You may have come across references to ‘Praxis Language’ in recent times, so let me give you some background to it.
In September 2005, myself, Hank Horkoff, and Steve Williams put together the resources to begin the ChinesePod project. The experience has been kind of like watching a child grow. Over time, we’ve come to believe that the animating idea behind ChinesePod has a broad and potentially disruptive application. In fact, we’ve developed an almost messianic belief in the thing. Why?
Well, any start-up needs to take advantage of some social trend. ChinesePod is actually riding 2 mega-trends: the rise of Mandarin, and the spread of web 2.0 and other technologies. I think we’re looking at great social and economic change out there. It could be a question of ‘right time, right place’.
But it’s hard to predict the future. My own view is that there’s a revolution in learning going on. I guess we’re in the middle of it, maybe even leading it in some ways. (Last week NBC Nightly News were over here; yesterday I was interviewed for the Economist, for what that’s worth.) I’m pretty eager to know the potential for what we’ve developed in the last 18 months. Could we apply the same approach, say, to Spanish? My answer, is an emphatic ‘yes‘ (though with some obvious tweaks).
And that’s precisely what we’ve done. These are early days for SpanishSense, but it’s growing and acting in many ways like ChinesePod did in its first months of life. Already this short experience has yielded us some tremendous insights when we contrast the two. Again, this puts us in a fairly unique position of learning the ropes of a whole new discipline/industry? (language instruction in the web 2.0 era). After all, these days it’s all about learning, n’est-ce pas?
So, there may well be in the brands in the pipeline. (I’ll keep you informed.) In the meantime Praxis Language is the parent company of both ChinesePod and SpanishSense. So, who’s behind Praxis Language? Myself, Hank, and Steve. We’ve put together a site to offer a little more info on PL. (And, yes, if you are a very generous investor, with visionary proclivities, we’d consider having you on the team .)
Ken Carroll
中文 Chinese
FuDaWei Says:
May 23rd, 2007 at 5:48 pm
Smart
Was wondering when you’d get around to diversifying a bit. And adding a free Preemie month to boot is quite clever. Surprised you don’t offer a whole host of books, posters, T-shirts, mugs and software to augment your income. I suspect that’s coming.
On the other hand, I don’t think I’d want a T-Shirt or mug with the new Cingular-Java hybrid logo. I miss the old one (though I realize you wanted some uniform look so that it could be used elsewhere as well as at CPOD).
Prez Life Says:
May 25th, 2007 at 2:43 am
FuDaWei triggered a despairing sense of self-recognition in me with his statement a couple weeks ago:
“No one ever learned a language by mimicking static sentences from a Berlitz phrase-book. My concern is that CPOD’s modular approach is often not much different — it’s an audio phrasebook. Nothing builds on anything else. Nothing reinforces earlier material.”
Reflection on this has led me to conclude that I have become primarily a low-grade phrase utterer. I frequently throw canned podcast phrases at my Chinese colleagues, but I rarely get into much give and take or conversation with them. This is after rigorously working through a few hundred podcasts and the premium content associated with each.
From early on I tried to structure my use of CPOD to overcome some of the limitations that FDW, Auntie Sue, Jeff, et al have so well described in recent posts. I use the “Expansion” exercises to force myself to generate output rather than just to passively absorb input. I insert a delay of at least a few days between working the podcast lesson and working the associated on-line exercises, to try and build long-term storage. But, I don’t think that I have been very successful.
Prior to picking up CPOD 14 months ago, the last time I had studied a language was over 10 years ago (German), via a “traditional” class. Without a doubt CPOD is more efficient and convenient than taking a traditional class, and is a more powerful tool for building listening comprehension. But, what I gained from the traditional class that I have not yet gained using CPOD is: Agility. The ability to instantly pull words from my limited vocabulary and use them to rapidly build ad hoc statements and to partake in conversation. Being constantly badgered with questions by a teacher drives this, especially when the content being learned grows in layers over time rather than in disparate chunks.
It seems clear that CPOD is not what would be considered “system”. It is a limited set of pieces and components of content. What all of us users – and CPOD itself - are challenged with figuring out is: what are these pieces good for, and what are they not good for. What other components do we need to find somewhere else in order to build a true language learning system?
I believe that CPOD is a great set of components for gaining an introduction to the language and for becoming comfortable with the sounds. In fact, that is what makes it so seductive: the progress that a first time Chinese student can make during the first few weeks of CPOD use is truly astounding!
And, CPOD also seems to be a rich set of supplementary input for students who already have a grounded foundation in the fundamentals of the language, gained from some other learning source.
I am curious as to what the three horsemen of CPOD intend for CPOD to become over time: a full language learning system, or an ever growing and evolving set of discrete components?
Geoff De Says:
May 25th, 2007 at 10:00 am
I’ve learned so much from Chinesepod. It works really well for me. No doubt about it. Of course it’s not just a matter of listening and doing the exercises and then speaking fluently. That’s kind of naieve.
To me, it’s very simple. You have to be realistic. You learn the stuff and then you have to practice speaking.I found my understanding has increased tremendously through Chinesepod. It also leaves lots of words and phrases in my mind that i can use when I’m speaking, but you definitely have to practice speaking in order to be fluent.
Ken Carroll Says:
May 25th, 2007 at 11:04 am
Prez Life,
I don’t agree with FDW that ChinesePod is not much different from a Berlitz phrasebook. ChinesePod adds dimensions to the learning that no phrasebook can have. It’s also integrated, first of all at the level of the lesson. You see, hear, discuss, analyze, and process the input from several angles, using different modalities, including from a production angle in the expansion sentences.
Meanwhile, there is also integration BETWEEN the lessons. You can choose topics and items that interest you, while high frequency language is recycled, even if we don’t draw attention to this in the actual podcasts. You can search for lessons on the basis of topics, or vocabulary, etc(and soon, on the basis of grammar). Meanwhile, Dave Lancashire is getting very close to a new way to review stuff that I think will help.
As to spoken fluency, there is no way you can develop fluency without actual, practice. No system exists - no system could exist - that can make you fluent without practice. I’m not sure why people in your office respond in the way that they do, but I can see that this could be very de-motivating. (All learners go through periods of lower and higher motivation, so don’t get down on this.) Perhaps you could organize some one-on-ones with some of them to get started. No question about it - you will need to practice speaking if you are to improve.
It’s also for this reason that we’ve created the Practice Plan.
If you’ve put a lot of time into studying then you probably know much more than you realize. Some practice sessions will help you draw on all that knowledge and make it easier to apply it. I guess it’s about skill development.
Ken Carroll
Michael Butler Says:
May 25th, 2007 at 1:24 pm
I liked Prez Life’s posting and I liked Ken’s reply.
I would say a big difference between a modular approach and a linear approach lies in the expectations the student should have of the instructional organization.
In a modular approach, educators talk in terms of could, may, and might whereas in a linear approach educators tend to talk in terms of should.
As in:
After lesson 13 you should now be able to use these words in these ways and you should be able to understand X in these instances. In other words, with a linear approach a promise is inherent in the organization of the material.
Now one could argue that many (most?) linear based programs fail by making this promise and then not following through. Given this situation it is perhaps far less frustrating (and much more fair) to follow a modular approach where explicit promises are not made.
But as Ken mentioned, expectations do lie beneath even the CPOD modular approach. Although these expectations are not made explicit, they exist (within and between levels in terms of grammar, vocabulary and listening comprehension).
Cpod is what it is. I have seen over time a concerted effort to make CPOD into more of a linear program even if this is hidden from view. But as Ken says language study can never be complete without real time practice with a speaker. This kind of practice, with the right person, activates what we have learned. It fuels both the fires of discovery and motivation.
Henning Says:
May 25th, 2007 at 2:39 pm
My Chinese made tremendous progress since I started here. The feel for the language rythm and the vocab benefited most. I note that progress when I come back to old lessons that I once had no access at all too. Mabe the CPod just works perfectly with my personality.
My language abilities are still hampered by two crual soft spots. One is pronounciation and the other is grammar.
This is why the “Complete Grammar Guide” - including drill exercises - is the one feature I am most desperatly longing for.
FuDaWei Says:
May 25th, 2007 at 3:58 pm
Ken …
To be fair, my phrasebook analogy was a “concern” — not an accusation. Like Henning, I’m anxiously awaiting the “Grammar Guide” and am optimistic that several issues will be somewhat ameliorated by that.
Marc Says:
May 25th, 2007 at 6:39 pm
Just a few rambling thoughts…
I also feel that over the past year my Chinese has improved a lot. In fact the progress was more rapid once I decided to stop going to my evening classes about 6 months ago, because now I can spend all this extra time working on real dialogues and real vocabulary. Of course, there is still a long way ahead of me. I have some experience with language learning and I know for sure that nobody (except some vry rare talented people) can learn a language on a level where they can have a free flowing conversation without difficulty in only a few years time. I think a realistic time frame is 5 to 7 years. The level that you attain in the language will ultimately depend on the real life practice that you have, but also on the amount of input that you get.
For me the ideal input has always been reading books, articles, etc. The reason for this is simple: you can regulate the time and effort needed to take it all in. Nobody is setting the pace for you. If you feel like looking something up in the dictionary, you can do so. If you just want to skim over a couple o words that you don’t really understand, that is ok too. If you want to put the book aside for a few minutes, perhaps to repeat a phrase in your head, that is also possible…I know that reading in Chinese presents the learner with extra difficulties, but on the other hand I believe that getting to know the right characters for the sounds that you hear will ultimately deepen your knowledge of the language. These lase few weeks I have finally reached a level where I begin to be comfortable reading some material in Chinese. I use some books with stories designed for 小学生. It is a start and it is going well. The stories may not be very exciting for an adult but the process of reading, looking up characters, writing them, etc, actually is. I also find that I pick up a lot of new things doing this.
A lot of courses out there seem to be stuck on beginners and lower intermediate levels. ChinesePod provides material accross the whole range. I think that this is a great advantage. The material is there for you to use. It doesn’t have to be related. Frequent exposure will stimulate the brain to make sense out of it. I feel very comfortable with this, I like to study things on my own. But I know a lot of people function differently. And ChinesePod is not providing optimal support and guidance for a (large) part of their potential market. The Practice Plan is one way to provide this service. But subscribing to this plan is a big step for a lot of people. I firmly believe in segmentation as a market strategy. I think that ChinesePod should consider to be less dogmatic about it’s approach to language learning and try to use it’s resources to cover more of the potential market. Designing guides is one way forward (like the grammar guide). But I don’t see why ChinesePod should not create a real structured beginner’course, say 50 lessons or so to get people started. This could exist alongside the podcast based lessons. There could be a different pricing plan for it too. The same could be repeted for all the gaps to be filled in between levels. That would IMO be a way to address the huge gap between Elementary and Intermediate. There is a guy out there who seems to be good at doing things in the structured way. Pooling resources (take-over, merger?) could actually make Praxis the one-stop place for learning Chinese on the internet.
Marc in Belgium
Prez Life Says:
May 25th, 2007 at 10:15 pm
All the previous discussion about Pimsleur made me curious, so I ordered a set and received it last night.
My early impression:
Query-Response-Query-Response-Query-Response. Build-breakdown-build-breakdown. Very similar to the agility-building aspects of working with a good teacher. A healthy work-out. Good preparation for ad hoc conversation.
This dynamic seems like it fills a gap that currently is missing in CPOD.
Ken, if you can succeed in integrating a similar method into CPOD, it will be very powerful - the best of both worlds. I think it could draw a lot of new premium subscribers (as well as old former-subscribers).
It also may become a competitive imperative over time. In most cases, it seems easier for system providers to disaggregate their content into components and compete at that level, than it is for component providers to move up-stream to compete as system providers.
Clever Dick Says:
May 25th, 2007 at 11:39 pm
I have also adopted the “Phrase Utterer” approach, but with surprising success.
In fact, I have coined the term C.R.A.P. (Current Relevant Approximate Phrase) for my method. So, if I’m having a conversation with my Mandarin-speaking co-workers, I usually don’t comprehend a word that they are saying, and so I simply “retrieve a convenient CPOD lesson catch-phrase” from memory and use that as my response and hope it is relevant to the conversation. So far, they all think I really am the second Da Shan…so this method must have some validity to it.
Sample conversation:
Co-worker: Ni hao.
Me: Shenme ? Ni hai gan ding zui ?
Co-worker: Ni mingming bu zhidao Zhongwen.
Me: Guan ni pishi !
Co-worker: Ni zhe ge ben dan !
Me: Xiexie !
Who needs Pimsleur when you can use C.R.A.P. ?
Michael Butler Says:
May 26th, 2007 at 9:46 am
Clever Dick,
That’s funny!!!
But I believe using the C.R.A.P method is completely justified when your Chinese interlocutor is using the T.R.A.P. method when speaking to you (Truly Ridiculous Assine Phrase)
Maybe CPOD can start teaching us how to use C.R.A.P. to avoid being T.R.A.P. (ed).
Jimmy B Says:
May 27th, 2007 at 4:46 am
Prez - Welcome to Pimsleur! I am working it in parallel to Cpod as well… and I’m finding that there are times when I’m listening to a CPod lesson and a word is associated with the Pimsleur “voice”, and times when I’m doing a Pimsleur and I “hear” Jenny and Ken talking from one of their lessons - so that leads me to think they’re both equally “sticky” in their approach.
Where Pimsleur will win is that I have those CDs staring me in the face, wanting to know why I paid that money and aren’t using them… while a podcast/website has no similarly guilty-making powers.
That said, I think that if I shelled out for the Practice Plan, it would be similarly non-negotiable - I’d NEED to move forward or there would be a dissappointed teacher on the other end of the Skype.
I have thought about loading up a few Cpod lessons and re-editing them Pimsleur style, emphasizing repetition… it would be an interesting experiment…
JimmyB
FuDaWei Says:
May 27th, 2007 at 7:35 am
Pimsleur is only one approach (albeit an effective and popular one). I had brought up Michel Thomas in another thread. He likes to break things down to into smaller units and use them as building blocks to generate longer and more complex sentences.
EXAMPLE (from lesson *1*, no less):
like that; that way ….. así
for me ….. para mí
for you ….. para usted
It is like that. ….. Es así.
It is not like that. ….. No es así.
It is not possible that way. ….. No es posible así.
It is not acceptable for me that way. ….. No es aceptable para mí así.
Why isn’t it acceptable for you that way? ….. ¿Por qué no es aceptable para usted así?
You get the idea. Anyway, I wonder how this approach would work in Chinese. It fits well with inflected languages, but I’m guessing the principle could be applied to Chinese easily enough. Would be an interesting experiment to try a lesson or two in that style.
Prez Life Says:
May 28th, 2007 at 1:39 am
Jimmy B & FuDaWei,
I like your ideas.
Another option would be to leave the existing podcasts as is, but to create an additional .mp3 consisting purely of query/command-response exercises built around the content. The goal being to help re-inforce the material by moving from passive to interactive, ala Pimsleur or a human teacher.
A second step beyond this would be to identify sets of lessons that truly buid in layers upon each other, and to build query/command-response exercises that incrementally move across the set. There were some early Newbie lessons that were intentionally layered upon each other prior to formalization of the disaggregation strategy (e.g. “Story Time 1 - Miss Li Likes to Drink”) - I’m sure there are others that accidentally do and that could be found with some tag searching and heavy sorting.
Hopefully CPOD will consider doing these things. If not, I probably will work with a teacher/tutor to try to do something along these lines.
Auntie Says:
May 29th, 2007 at 7:41 am
Hello. I agree with FuDaWei, Henning, and Prez Life about the value of features that bring CPOD beyond “phrase uttering”.
Ken, please be patient and open-minded on this. CPOD is less of a “phrasebook” IF you are a Premium Subscriber, and importantly, also IF you are wiling or able to work in front of your computer.
The two “if”s are important. For the non-Premium subscriber, the selling point is the delivery — in interesting daily chunks — of very good vocabulary/grammatical points in a form that I can use on the go. On my iPod. Or maybe even listen to on iTunes while I am doing other things, eg. checking online news headlines.
To Prez Life’s proposal for query/command-response drill, I’d like to add my support and propose a slight refinement of that:
Not only question-response type drills, but good variation drills/transformation drills. And that can be pure audio, hence totally portable. The chunky “FSI” courses (the kind with 16 CDs) don’t feel slick and innovative, but they have amazing audio drills which are very effective.
Basically, the narrator reads a model phrase, followed by the word/lexical chunk to be substituted in that phrase, there is a pause to allow the student to tackle that transformation, and then the narrator says the correct answer. These drills are progressive; by the “master” level which consolidates the learning for that lesson, the student is really forced to concentrate because the narrator is substituting different parts of the phrase, randomly, so the student has to pay attention to syntax in order to know which part has to be transformed.
Although, as has been noted earlier in this thread, Chinese is not an inflected language, there is still a lot of potential for this kind of exercise to help.
Eg., As a “heritage speaker” of Chinese, I only have a limited vocabulary, but my grasp of syntax is still good enough to see that word order is still a problem for many advanced students, judging by some of the comments I see written in Mandarin. The kind of exercise I described is great for reinforcing a feel for natural and correct word order.
Another use is in reinforcing new, essentially “Chinese” expressions, such as “SHEI2 DOU1 [zhi1dao4/xi3huan1/etc]“,”[ni]HAI2 BU4[wenxigongke/shuaya/etc].
I hope this is useful in some way…
Pat Says:
May 29th, 2007 at 10:10 am
A interesting point from Ken’s earlier reply about reinforcement. If you go through all the Newbie, Elie and Intermediate CPODS there is a commonality to many phrases repeated at all levels. After encountering a word or phrase at one level its repeated and expanded at other levels. I think that works well. If you go back to the very early lessons Jenny and Ken use constructions explained by John at INT levels.
It begs the question as to what point should one say; OK i’ve got 400 lessons, why not just stop inputing new lessons and just be competent with whats already out there?
After all its tough to complete all lessons on a daily basis thoroughly.
I feel like Buster Keaton sometimes (Ken will remember who he is) chasing the train but never quite catching it (i.e. getting all lessons covered as they happen).
Anyone else tried stopping input from new lesons?
Ken Carroll Says:
May 29th, 2007 at 11:18 am
Auntie,
I thought I was being patient and open-minded… I actually see all this as a huge learning opportunity and I’m grateful for that. Debate is good - really good. I’m happy to hear every opinion.
It’s true that premium subscribers get more than basics or non-subscribers, but I don’t think I need to explain that logic. It’s also true that some of the learning has to be done through text - PDF, computer, etc. There’s a reason for this:learning exclusively through audio puts limitation s on what you can do. Audio, with text, visuals, and multi-media generally, is more effective than audio alone. Multi-media adds whole new dimensions to the learning. I don’t know how much you could learn from audio alone, but it is certainly less than when combined with other things.
Pat,
You’re on to a crucial point here. I suggest that you do not stop the input. Instead, you just find the chance to practice speaking and applying that input. Nothing helps consolidate it like speaking practice. Your options there are to go to night school, find a one-on-one teacher, connect with someone in the ChinesePod community, or take the Practice Plan. http://chinesepod.com/practice. Good luck!
Ken Carroll
Auntie Says:
May 29th, 2007 at 1:05 pm
[QUOTE]
It’s true that premium subscribers get more than basics or non-subscribers, but I don’t think I need to explain that logic.
[/QUOTE]
Dear Ken, thanks for your friendly response to my post. The logic is “self-explanatory” only if you are presuming that significant numbers of your Premium subsribers are people whose very first subscription was “Premium”, rather than former Basic subscribers (or former non-subscribers) who spent some time lurking before getting hooked through your most basic features (not the full bells and whistles features), and upgrading. Here only YOU know your subscriber profiles, not me. But I have made this point so many times that it’s tiring, so this is the last time, I promise!
Seriously, if you offered enough quality Premium-level features which didn’t require me to be chained to my computer, I would pay for the upgrade in an instant. I never learn from audio alone, but as part of a balanced course, audio has a value which you may not have exploited to the fullest up to this point (imVERYho).
Cheers,
Auntie
guillermo Says:
May 29th, 2007 at 3:30 pm
Yeah, me too. “premium podcasts” is learning on my terms…
AuntySue Says:
May 29th, 2007 at 6:00 pm
Ken, remember that those of us who refuse to be tied to our computers for study don’t necessarily want audio-only. It’s the non-audio stuff that we want to take away too.
Quite a few of us use Palm PDAs to not only play the podcasts but also to read Chinese, to write Chinese, to view PDFs if we must, for our main flashcard program, our dictionary, and for downloaded texts and web pages to read offline. Some of the later PDAs also allow us to record ourselves speaking, and to photograph Chinese signs to work out later.
Even more of us want to be able to sit under a tree with a laptop, or at work where the computer is not networked (or savagely proxy-restricted), and to still be able to do all of our study activities there.
There is a lot to be said for working online in the comfort of your home computer setup, if that luxury is available for enough hours in the day. For many of us, though, that is simply not an option. (Consider how many live with net-struck teenagers, or with small kids growing up so fast that if you blink you’ll miss it, or busy angling to create such a household.)
Additional canned audio activities would be most welcome, but that’s far from the whole point. On my terms, for me, means where and when I can fit it in, and using my preferred software environment, on my terms. If the premium membership was free and delivered a gold rimmed pizza for each mouse click, I’d still only be able to use it for up to an hour once or twice a week. Anything that’s carried on a USB stick can be used 2 or three times a day, and if it is working well on my PDA it is likely to be used 5 or 10 times a day.
Jimmy B Says:
May 29th, 2007 at 10:19 pm
Sidebar to Auntie: How do you get your Chinesepod PDF materials onto your Palm? The PDF readers on US Palms is garbage. I’ve been converting the PDFs to JPGs, but that’s extra work every day…
Back to all:
The existence of the upcoming CPod DVD points to the ability for us to enjoy CPod without a network connection (which is something I struggle with too)…
goulnik (郭力毅) Says:
May 30th, 2007 at 12:19 am
re: Pat, I embarked on the CPod Practice Plan about 5-6 weeks ago and I since almost lost track of the new lessons. I still listen to *some* of the new podcasts in the car but almost cursorily.
This is because my Practice Plan is based on a different lesson every day, and I do a thorough preparation to get the most benefit from my 10-12 minutes daily chat.
That leaves little time for anything else, so much so that when I renew the 8-weeks plan as I will (probably 6 months this time), I’ve asked to do it on a 2 weeks on/1 week off basis.
Pat Says:
May 30th, 2007 at 9:28 am
goulnik: Having used your full intermediate transcripts extensively its evident that you already are at quite an advanced level gramatically. Are your 10 minute calls also at that high level or do you find your structural understanding is way ahead of your ability to converse and be understood?
I think that CPOD is obviously trying to adjust the input/output imbalance but I think most of us are drowning in input. Those lucky enough to be in a Chinese environment seem to progress well (viz. Lantian) but others I note from blogs and comment columns hit some big hurdles (viz. Bazza)which it takes a lot to overcome (and not go insane or be ultimately discouraged).
I am just getting more and more convinced that one-on-one guidance is really the only way to go. OK; Use CPOD as a basis for great yǔ kuài but only with personal instruction as an adjunct will most folks succeed in getting the most out of what is an excellent starting point in a long journey.
goulnik (郭力毅) Says:
May 31st, 2007 at 12:42 am
Pat, I replied to your question in another conversation but I certainly do feel I’m drowning in input. But that is somewhat abstract input as I don’t live in a Chinese environment. What the practice plan does is kind of a reality check, making sure I constantly get to use the stuff, if only for a short time.
goulnik (郭力毅) Says:
May 31st, 2007 at 12:44 am
it looks like the link I posted above didn’t work so here goes, quoting myself
Pat Says:
May 31st, 2007 at 2:11 am
goulnik,
Thanks for sharing your learning approach. Being outside of a chinese speaking world I think requires a constant reprocessing of input in different ways to achieve realistic conversation.
For me I have found it takes 10 to 12 iterations of the same grammar pattern or lexical chunk to be able to retrieve it spontaneously when needed; otherwise one tends to take the conversation in a circuitous route to ones statement goal with “familiar fill in” phrases just so the interchange does’nt grind to a halt or revert to english.
My goal is to be at intermediate level at some future date for conversation only rather than advanced, after all,most chinese I have interacted with speak english to some extent and can always supply the word or phrase that may be lacking.
I’ll cerainly give the CPOD practice plan a shot.
Be good to hear from others whether the practice plan is of benefit in the long term or like the benefits of the French revolution it may be too soon to tell (Saul 2007)
AuntySue Says:
June 4th, 2007 at 6:03 pm
JimmyB, I copy the PDF onto my SDCard, and read it with PalmPDF which is free and excellent. In order to see Chinese characters, you need to purchase CJKOS, but you can try it first and it will work for about a month before you have to pay for it. By the way, for writing Chinese, CJKOS is the best input method I’ve tried, on any platorm.
Personally I dodge PDFs like the plague, they are inefficient huge files, primarily concerned with page layout. I’m interested in data, not fluff. I like to save the characters to a text file, convert it to GB2312 (or Big5 in my case) and simply read/edit that text file on my PDA with a text editor (txtMemo is excellent and free). Again, you need to buy CJKOS to read or write characters. Everything else you can get at freewarepalm.com
If you want to know more, let’s chat at the Forum where there’s already a lot of info about using PDAs for learning Chinese. Look on the Statistics page there, you’ll see it listed under the most-viewed topics.
goulnik (郭力毅) Says:
June 5th, 2007 at 7:30 pm
AuntySue, since you dodge PDFs I’m not sure why to go through the trouble of converting them to GB or Big5 when you’re now able to get the straight html version (thx to V3.)
AuntySue Says:
June 6th, 2007 at 5:23 pm
Because,…
Converting the encoding is easy, almost automatic, on a mac or unix system. While you’re doing save-as you can select whatever encoding you like.
The HTML version is simplified not traditional and UTF8 not the GB2312/Big5 which the Palm requires
The html idea is great, but only useful when tied to my desk at home
A text file can work out a thousandth of the size of a pdf, and use correspondingly less PDA memory to store and display, and be correspondingly quicker, and as a bonus it’s editable on the PDA as well.
Actually, there’s no really easy way to get my study onto a PDA in a useful format, but some things, like PDFs, make it a whole lot harder. Using the computer to read them doesn’t help, because as well as being non-portable, my computer’s CPU is half the speed of my PDA’s. That’s appropriate, because I mainly use it as a file transfer device, and use the PDA as my primary desktop.
goulnik (郭力毅) Says:
June 6th, 2007 at 7:06 pm
As a matter of fact, there is is an html version in traditional characters (see details so saving it as text from any browser should be a piece of cake
AuntySue Says:
June 7th, 2007 at 4:45 am
Oh? I still can’t find it, I can only see simplified in html.
Oh, wait, NOW I get it. I tried guessing that URL variant a few weeks ago and it didn’t work, but it does now! How come the link from the trad PDF takes me to the simplified version?
MarkT Says:
June 7th, 2007 at 9:33 am
The traditional HTMLs are spotty before lesson index 0496 (I only found 11), but 0496 and onward they are present.
trevelyan Says:
June 7th, 2007 at 3:35 pm
That was exactly the turning point, Mark. We added the traditional HTML docs quietly after the transition to V3. The files are now being generated automatically by the backend lesson preparation system. We simply haven’t gone back to produce them for the entire archive.
An archive-wide revision like this would be a big deal, and probably won’t happen until we have a separate download section for all of the lesson files. We’d also need to finalize the HTML format and probably explore ways to make it more usable (ie. Carl’s dynamic CSS). Thing are changing on an ongoing basis now - if people compare the older HTML docs with the newer ones the improvements should be visible (speakers, proper punctuation, capitalization, etc.).
@AuntySue - the links in both PDF files aren’t actually to the HTML files themselves, which is why both redirect to the simplified page. The reason for the redirect is to avoid “breaking” the link to the HTML documents if we change the way we’re storing the data internally. I don’t think we’ll be able to make too much progress in usability here until we have a separate downloads section on the site.