Any language learning should reach the eventual end – an interaction with natives. Usually
people wish to interact with natives only if they have a high level of language competence.
However, some language learners use this method as their starting point or to improve their
not-so-high level of language competence.
As I mentioned above, people usually do not feel confident enough to use their language skill
as they don’t think they are skilled enough. Immersion – being in a foreign country
among native speakers – forces learners to get past their own discomfort, as it is very likely that
they will have to use their language skill before feeling like an “expert” of the particular
language.
This learning approach is generally popular among language learners, but it has some practical
defects. Nowadays, not many people have the time, means or possibility to move to another
country for a period of time. The general rule of “the longer the period one stays in the particular
country speaking the target language, the better the language can be learnt” gives a particular
idea of how time consuming and possibly life changing this method can be. This claim is
supported e.g. by Krashen, who mentions in his work that several studies had been conducted
to examine if length of residence has an impact of second language acquisition and it certainly
does.
Nevertheless, it does not need to be true for everyone. There are many cases of people living
in a particular country for several years and still not being able to talk fluently in comparison
to people who spend a few months in the area and are able to have a full-on conversation.
This also shows the importance of willingness and self-discipline of the learner in connection
with this method.
Learning a foreign language while living abroad is very dependent on the environment and
people around the learner. Lots of Erasmus students go abroad to improve the target language
and get to know the culture, yet some of them might speak English or their native language
the whole time and not learn anything about the culture – simply because the environment
provided these limited possibilities. Ultimately, as it is with every language learning method,
the approach and willingness to learn (and possibly make sacrifices) is reliant on the learner
themselves.
What learners cannot influence is the way natives talk to them. Native speakers usually speak
too quickly so that learners often do not have time to mentally break down the sounds, words
and meaning of what they are hearing. This is why native speakers usually adapt their way
of talking according to the level of the language learner Krashen distinguishes three types of communication with a second language learner; basic-talk, foreigner-talk and teacher-talk . The basic-talk can be defined as a conversation that two native speakers would have with one another. The foreigner-talk is a conversation adapted on the level of learner. Conversational partners make adjustments in vocabulary (easier content words), syntax (shorter sentences), speed (slower) etc. They also ask reassuring questions if the language learner understood well. And lastly,
the teacher-talk is very similar to the foreigner-talk plus it focuses on error correction.
As I mentioned before, it is by no means possible to write down each and every method used
for language learning. Not only do I believe that each method deserves a thesis on its own. It is
also simply because every individual (and especially polyglots) uses a different type of methods
which they can even combine with one another, all for the purpose to learn a language. Polyglots
have the advantage of knowing well what method suits them the most and that is (also) why
they are so successful in learning languages.
