usage, listening, and vocab, IELTS focuses on writing essays, speaking, reading, and listening (both reading and listening do have some multiple choice in it, but most require short and long answers) . I would say that IELTS really measures how well somebody can use English daily, whereas TOEFL is more superficial in this regards. When you teach somebody with the final goal of doing IELTS, you really teach them how to use English, whereas with TOEFL is more teach to the test kind of thing.

 

I suspect this is what is happening with SAT as well.

Edited May 15, 2009 by mom2moon2

[Julie in MN]

I look at it a bit differently. I don't look at it as an American or English thing. I work part-time at Kumon, which is not an American program, and vocab is definitely important to them.

 

I look at vocab as a way to teach (and test) reading of material that uses words that kids do NOT use with their friends. It's a good measure of what they have read, and even more so what they are capable of reading and understanding.

 

Often good students are good test-takers, quick to read and answer questions. But if their vocabulary is poor, they really aren't getting the meat of the story or the information, especially at the higher levels, where the author's viewpoint is often being presented specifically through nuances in word choice. A vocab quiz seems like a quick way to estimate the student's abilities -- or potential, anyways.

[Ellie]

The only time I had specific vocabulary study was in 7th grade, where we learned some amazing words, ones which are not common and which cannot always be deciphered when read/heard in context.

 

I'm thinking it's probable that public school instruction is just so poor that students have to study the words that they aren't picking up in the normal course of events.

[dangermom]

LOL I absolutely LOVED this!! Who is the quote from?

 

Online it's attributed to one Eddy Peters, but I'm not sure how accurate that is.

[Pine Ledge Academy]

So, if we need to have a vocab program, what to use and when to start?

[AnnetteB]

There are so many good ways to incorporate vocabulary study into your student's study. We like BJU and ABeka Spelling and they both have vocabulary study elements. We became bored with Wordly Wise books, but they are good. Progeny Press literature guides have the kids defining words, too. Good graded reading programs usually have vocabulary words that challenge the kids. We also use Vocabulary from Classical Roots A through E. We keep dictionaries handy and never continue to read past a word they don't know. We all seem to love words and word play. I cannot imagine not studying vocabulary since it is both enjoyable and beneficial.

[Julie in MN]

It boggles my mind that in the US we don't use the vocabulary, aren't taught the vocabulary (except generically through memorization of some random list of words), yet we think it is important enough to put on a fairly important test (SAT for example).

 

But that seems to be the point -- the test is measuring something that people will need in higher education/college and probably don't just pick up through normal use. The test is "supposed to" measure whether you have achieved a level of education needed to succeed in college. (I don't necessarily think that it does, but that's its goal.)

[Julie in MN]

So you are saying that the goal of school is not to prepare a person for entry into college?

 

I don't get what you're saying. The goal of the ACT/SAT tests is to evaluate how well educated you are.

[Julie in MN]

What is the point of learning it just for a test?

 

I think it's different to say we don't use it in conversation vs. we don't use it when reading college-level textbooks. Is that where we're getting confused in our cyber-conversation?

 

I think Americans most definitely don't use higher vocab in conversation.

 

I think colleges most definitely expect higher vocab in reading as well as writing. I tell students that learning this level of vocab may be like learning a foreign language that they don't use with their friends but may need in their higher education and in their career.

 

You said college wasn't a step up for you. So do you think your high school education was good, or do you think college vocab wasn't really at a high level? I went to college so long ago that maybe it's changed now? I know my son had to at least have a good science vocabulary in his engineering college.

[iwka]

Don't compare English vs Polish, but you should compare American system vs UK system vs Australian system. Why do American put a heavy emphasis on vocab while others don't ?

 

The answer is: SAT.

 

SAT verbal is loaded with borrowed vocabularies which are rarely used in conversation. So do GRE (SAT for graduate study) and TOEFL (an English test taken by foreigners). Therefore, in order to do well on these tests, one has to memorize these vocabs. THat's why Latin comes handy because most of SAT's words have Latin roots.

 

In UK, as far as I know, the emphasize is more on the usage and practical aspect of language. At least, their version of TOEFL (called IELTS) reflects this very well. Instead of using multiple choice on the subject of reading, grammatical rule and usage, listening, and vocab, IELTS focuses on writing essays, speaking, reading, and listening (both reading and listening do have some multiple choice in it, but most require short and long answers) . I would say that IELTS really measures how well somebody can use English daily, whereas TOEFL is more superficial in this regards. When you teach somebody with the final goal of doing IELTS, you really teach them how to use English, whereas with TOEFL is more teach to the test kind of thing.

 

I suspect this is what is happening with SAT as well.

 

I don't want to offend no one, but the common opinion Iąve heard around Europe is that Brits use more and more advanced vocabulary then Americans (what is is based on, I don't know - newspapers? news? research?). Are students in British schools also "thought" vocabulary?

[iwka]

PS. Back to your orignial point - I could never understand the point of vocab studies, because I always picked up everything just by reading lots - but I'm seeing that my kids don't seem to be as intuitive as I am (though they also read a lot).

 

We have similar situation at our home...I personally am more natural and intuitive, but I find that I need to explain vocabulary to my ds 9 especially...

[iwka]

It boggles my mind that in the US we don't use the vocabulary, aren't taught the vocabulary (except generically through memorization of some random list of words), yet we think it is important enough to put on a fairly important test (SAT for example).

 

that's a question I have....

[iwka]

There are so many good ways to incorporate vocabulary study into your student's study. We like BJU and ABeka Spelling and they both have vocabulary study elements. We became bored with Wordly Wise books, but they are good. Progeny Press literature guides have the kids defining words, too. Good graded reading programs usually have vocabulary words that challenge the kids. We also use Vocabulary from Classical Roots A through E. We keep dictionaries handy and never continue to read past a word they don't know. We all seem to love words and word play. I cannot imagine not studying vocabulary since it is both enjoyable and beneficial.

 

Are you teaching Latin plus Roots?

[katilac]

I think that vocabulary study can be worth the time, especially for middle grades and up. Many people get the sense of what a word means by reading it in context, enough to pick the right choice on a multiple choice test, but I have so often seen that they don't get the nuances or know when to choose one word over another.

 

One thing that drove me nuts about Latina Christiana is the derivative study; the dvd lessons gave rather sloppy definitions of many words, imo.

[zaichiki]

So you are saying that the goal of school is not to prepare a person for entry into college?

 

I didn't find college work to be much of a leap after I finished high school.

 

Wendy,

In general, the goal of the public schools is NOT to prepare a person to enter college. (That's why parents can choose to send their child to a "college prep" private school.)

 

The American public schools developed on Dewey's system, I think, and the Kaiser's German system of public education. The goal is to encourage conformity and prepare the population for the factory work of the industrial revolution time period. Anyway, I read that somewhere. John Gatto maybe? Or perhaps it was William J. Bennet or E.D. Hirsch?

[Laura Corin]

So my question is, why and what for and how are people using "vocabulary" instructions in classical education? I thought that broadening one's vocabulary should come naturally, just from reading literature, other subjects in school, newspapers, using encyclopedias, dictionaries, from discussions etc. Why is there such emphasis put on vocabulary preparation before SAT?

 

thanks

 

However, my children are avid readers who pick up vocabulary very naturally. Maybe if they weren't I would feel the need to supplement.

 

Laura

[Rosie_0801]

I was reading recently that the average person only uses about 2,000 words in their every day life. Someone on the board said in a recent thread that there are something like 500,000 words in the English language, so that's completely woeful. Embarrassing, even. I know my vocabulary has decreased (from learning a second language and having children) so I'm considering buying a vocab program for myself!

 

Rosie

[AnnetteB]

Are you teaching Latin plus Roots?

 

We only "dabble" in Latin so far. Our 4 older children learned Spanish. Their cousin speaks fluent Spanish and teaches in Honduras and Spanish seemed a logical first foreign language for us living in California and then Oregon. Then the dc started learning German so that they could converse with their German cousins. Dd has married into a German family and her dds will be fluent in both English and German. Dd also studied Greek. Ds and dd were able to speak and comprehend German quite well during their month visiting their sister and Uncle's family. We enjoy the study of Latin roots and phrases, but it has taken a backseat to German and Spanish because we can use them! Dd, 14, has also started studying Italian. One thing that we love is seeing how languages are related. (Rosetta Stone has become a favorite around here)

[elizabeth]

I think it is a cultural phenomenon. It is very interesting that with a brief perusal of older childrens and even literature written for an adult reader it is clear that the syntax and subject matter have become woefully banal. It is likely not the case that the schools have done a poor job with teaching vocabulary but rather our culture has become so lazy and sloppy mentally that if it is not a 30 second soundbite or the equivalent a NYTimes bestseller generally it is ignored. Thus the need for some students to engage in vocabulary study as a subject artificially isolated from the simple act of reading worthwhile literature. Go to the library and read older newspapers from before the 1960's and it will be obvious that there has been a shift in the difficulty of reading material for the general public. Popular books likewise. As an example compare the once popular books by James Michener or Herman Wouk to the best selling historical fiction today and the difference between the two eras is quite obvious. I contend that the schools merely reflect the trends taking place in popular culture not that poor instruction makes vocabulary study a mandatory component of becoming an educated person. An interesting book on the subject is linked http://www.amazon.com/Twilight-American-Culture-Morris-Berman/dp/039332169X'>http://www.amazon.com/Twilight-American-Culture-Morris-Berman/dp/039332169X'>http://www.amazon.com/Twilight-American-Culture-Morris-Berman/dp/039332169X'>http://www.amazon.com/Twilight-American-Culture-Morris-Berman/dp/039332169X It used to be that to achieve middle class success with the trappings of social mobility that one must be well read . Self education and enrichment was the norm for social strivers. Today with a consumer based identity, that is to say , we are what we can buy, education and erudition has fallen by the wayside as a marker of having achieved upward mobility. You can literally buy class in our culture. Many here certainly see through that and would rather be considered a person of promise and value based on, among other things ,what they read and how they think. Not so with most Americans. If I can buy a Louis Vuitton bag then I have status among my peers is far more the norm. It is, in my estimation, profoundly tragic that so many well intended parents play into this without hesitation or reflection. Given a choice between a label of clothing with a branded name or a fine book many will choose what others immediately recognize as "class" that is the consumer product that tells others you have arrived. Many have become the bitter and shallow soundbites they purport to loathe. We often permit ourselves to be defined by what we have rather than who we are. Just thinking out loud here and wondering how this change happened?? http://www.amazon.com/Twilight-American-Culture-Morris-Berman/dp/039332169X

Edited May 16, 2009 by elizabeth
I cannot type well

[elizabeth]

bump

[Julie in MN]

I contend that the schools merely reflect the trends taking place in popular culture not that poor instruction

 

I agree that schools generally reflect what the parents want. That's what I saw, anyways. Some of us would initiate a change, and it was the other parents who would fight it.

[iwka]

I think it is a cultural phenomenon. It is very interesting that with a brief perusal of older childrens and even literature written for an adult reader it is clear that the syntax and subject matter have become woefully banal. It is likely not the case that the schools have done a poor job with teaching vocabulary but rather our culture has become so lazy and sloppy mentally that if it is not a 30 second soundbite or the equivalent a NYTimes bestseller generally it is ignored. Thus the need for some students to engage in vocabulary study as a subject artificially isolated from the simple act of reading worthwhile literature. Go to the library and read older newspapers from before the 1960's and it will be obvious that there has been a shift in the difficulty of reading material for the general public. Popular books likewise. As an example compare the once popular books by James Michener or Herman Wouk to the best selling historical fiction today and the difference between the two eras is quite obvious. I contend that the schools merely reflect the trends taking place in popular culture not that poor instruction makes vocabulary study a mandatory component of becoming an educated person. An interesting book on the subject is linked http://www.amazon.com/Twilight-American-Culture-Morris-Berman/dp/039332169X'>http://www.amazon.com/Twilight-American-Culture-Morris-Berman/dp/039332169X'>http://www.amazon.com/Twilight-American-Culture-Morris-Berman/dp/039332169X'>http://www.amazon.com/Twilight-American-Culture-Morris-Berman/dp/039332169X It used to be that to achieve middle class success with the trappings of social mobility that one must be well read . Self education and enrichment was the norm for social strivers. Today with a consumer based identity, that is to say , we are what we can buy, education and erudition has fallen by the wayside as a marker of having achieved upward mobility. You can literally buy class in our culture. Many here certainly see through that and would rather be considered a person of promise and value based on, among other things ,what they read and how they think. Not so with most Americans. If I can buy a Louis Vuitton bag then I have status among my peers is far more the norm. It is, in my estimation, profoundly tragic that so many well intended parents play into this without hesitation or reflection. Given a choice between a label of clothing with a branded name or a fine book many will choose what others immediately recognize as "class" that is the consumer product that tells others you have arrived. Many have become the bitter and shallow soundbites they purport to loathe. We often permit ourselves to be defined by what we have rather than who we are. Just thinking out loud here and wondering how this change happened?? http://www.amazon.com/Twilight-American-Culture-Morris-Berman/dp/039332169X

 

My question would be then...was the educational system better during the 50' and the 60' in America? And...what happened?

[usetoschool]

My question would be then...was the educational system better during the 50' and the 60' in America? And...what happened?

 

I can't think of a way to answer without turning this into a politcal discussion. :glare: There was some dumbing down, but the cause of it is the point of contention.

 

But I agree that vocabulary is necessary because the standards are lower, and in our case, we just like words - their meanings, origins, usage. We love knowing good words and coming across them in our reading or just using them around the house with each other.

Edited May 17, 2009 by jcooperetc
forgot the response to the op

[elizabeth]

 

My question would be then...was the educational system better during the 50' and the 60' in America? And...what happened?

I cannot say that it was better in terms of access to education. In fact I would posit that the educational standards/expectations were superior . However, that is the only one aspect when discussing public education . Plessy v. Ferguson as a standard of access to education was a disgrace. Young women being shut out of Chemistry class and directed to Home Economics as a substitute is ,in my opinion ,equally reprehensible. Again, what has happened is not exclusive to the system of public education rather, I believe, endemic to a consumption, ego - driven society. The attitude seems to be that if a certain knowledge base or subject will not produce income then it is not worth learning.I hear this all the time when I encounter people who ask why we home educate and even more specifically why we study Latin or anthropology etc. For many people there is no inherent value to learning other than what it can put in their bank account. Again it is not reducible to the educational system .I truly have found it all starts and ends at home with the culture the parents create. If you value education and are curious about the world and ideas those same priorities are reinforced every day to your children. Conversely if you think reading Oedipus Rex is a waste of time because it is not about your corner of the world or is not pertinent to your major etc then those values will likewise be replicated in your family. As I stated previously ,the question of vocabulary study apart from the context of simply reading worthwhile books is one that needs to be evaluated in terms of the larger culture not limited to the scope of public school as the only or primary influence. It is easy for me to see that my parents knew what they were doing by making weekly sojourns to the library and trips to the book shop downtown monthly as a treat . Movies? Rarely, maybe once a year. Video games? Not in our house. Books and board games? Everywhere , all day ,every day. I never took a vocabulary course in my educational career and have two post graduate degrees in areas that demand superior vocabulary skills . A steady diet of great and good books was all that was needed. I did not have all the distractions from thinking that many deem absolute necessity so my time was not wasted on communicating my every piddly activity during the day. If you want to read nightmarish prose consider that composed by a person who grew up "texting " and emailing as their primary mode of communication...It might not be polite to say so but truthfully so much of what passes for "communication" in the modern world is nothing more than an endless litany of statements of no importance or meaning to anyone with two brain cells to make synapse. The level of self involvement required to engage in these activities ,communicating your every thought and activity to others is what can only be called narcissism . If we spent half as much time in silence trying to understand the ideas and words of the "other," I think we would be more content and fulfilled.

[iwka]

The attitude seems to be that if a certain knowledge base or subject will not produce income then it is not worth learning.I hear this all the time when I encounter people who ask why we home educate and even more specifically why we study Latin or anthropology etc. For many people there is no inherent value to learning other than what it can put in their bank account.

 

That is exactly what I hear Europeans say FOR and AGAINST Americans - "they are so practical" (meaning: why do we have to learn so much at schools, when Americans are exceeding in every field, although they don't necessarily know where Greece is located on the world's map, why Aristotle changed the way we think, how king Sobieski saved Christiendom etc.; do we really need to teach that in our schools?) the other aspect, which is gaining popular lately, is confronting the knowledge of the facts vs. accessibility to the internet world - the result being in statements that we don't need to know that much as long as we have handy dandy laptop within reach...

 

By the way, I've just read news yesterday that Latin/Ancient culture migh have a big come back to Polish high schools as a 4h weekly subject thought for two years. Right now only classes profiled in chemistry, biology and humanism have Latin.