[xtm-wg] Re: Agenda for Dallas

[Andrius Kulikauskas <ms@ms.lt>]

"Steven R. Newcomb" wrote:
> I do not believe we will all "get" either model in only half a day of
> discussion.  What we face here is a mutual language-acquisition
> problem.  The most efficient language-acquisition technique is
> immersion.  The immersion technique of language acquisition is to
> prohibit discourse in any language other than the language that is to
> be acquired.  If you can't ask a question using the language you're
> attempting to acquire, that's good: learn the language, so you can ask
> the question.  That may involve asking a lot of other questions.
> That's good, too.  It's all language-acquisition.

I agree with the need for time to understand the models.  The total
amount of time we have isn't going to change regardless of how we carve
it up.  But large blocks of time encourage open-ended discussion, which
I don't think is our situation.  We gave ourselves a deadline precisely
because it forces closure. 

I think the goal of all of us "acquiring" two languages in two days is
ambitious, maybe needlessly so.  A more modest goal is that we are able
to check "compatibility" of the two languages, each of us to whatever
degree we feel qualified.  I imagine there is a wide spectrum as to how
much each of us feels qualified to contribute.  I feel I'll be able to
help in small ways, so my point of view is not that important, but I
feel like speaking out now, rather than at the meeting.

Judging from the meetings that I attended, in San Jose and Montreal, our
meetings are productive over all, but degenerate at times, get stuck. 
Looking back, maybe that works, but it doesn't always feel that way at
the time. 

I liked the CMS presentation in Montreal, and I'd appreciate very much
if we started with such presentations.   

As far as "learning a language", part of the logic of immersion is that
you are actually doing something else, not "trying to learn a
language".  For example, I'll get better immersed learning the Chinese
language if I'm learning to cook Chinese food, or to use Chinese
medicine.  You don't get immersed if you don't have any way of using the
language.

In our case, I think we're looking to find or create compatibility
between the CMS and ISS views.  That's why we're using the languages. 
So I think it makes perfect sense, as we're trying to learn each
language, to have such a practical goal in mind.  That certainly makes
my mind more interested in the languages.  I have to find something to
get me interested in the languages, so it should be something relevant,
otherwise I'll go completely off-track.  And that's completely
unnecessary.  In this case, though, I need to know at least a little bit
about both.  Maybe for others that's not true.

Steve, you already know all of the issues.  I don't know them at all. 
Maybe many of us are somewhere in between.  But I think hearing the
overall work and structure of both views, and only then having
sympathetic discussion and exploration - trying to learn the language,
while in the back of the mind, noting the issues and considering
solutions - will be most efficient.  This way we can start the third day
with a quick statement of what the issues are, because throughout day 2
we'll have been noting these issue.  The way you have it, I think we'll
have to spend a lot of time on day 3 cataloguing the issues, at least
half a day, and so I wonder how we'll find time to solve them.  The way
I have it, somebody could even have all those issues written up for us
by the start of day 3.  So day 3 would be reserved for solutions, and if
we're doing well, end with a review of all of the work.

If these arguments don't carry any weight, then I would suggest it would
be good that along with your agenda you make explicit the rules as to
how we should conduct ourselves during discussion.  Also, the
chairpersons (peace pipe holders?) should have the right to make
exceptions to these rules.  There was way too much "meta-discussion" at
the Montreal meeting, in my opinion, and too little preparation as to
the structure of the meeting.  I think the more thoughtfully we
structure the meeting, the more boldly we can improvise.

Yours,

Andrius
Minciu Sodas
ms@ms.lt
http://www.ms.lt
+1 (773) 651-3785 or 586-6280

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/337252/_/973557895/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

To Post a message, send it to:   xtm-wg@eGroups.com

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: xtm-wg-unsubscribe@eGroups.com