Tag Archives: Paris

How do you learn French? ALL THE WAYS!

Posted on by
2

blah

One of my favourite things about travelling is learning the local language. And while previously I’ve mentioned the basics you should learn when arriving in a foreign country, I’ve been in France long enough to start focussing on more sophisticated conversations with the hopes that I will be able to work in French soon.

There’s a standard framework used for European language learning called the CEFR. This explains some of the competencies expected at each level. Language schools tend to teach you a curriculum based on particular levels. My French, to my knowledge, is somewhere in the B1-B2 range, depending on what I’m talking about, and with whom. For work purposes I should ideally be in the C1 or C2 range, so there’s still a lot for me to work on.

Meanwhile, I seem to be able to function in French, more or less. I can buy things in shops, order food at restaurants, have basic conversations about who I am and what I’m doing in France with minimal issues. I am starting to ask more complex questions and I surprise myself with the concepts I’m able to convey. I can understand most of what is said to me, at least the general topic area and the sentiment.

So far, my French education involved 6 years of classes in school (ages 12-18), and when I first arrived in Paris in April, I took classes at the Alliance Française for 3 months to try and bring back what I’d forgotten from my teenage years. I was away over the summer, and didn’t practice during that time at all, really. (Bad me!) So there was a little backsliding in terms of my skills when I returned in November. But after a week or two I think I was back at where I had been in June.

In November I decided that I wanted to focus on my spoken French for a while, since I can already read and write reasonably well. I needed to get my verbal French up to the same standard.

Of course, I don’t have the money for a French tutor to really work with me every day, or even French lessons so I have to find other solutions.

So, what have I been doing other than lessons?

  • I have moved in with French flatmates. Even if the daily conversations are only a few minutes of ‘Are you using the washing machine now?’ or ‘By the way, I will have a friend visiting for a few nights next week’, every little bit forces me to think about how I would express myself in French, and they speak only French to me. Even finding a place to live was an adventure of calling up in French and meeting them speaking only in French. Deciphering ads on Le Bon Coin (the French equivalent of Craigslist) was entertaining, too.
  • I ALWAYS try French first. At the bank, at the supermarket, at the train station, at the internet café. Everywhere. I assume the person I’m interacting with knows no English, even if I know they speak some. You’d be surprised at how much you can express if you just try and use a few key words. Also, I’m very good at gesturing. In fact if they respond in English (because I’m a foreigner with an accent), I often keep trying the French despite their English efforts. I am determined to communicate in French if I possibly can!
  • I found a wonderful conversation group: l’Arc. It’s a group of native French retirees who provide an environment where you can go and practice your French with other non-native French speakers from all over the world. At each table there’s a French person to guide the conversation, welcome new people to the table, and to help provide corrections when required. It’s on 5 afternoons a week, and they even organise weekend trips every few months to see more of the countryside. I try to make it there most days for at least 2-3 hours at a time. It helps to have some degree of fluency, though. To begin with I sat and listened a lot, but these days I interact much more.
  • The Polyglot Club has also been incredibly useful. This is an organisation where you can get in touch with people who want to participate in language exchange events. You can find native French speakers who want to learn English, for example. I go semi-regularly to some of the evening events and over a beverage I chat with French natives in French, then in English. Or Polish, or whatever other language I want to practice. The website also provides resources to help correct written works. But be careful because not all of the corrections are done by native speakers.
  • Also through Polyglot and My Language Exchange I have connected with people for one-on-one language exchanges. We meet for a drink, or lunch, and spend half the time speaking French, and half English. The one-on-one nature means you get more personal feedback, but also it means you need to be lucky to click with the person so the dynamic works between the two of you. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t. Thankfully, as a native English speaker I’m in demand and could probably meet someone new every week if I needed to.  Exchanges can happen in person, via IM, phone or Skype, depending on your preference.
  • I consume lots of the media. I watch French TV and news, I listen to French radio, I read newspapers. Usually, I’m terrible at keeping on top of current affairs in English-speaking countries. Here, I’m better simply because I’m using it as yet another resource to help understand the language.
  • I love watching French films and reading books which I already read in English before. Currently, I’m making my way through Bridget Jones’ Diary 2: The Age of Reason. In French. Booyah. Lots of slang, but because I’ve read the book and seen the movie, I think i understand a lot more than I might otherwise.
  • I do local courses. In an interesting twist, I’ve been volunteering at a swing dance school. So I attend dance classes, even beginner ones which are well below by skill level, to learn French. Arguably, much of the vocabulary I learn is specific to the domain of dancing, and I’m not sure how often I will need to describe keeping your core straight but rotating your hips in other circumstances. But I’m sure even the brief interactions with the teachers and other students are helpful from the perspective of learning French social interactions and how interactions differ here. I’m also finding it interesting to try and diagnose the beginners’ mistakes, and attempt to explain how to do it better in French.
  • I plan to also join a ukulele practice group when it stops conflicting with my schedule. And in that vein I’m listening to and learning to play some French songs.
  • There are dozens of mobile applications to make use of too, for vocabulary and to practice grammar. These are great when you have a few minutes to kill on the train, for example, or waiting for a bus.
  • I’ve dabbled with online resources like Duolingo and LiveMocha, but honestly, for me interactive activities work better. Online stuff rarely retains my attention for long.
  • I have also listened to a lot of mp3s (Pimsleur, BBC Active Talk 2) especially while walking somewhere or working out at the gym. Definitely good ways to make the most of your time.
  • Finally, one of my evil plans is to translate these blog posts into French, too, (with the help of my French friends, of course). Stay tuned!

What am I missing? What have been your most effective language-learning techniques? 🙂

Protests.

Posted on by
4

protest

France is known for being a country where people stand up for what they believe in. It’s a country of protests. It’s a country of going on strike when necessary. That makes sense to me.

Today, there’s a large anti-gay-marriage protest happening in Paris, and, to be honest, I just don’t understand.

Can someone please explain to me how being against gay marriage makes sense?
The arguments I’ve heard are that:

 
1. Marriage is traditionally between a man and a woman.

Really? The bible spoke of many forms of marriage, often with many wives, or the sale of people being involved. A more recent flavour of the week has been marriage between a man and a woman. Perceptions and beliefs evolve. Surely we should promote ‘marriage’ as a union between two individuals who want to be committed to each other and potentially raise children together in a loving and committed environment?

2. Children should be raised by both a father and a mother.

Firstly, why? Countless people have been raised in non-traditional households and been fine. Also, countless people have been raised in a ‘traditional’ household and turned out to be gay (not that there’s anything wrong with that, but arguing against gay marriage suggests that there is), or much worse.

Secondly, studies show that the best thing for children is a stable household. Single-parent-raised children have more social issues growing up, as do children of divorced parents. There is NO research suggesting that being raised in a same-sex parent household affects the quality of their upbringing. The main factors that contribute to child wellbeing are stability of  the caregivers’ relationship, and other factors such as family income and time spent with the children. It happens that most ‘stable’ families with consistent family structure tend to be of the traditional structure. But that’s because most people tend to be in heterosexual relationships. That doesn’t invalidate the quality of the potential family in a same-sex parent situation.

If you want to argue that it’s so that children are shown both aspects of gender, you’re horribly misguided. ‘Gender’ is a complex term these days. And even if there were only a ‘male’ and a ‘female’ version, does that mean the man has to be the family breadwinner and the woman the homemaker? Are you implying that families where the man is the stay-at-home-husband are no longer fit to raise children? Or single parents? Should we take these children away from their parents because these families do not conform to the stereotypical view of a ‘family’ that you are trying to perpetuate? Should we ban divorce?

And if these family examples are ok, why not same-sex parents? People who are ready for parenthood (emotionally, financially and otherwise) and who want to raise children are probably much better suited to parenthood than a traditional couple who fall pregnant by accident before they have the resources set up for a family.

3. A man and woman family is the ‘natural’ thing.

What do you mean by ‘natural’? It occurs by itself in nature? Gay people aren’t made in labs, you know. They occur naturally in society and have done for thousands of years. Not just in humanity, either.

And since when does humanity only do the conventionally ‘natural’ thing? Should we shun all medications because they don’t grow on a bush? Since when is it ‘natural’ to sit in a plane seat for 6 hours or more and move at close to the speed of sound to go visit another country?

 

4. A man+woman family is the truth.

I’ve seen posters for the anti-gay marriage movement which say ‘On ne ment pas aux enfants’, ‘We don’t lie to the children’. I take issue with that concept. By telling your children that families only exist as a man+woman+children = family concept, you are lying. There are other options.

Also, you’re implying that same-sex couples would lie to their children. They would have no reason to. In fact, if anything, they’re being more honest by saying that people sometimes don’t conform to convention. A child raised in a same-sex parent household would surely be told that it has a biological mother and father, but that the parents it has at the moment are the ones that love it most and look after it, no matter what happens. If anything, a heterosexual adoptive couple would have more motivation to lie about the child’s biological parents.

———————–

A question for you anti-gay-marriage conservatives, too:

Why do you care?

Why would you go to the point of protesting this issue? It doesn’t change or invalidate heterosexual marriage. If anything, it promotes the idea of long-term commitment, which is by far a more useful and heart-warming concept than anything else on the table here.

It doesn’t improve your marriage to stop someone else getting married! Nor does it make it more worthwhile. Why would you be against people who love each other officially committing to one another under the eyes of the law and getting the same benefits as any other couple?

I just don’t understand. From all logical standpoints it just doesn’t make sense. Why do you care?

It just looks like bigotry to me.