[HN Gopher] Language learning with Netflix
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Language learning with Netflix
        
       Author : skanderbm
       Score  : 283 points
       Date   : 2021-06-07 10:30 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (languagelearningwithnetflix.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (languagelearningwithnetflix.com)
        
       | kubb wrote:
       | > Immersion doesn't mean you have to pack your bags and move to
       | Europe.
       | 
       | Joke's on you, I've lived in Europe my whole life.
        
         | framecowbird wrote:
         | Good news, now you no longer have to!
        
         | bluGill wrote:
         | Too bad my target language isn't spoken in Europe (or my home
         | country)
        
       | sweetheart wrote:
       | I run a language learning app (leerly.io) which focuses on
       | teaching language through comprehensible input, which seems to be
       | at least somewhat how LLwN is approaching the problem of language
       | acquisition. For those interested in how to get the most out of
       | language learning tools like LLwN, some tips which are backed up
       | by the field of applied linguistics:
       | 
       | - Don't translate! If you do, do so very sparingly. It sounds
       | counter-intuitive, but stopping to translate often will just slow
       | you down. That's because...
       | 
       | - The most important thing is just experiencing the language. You
       | need hundreds and hundreds of hours listening to the language to
       | really start to acquire it. Comprehension is inevitable, just
       | optimize for time spent listening/reading.
       | 
       | - Avoid speaking. This has shown to actually hinder the process
       | of acquiring a language. Speaking is the natural result of having
       | learned a language. You'll notice when you're ready to start
       | speaking a little because you'll occasionally have thoughts in
       | your target language. Until then, speaking practice is virtually
       | useless.
       | 
       | Maybe these will help you, as they've definitely helped me learn
       | Spanish. Buena suerte :)
       | 
       | Note: These tips are also only for people who want to learn a
       | language to fluency. If you just want to learn enough to order at
       | a restaurant, that's a different ballgame.
        
         | resonious wrote:
         | I'm curious, do you know of any research (or even just
         | anecdotes) showing that speaking practice is bad? I've heard
         | the claim before but never seen any evidence for it.
         | 
         | In my own experience, it feels like speaking helps improve my
         | speaking a lot. Sure it doesn't help me pick up new phrases or
         | grammar at all, but the first time I say something always comes
         | out horrible, before getting progressively better as I say it
         | more. And there's the skill of utilizing a limited vocabulary
         | to communicate complex ideas. That's another thing that I feel
         | has gotten better as I exercise it through speech.
        
           | sweetheart wrote:
           | I'll try to dig up the original study I found months ago,
           | talking about correlation between speaking practice and
           | language acquisition in Japanese students learning English.
           | When controlling for method of study, the researchers noted
           | that students who tended to speak more ended up doing _worse_
           | on final exams. This could potentially be explained by the
           | tendency for early speakers to way over-focus on correctness,
           | which slows the whole process.
           | 
           | In the meantime, this book by Krashen may be of interest! He
           | touches on some of the same ideas, roughly. Notably, around
           | page 100 or so, he starts to define what he would consider
           | his ideal learning environment: http://www.sdkrashen.com/cont
           | ent/books/sl_acquisition_and_le...
        
             | kwhitefoot wrote:
             | > students who tended to speak more ended up doing _worse_
             | on final exams.
             | 
             | It is possible that this simply tells us that the final
             | exam was only or primarily a written one. I know it is not
             | directly comparable but my children learnt Norwegian
             | starting at age 3 1/2 (after they already spoke English)
             | without any formal instruction at all, just by speaking
             | with other children and the staff at the kindergarten.
        
             | verst wrote:
             | > the researchers noted that students who tended to speak
             | more ended up doing _worse_ on final exams
             | 
             | Surely those exams focus on literary analysis or advanced
             | grammar structures.
             | 
             | Who is the better speaker of a language? The person who can
             | carry simple (daily life topics) conversations fluently or
             | the person who knows pedantic language constructs but can
             | only utter them with significant delays and only speak in
             | chunks of a few sentences?
             | 
             | Knowing a language and being able to speak it are different
             | things. I agree you have to know it (understand grammar and
             | vocabulary) before it makes sense to practice speaking it.
             | Until you are forced to quickly think on your feet in
             | another language your speaking ability won't progress much.
        
         | Rompect wrote:
         | Muchas gracias!
        
           | sweetheart wrote:
           | !De nada, tio!
        
         | kapp_in_life wrote:
         | Thanks for the tips.
         | 
         | One thing I've noticed helps me learning language has been
         | working hard to imagine the physical thing as opposed to the
         | english equivalent word. That is imagining a shiny red apple
         | when learning "manzana" instead of the word "apple". Always
         | wondered if theres anything to back this sort of approach up or
         | its just different learning styles.
        
           | sweetheart wrote:
           | Oh totally, I've wondered the exact same thing. I started
           | messing around with that on leerly, and there are a couple
           | articles with a feature called Storybook, where images appear
           | as the user is speaking, to help build the association
           | between the foreign word/sound with an image, rather than the
           | associated word in your target language.
           | 
           | I have no idea if it's effective, I just think it'd be cool
           | to see how it helps with learning grammar. I def want to
           | experiment more with it, but it takes a fair amount of time
           | to add images to all the articles.
        
         | derriz wrote:
         | I disagree with nearly all of your advice and tips. And I'd be
         | very surprised if they reflected actual scientific findings in
         | linguistics.
         | 
         | The least objectionable is the "don't translate" tip but even
         | there I think you've gotten it wrong - translating isn't the
         | issue - avoiding the trap of getting bogged down in trying to
         | translate _precisely_ or being a perfectionist. But you
         | definitely have to maintain some understanding of the context
         | in order to get any value from subsequent exposure.
         | 
         | I fully disagree that you can acquire language just by osmosis
         | - that it's enough to just listen to a language for hundreds of
         | hours. Do you really think that if I isolated myself with
         | hundreds of hours of say Mandarin audio recordings, TV shows
         | and newspapers and novels and spent 40 hours a week listening
         | to the recordings or staring at written text, that in a few
         | months I would acquire the language? I mean if this actually
         | worked, learning second languages wouldn't even be seen as a
         | challenge or task.
         | 
         | It takes thousands of hours of active "work" with a second
         | language to acquire it (although the data is patchy), not
         | hundreds of hours of passive "experiencing".
         | 
         | And avoiding speaking is terrible advice. It's been shown to
         | provide a huge boost to language acquisition. I know people who
         | can read and comprehend the spoken form of a second language at
         | a reasonably high level (C2) but can barely speak it. Speaking
         | will not just "happen" if you don't actively practice it.
         | 
         | If you honestly did manage to acquire fluent Spanish purely by
         | just passively "experiencing" the language, then I'm guessing
         | your first language is closely related one - one of the romance
         | languages.
        
           | ehaliewicz2 wrote:
           | > Do you really think that if I isolated myself with hundreds
           | of hours of say Mandarin audio recordings, TV shows and
           | newspapers and novels and spent 40 hours a week listening to
           | the recordings or staring at written text, that in a few
           | months I would acquire the language?
           | 
           | Yes, it does work, according to various accounts I've seen,
           | although 40 hours for a few months might not quite be enough
           | (the usual figure is around 18 months of full-time immersion,
           | and more is obviously better), and this is actually quite
           | challenging to do for long periods of time (esp. without
           | distracting yourself with your native language excessively)
           | and that's why it can be a challenge.
           | 
           | >not hundreds of hours of passive "experiencing".
           | 
           | It's on the hour of thousands, not hundreds. There are
           | people, especially in the refold community, who have reached
           | fluency in languages very different from their native, with
           | mostly input (active output is part of the equation, but it
           | can be done later, after your comprehension is very high).
           | 
           | >Speaking will not just "happen" if you don't actively
           | practice it.
           | 
           | Yes, you do need to practice speaking to get good at
           | speaking. But from aforementioned accounts, this process can
           | be quite fast after a high level of comprehension has been
           | gained.
           | 
           | I can confirm that for myself, over the past half year or so,
           | increasing the amount of input I get every day has greatly
           | accelerated my japanese learning process, versus the previous
           | year, where I got far fewer hours in (1, maybe 2 hours a day
           | at most, versus my current 4+ hours every day), although I'm
           | not fluent yet.
           | 
           | In just that time I went from barely being able to read, and
           | only being able to understand simple beginner podcasts to
           | being able to fully understand easier shows (stuff for adults
           | is still mostly out of my reach), and understand most of all
           | the podcasts I listen to, (as long as I'm actually focused on
           | the audio, if I'm passively listening I don't understand as
           | much). My reading hasn't improved as much, as I spend
           | probably 80% of the time listening/watching shows versus
           | reading, but I can read basic manga easily now, and I'm
           | working on reading through some essays now, novels still
           | seems massively difficult, but we'll see in another couple
           | months.
           | 
           | I've found that many hours of audio input each day have
           | greatly improved my ability to keep up with native-speed
           | speaking, although for increasing my comprehension, intensive
           | study (making sure I understand each line in a show, or
           | careful reading) is more effective per unit of time. I have
           | no doubt you could acquire the same results as intensive
           | study with enough exposure to the language though, as I've
           | seen it happen with myself before I tried adding intensive
           | study, it would just take more time.
           | 
           | Most people wouldn't call 4 hours a day massive though, so I
           | can probably still increase my rate of improvement if I find
           | more time to use.
        
             | derriz wrote:
             | > Yes, it does work, according to various accounts I've
             | seen, although 40 hours for a few months might not quite be
             | enough (the usual figure is around 18 months of full-time
             | immersion, and more is obviously better)
             | 
             | Could you provide a reference to these studies or accounts?
             | 
             | The original claim was a second language can be acquire by
             | hundreds of hours of passive "experiencing". Your claim of
             | 18 months full time is more like 6,000 hours if by full-
             | time you mean all-day. This is more than an order of
             | magnitude more than the original claim and 2 to 5 times
             | more than then numbers I've seen in studies on how many
             | hours it takes to achieve C1 level in a second language
             | using regular teaching/learning techniques. There is
             | significant variance depending on the the relationship
             | between the learner's first language and the L2.
             | 
             | So even if it worked (and I'm dubious - learning anything
             | requires some effort/active practice) spending 7,000 hours
             | of passive "experiencing" would be a hugely inefficient way
             | to learn a language.
        
               | ehaliewicz2 wrote:
               | Perhaps we are having some miscommunication here. I don't
               | know if the original poster was making a precise
               | statement when they said "hundreds and hundreds of hours"
               | anyway.
               | 
               | >Could you provide a reference to these studies or
               | accounts? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxYZvMByRjU&lis
               | t=PLT9cfjU1yk...
               | 
               | I haven't watched any of these videos in a while so I
               | don't remember which ones are good, and it's a lot to go
               | through, sorry about that. But there are some accounts
               | here of people who have followed "mostly-input" style
               | methods. I don't think any of them are 100% passive input
               | though, and I'm not sure anybody argued that is the best
               | way to do it.
               | 
               | I also seem to remember a study I found recently on
               | whether uncomprehensible input works for language
               | acquisition with very interesting results, but I cannot
               | find it right now.
               | 
               | >spending 7,000 hours of passive "experiencing" would be
               | a hugely inefficient way to learn a language
               | 
               | The efficiency really depends on if it's something you
               | want to do or not, but I don't know if anybody is doing a
               | full 12 hours a day (maybe some super hardcore people). I
               | believe it's closer to 6, maybe 8 hours if you're very
               | serious about it and have the time.
               | 
               | >learning anything requires some effort/active practice
               | 
               | Yes, you need to actually try to understand what you're
               | listening to at least part of the time, maybe most of the
               | time, which means you need to be actually interested in
               | the content, otherwise you will get bored quickly. But
               | passive listening while you are doing other things
               | definitely helps in combination with active study.
               | 
               | I'm not sure if we're using "passive" in the same way
               | though. Actively focusing on, and trying to understand
               | what you are listening to isn't what I'd call passive.
        
         | zolland wrote:
         | > The most important thing is just experiencing the language.
         | You need hundreds and hundreds of hours listening to the
         | language to really start to acquire it. Comprehension is
         | inevitable, just optimize for time spent listening/reading
         | 
         | Listening with or without subtitles? I've been trying to figure
         | out if watching content in another language with English
         | subtitles actually helps me at all...
        
           | sweetheart wrote:
           | Nope, no subtitles in your mother language. Only your target
           | language. It's okay if you don't understand a lot, what
           | matters is exposing yourself to the sounds and sights of the
           | language, and the general message of what is being conveyed
           | ("I don't know exactly what they just said, but they seemed
           | pissed and they said 'mierda' a lot, so maybe that means
           | something bad").
           | 
           | Ideally, you'll want to focus on material where you can
           | understand the majority of what is being said, through
           | subtitles or just listening. If you find you can't do that,
           | try watching something that would be easier to understand.
        
         | solarmist wrote:
         | "Avoid speaking" This is 100% a myth. The Defense Language
         | Institute comprehensively disproved this in the mid-1970's.
         | 
         | I know this because it's discussed on the first day of classes
         | at DLI as for why you need to learn to speak the language not
         | just hear and read it. Because my job title was voice intercept
         | operator.
         | 
         | Pre-1976 the Defense Language Institute did not score or rate
         | students speaking ability because only reading and listening
         | were considered mission critical skills.
         | 
         | Post-1976 it was considered a mission critical skill because it
         | had such a dramatic effect on students final listening and
         | reading abilities during the culminating Defense Language
         | Proficiency Test (DLPT). Subsequently an Oral Proficiency
         | Interview (OPI) was developed and is considered an integral
         | part of the DLPT.
         | 
         | Note: This was all direct, primary research done at the Defense
         | Language Institute with thousands of participants annually, so
         | it was direct cause and effect experiment.
         | 
         | It's hard to find the specific research results summarizing
         | this, but here's one example from that time period.
         | https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1975-10458-001
        
           | dnautics wrote:
           | The DLI has a different set of motivations: bring as many
           | analysts to a working level of proficiency within a fixed
           | time period, and has a lot of other things that confound this
           | analysis: it's totally ok for the DLI to wash out some
           | percentage of trainees in each flight, they can pre-screen
           | candidates into whatever language they think is a best fit
           | depending on candidates latent aptitudes, etc.
           | 
           | There is a universe where both pieces of advice can be right;
           | surely you can imagine "don't worry about speaking" advice
           | might be reasonable for someone who is learning casually, has
           | no hard time frame to learn, wants to learn in dribbles and
           | maximally passively, for whom a partial fluency might be a
           | reasonable endpoint, and the greatest risk is burnout from
           | negative reinforcement of failure.
        
             | foldr wrote:
             | There's a lot of wishful thinking around language learning.
             | The idea that some part of it will "just happen" naturally
             | is very appealing. The unfortunate reality is that you meed
             | lots of practice at everything: speaking, listening,
             | reading and writing. You won't improve significantly at any
             | one of those skills without many hundreds of hours of
             | practice.
        
               | dnautics wrote:
               | I interpreted the GGP to mean something like: think about
               | how you learn your first language -- you spend a ton of
               | time listening before trying to speak. Don't focus on
               | speaking so soon. I don't think that is so much "wishful
               | thinking" as an interesting strategy to consider.
               | 
               | I'd do it for spanish, but I can't find star trek with
               | (latam) spanish audio.
        
               | ehaliewicz2 wrote:
               | Massive amounts of listening and reading is practice :)
        
               | foldr wrote:
               | Yes. It will make you better at listening and reading,
               | but not at speaking.
        
               | ehaliewicz2 wrote:
               | Yes, like speaking will not make you better at
               | comprehension, although comprehension is required to have
               | any meaningful conversation. Speaking needs to be
               | practiced, but input and understanding comes first.
               | 
               | I'm pretty sure the originally poster did not mean to
               | never speak at all. But just not to worry about it for a
               | while.
        
               | [deleted]
        
             | emodendroket wrote:
             | Those are all different claims than the original post was
             | making though.
        
             | solarmist wrote:
             | "Don't speak" is a myth and by not speaking you are
             | hindering your own learning. Dr. Krashen's advice was taken
             | out of context. It was not meant as general advice not to
             | speak.
             | 
             | If you personally don't care and don't wish to speak that's
             | fine, but don't try to promote that as advice on how to get
             | the most out of studying a language.
        
           | sweetheart wrote:
           | Not according to the research I've done -\\_(tsu)_/-, or my
           | own experiences.
           | 
           | EDIT: As I linked below, here is Krashen on the subject - htt
           | p://www.sdkrashen.com/content/articles/down_with_forced_s...
        
             | anbende wrote:
             | Right but as has been pointed out elsewhere, the linked
             | article does not say to avoid speaking. Instead it says to
             | avoid a strong focus on forced speech in a classroom, which
             | likely means the sorts of repetition exercises that many of
             | us remember from adolescence. That is very different from
             | not trying to use the language productively at all.
        
               | solarmist wrote:
               | Right. Making students repeat and memorize sentences that
               | are beyond their current ability is detrimental.
               | 
               | Think of it this way. If I gave you a paragraph in
               | Turkish (or insert language X) to memorize and recite
               | that's very different than giving you some greetings and
               | responses to memorize and recite.
               | 
               | For the first there is no mental model for where the
               | paragraph fits in or how it's constructed. In the second
               | almost everyone has some experience learning greetings in
               | a couple of languages just by exposure to pop culture, so
               | even if you don't understand the specifics of how those
               | phrases work you have some confidence in how to employ
               | them and you'll generally feel somewhat confident in
               | being able to break them down later if you need to
               | because greetings done in short and simple language.
        
           | commandlinefan wrote:
           | I was surprised to see that suggestion as well: every
           | language course I've ever seen focuses on memorizing a
           | (relatively) natural dialog and reciting it word for word
           | from memory as its primary means of targeting fluency. I
           | don't know about the research OP cites, but I've found that,
           | for me, memorizing the dialogues as the courses suggest have
           | been by far the most helpful way to advance in language
           | acquisition. I will admit, though, that of the foreign
           | languages I do speak, I speak them better than I understand
           | them... so maybe there is something to this.
        
         | jjallen wrote:
         | Sure, don't translate, but the input also has to be
         | comprehensible. So there is always a challenge of not seeing
         | the translation but still understanding. If you never look
         | something up, there are some words you will never know. There
         | is a balance, and that balance is hard to find.
        
           | sweetheart wrote:
           | True, a lot of it depends on personal preference, too. I
           | think the idea is to not worry about understanding 100%. Even
           | just 70% could be fine! Or just the gist or emotion of the
           | text could be enough.
        
             | solarmist wrote:
             | This is wildly misleading advice. Using materials with
             | comprehension below 80% is a massive waste of time.
             | 
             | Will you learn something? Yes probably, but will it be time
             | and effort efficient? Not even slightly!
             | 
             | At 80-95% it can be productive if you're putting forth a
             | lot of effort, but comprehensible input assumes
             | comprehension above 95% for passive learning of materials.
             | 
             | To demonstrate what different (reading in this case)
             | comprehension levels will get you take a look at this[1].
             | 
             | [1] https://www.sinosplice.com/life/archives/2016/08/25/wha
             | t-80-...
        
         | emptysongglass wrote:
         | > - Avoid speaking. This has shown to actually hinder the
         | process of acquiring a language. Speaking is the natural result
         | of having learned a language. You'll notice when you're ready
         | to start speaking a little because you'll occasionally have
         | thoughts in your target language. Until then, speaking practice
         | is virtually useless.
         | 
         | This has to be the most counterproductive advice I've ever
         | heard. You need to start speaking as soon as possible. There's
         | no other trick to learning a language than forcing yourself to
         | speak.
         | 
         | For some it's easier because they're less socially anxious. For
         | others it will be more difficult. I was in the latter camp
         | learning Danish. You have to make friends with your fear or you
         | will forever be stuck in what many language learners refer to
         | as a "quiet period". I was for a decade (!!!) If you don't
         | start speaking you will forever have only an intellectual
         | understanding of the language.
         | 
         | So speak. Please speak. Early and often. Babies sound things
         | out early because they're trying to get a hold of it, the vocal
         | contortions required.
        
           | sweetheart wrote:
           | Hey, if it works for you, that's great! It's not necessarily
           | what the research I've done says, but I'm glad you found a
           | strategy that works for you.
           | 
           | EDIT: You may appreciate this - http://www.sdkrashen.com/cont
           | ent/articles/down_with_forced_s...
        
             | solarmist wrote:
             | The title even disagrees with your statement. And this
             | research is entirely focused on student anxiety. "Forced
             | output" is what the claim is against.
             | 
             | Even more specifically these studies are focused on
             | beginning students (i.e. 1st term students), so it is even
             | less applicable once you have some level of experience with
             | the language.
             | 
             | There is even a section on "How to promote speaking
             | fluency". He is 100% not advocating to avoid speaking, but
             | it talking about how speaking is a lagging indicator of
             | proficiency.
             | 
             | Speaking requires the integration of language skills, so it
             | will always lag behind other language skills. That does not
             | mean it should be avoided.
             | 
             | The Defense Language Institute (DLI) even formally
             | recognizes in its graduation requirements. The standard is
             | 2 Listening/2 Reading/1+ Speaking indicating that speaking
             | skills will generally lag behind reading and listening
             | skills by 1/2 a level.
        
           | solarmist wrote:
           | Now a result I can believe in this vein would be: "that
           | attempting to lean heavily on sentence construction and
           | grammar exercises to induce speaking could have a negative
           | effect on language acquisition" and that's what I believe
           | Stephen Krashen is actually advocating against.
           | 
           | But that's a very specific claim as opposed to "avoid
           | speaking".
        
           | ehaliewicz2 wrote:
           | You haven't really shown how speaking improves your
           | understanding or comprehension of a language.
           | 
           | Of course you need to speak to get good at speaking, I don't
           | think that's what the original poster meant. But rather that
           | you should focus on comprehension initially,because there's
           | not really much point to speaking to someone if you don't
           | know what you want to say and cannot understand the response.
        
         | triceratops wrote:
         | I started having thoughts in my target language _after_ I
         | started speaking. Until then it was just words on paper or on a
         | screen.
        
       | curiousgal wrote:
       | It might come as a surprise to some but subtitles on Netflix are
       | covered by a license agreement. Some are available in countries
       | and not in others. So this raises some interesting questions on
       | the legality of it all.
        
         | mikeweiss wrote:
         | As far as I'm aware it only provides subtitles that are
         | available for your market on Netflix. (I.E it uses netflix's
         | subtitles... it doesn't provide it's own.)
        
       | kerng wrote:
       | I am learning Mandarin and found this super useful when watching
       | shows. The ability to slow down and replay sentences quickly, as
       | well as show Pinying is great!
       | 
       | Just the other day I watched a Taiwanese movie called "Classmates
       | minus", which was quite good.
        
         | banada1 wrote:
         | I'm working on a language app and thinking about pivoting to
         | focus on Mandarin. I would love your feedback on the lesson
         | format:
         | 
         | https://chatlesson.com
        
       | pythonlion wrote:
       | suggestion: sometimes it is better to be challenged and not to
       | translate everything. I wish there was a way to only translate
       | some of the world with some dictionary of words you don't want to
       | translate.(you already know them)
        
         | Aditya_Garg wrote:
         | I built something based on that principle. It picks a couple
         | nouns from the subtitles and translates that. Its blanks
         | everything else out. You can still follow the story while
         | passively learning the nouns.
         | 
         | https://github.com/sutble/netflixlingo
        
         | maury91 wrote:
         | I'm working on a side project that does exactly that: translate
         | everything except some words.
         | 
         | When I will have something ready I will add a comment in this
         | thread
        
           | yorwba wrote:
           | Unless you're about to finish it today, you should probably
           | post it as a "Show HN", otherwise almost nobody is going to
           | see it.
        
           | Aditya_Garg wrote:
           | You can check out my project as well, which does something
           | similar.
           | 
           | https://github.com/sutble/netflixlingo
        
           | codethief wrote:
           | I really like this idea of leaving gaps every since I came
           | across the videos by ItsNachoTime / DeliberateSpanish. Here
           | is an example: https://youtu.be/7kbACgcnG8M?t=83
           | 
           | The idea is basically: Once the fill-in-the-blank text
           | appears, stop the video, try to recall the previous sentence
           | (letting the template help you) and repeat it until you can
           | articulate it fluently - that way, you will improve your
           | vocab but also train your hears, pronunciation and
           | intonation.
        
       | pferdone wrote:
       | As an active learner of the Turkish language this tool is really
       | held back by using Netflix' own subtitles. First of all if you go
       | to their website and u look for Turkish content, it only lists
       | shows created for the Turkish market, yet there's so much more
       | content available with Turkish dubs and subs like Ninjago,
       | Pokemon, Paw Patrol that likely have easier vocabulary, cause
       | it's target at kids. And yet again the subs sometimes hardly
       | match the dubs, which therefore doesn't help with hearing
       | comprehension at all. If anyone can suggest good alternatives to
       | practice hearing comprehension at different levels (even payed
       | ones) I would really appreciate it.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | arthurcolle wrote:
       | Are you allowed to use a private company's name like this? Not
       | trying to be annoying, just curious.
        
         | e_proxus wrote:
         | Usually most companies are okay if you have titles or names
         | like "X for Netflix". Some even explicitly state that they
         | prefer that. It's also a rule on the Apple App Stores that you
         | can't have a name like "Netflix X" to avoid confusion.
        
         | silverpepsi wrote:
         | Use a private company's name like saying "a printer cartridge
         | for HP laser" or "Toughshell TM case for iPhone 9"? I'd reckon
         | it's quite hard to sell anything specific if the law prevented
         | you from mentioning the thing your product fits or works with
         | 
         | Contrast "Language Learning by Netflix"
        
       | eob wrote:
       | Paying member here -- I've used it to slowly, sentence by
       | sentence, watch a full season of a Taiwanese workplace drama over
       | the past few months.
       | 
       | One of the best parts of LLwN as a way to study is the passive
       | encouragement: you can click on a word to mark it as "known", and
       | then it always shows up green in future subtitles.
       | 
       | Pretty soon, entire multi-line subtitles start showing up all
       | green. And for me at least, that provides a huge confidence boost
       | that helps me keep going.
       | 
       | Instead of seeing each new subtitle as a challenge ("<Deep
       | breath> here we go..."), you think, "It's all green! I already
       | know everything here! I just have to read it!" And that's made a
       | huge difference in how it feels to study.
       | 
       | I wish Kindle had a similar feature for books.
        
         | madmads wrote:
         | If you want a similar experience with text, I can recommend
         | Learning with Texts (LWT) if you want a self-hosted experience
         | and you are okay putting in some work to setting things up.
         | Basically you feed it some text and it lets you click on words
         | and define their meaning as well as how well you know the word,
         | from 1-5 + "Known" status.
         | 
         | There is also LingQ which is a paid and proprietary service,
         | but it has a ton of content as well as no real setup required.
         | It has an already populated pop-up dictionary and many texts to
         | pick from. LWT was inspired from LingQ if I remember correctly.
         | 
         | I've used both and can recommend both depending on what
         | experience you are after, I switched to LWT however to save
         | some money and gain some control. I also happen to prefer the
         | experience using LWT. If you're interested in LingQ, be warned
         | LingQ has a pretty scummy subscription cancellation sequence,
         | requiring you to click through 5+ screens of offers and "are
         | you sure?" pages, as well as them threatening with deleting
         | your account data. My data seems intact after the cancellation
         | though.
         | 
         | https://learning-with-texts.sourceforge.io/
         | 
         | https://www.lingq.com/en/
        
         | wibr wrote:
         | What's the name of the Taiwanese workplace drama?
         | 
         | For people learning Mandarin I provide some information
         | including word lists for a lot of shows on Netflix here:
         | 
         | http://www.jiong3.com/gradedwatching/
        
           | rjzzleep wrote:
           | Fantastic! Thank you for sharing. Do you actually practice
           | them? Or what's your approach to using them? I add vocabulary
           | to Pleco faster than the space repetition shows them so it
           | doesn't seem like an effective way to use them.
           | 
           | Also searches don't seem to access stored vocab first so it
           | doesn't actually make searching that much faster either.
        
             | wibr wrote:
             | It depends. Sometimes I really learn all the words before
             | watching, sometimes I just watch something without any
             | preparation.
             | 
             | Adding too many words to Pleco SRS over a short time
             | doesn't work well, you will get overwhelmed with reviews
             | quickly. So if I decide to study the words for a tv show I
             | take some time between the episodes to prepare for the next
             | ones, depending on how many words I have to learn it could
             | be days or weeks.
             | 
             | Which searches are you referring to?
        
           | kerng wrote:
           | Oh wow - this is awesome!
        
           | eob wrote:
           | This is amazing! Thank you for putting it together.
           | 
           | The show is called Office Girls. Friend in my Mandarin class
           | recommended it as being fairly simple once you get past some
           | office-related vocabulary. "Rich kid has to pose as poor kid
           | and work his way up from the ground floor of dads business"
           | story.
        
             | wibr wrote:
             | Thanks! I've actually watched that one a while ago but it's
             | not available on Netflix in my region so couldn't get the
             | subtitles to add it to the list. The version on youtube
             | only has hardsubs, unfortunately.
        
             | banada1 wrote:
             | I'm working on a language app and thinking about focusing
             | on Mandarin. I would love your feedback on the lesson
             | format:
             | 
             | https://chatlesson.com
        
         | vincvinc wrote:
         | That's interesting. I have been using this plugin for years,
         | but only for passive learning - just to watch things on Netflix
         | with dual subtitles (and to unlock subs in more languages than
         | the Netflix UI would allow). Will take another look at the
         | other functionalities.
        
       | Hard_Space wrote:
       | What a shame there is only one available Romanian title, since
       | that's the language I'm learning.
        
       | Abishek_Muthian wrote:
       | Excellent, Is there something similar which pops up a dictionary
       | on screen when a word from the subtitle is clicked?
       | 
       | A user on my problem validation platform was asking for such a
       | solution[1].
       | 
       | [1] https://needgap.com/problems/201-show-meaning-of-words-
       | in-a-...
        
       | wodenokoto wrote:
       | Apparently they are also hosted using fastly which is down.
       | 
       | HN discussion here: https://fastly.com/
        
       | hughcrt wrote:
       | I used Fleex (https://fleex.tv) when I was a teenager. It worked
       | really well. You can use it with Netflix and local files by
       | fetching subtitles from Opensubtitles, which is pretty smart
        
       | zelag wrote:
       | Is there a similar application but for movies/tv shows stored
       | locally?
        
         | esrh wrote:
         | I don't use netflix because of the ethical issues associated
         | with drm and nonfree software.
         | 
         | I've been learning japanese for nearly a year using yomichan[0]
         | mpv, mpvacious[1], and anki[2].
         | 
         | There is a fair bit of setup involved:
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbg6ztWecbU&t=0
         | 
         | [0] https://foosoft.net/projects/yomichan/
         | 
         | [1] https://github.com/Ajatt-Tools/mpvacious
         | 
         | [2] https://apps.ankiweb.net/
        
         | katspaugh wrote:
         | You could try my app: https://video.fluentcards.com
         | 
         | Haven't tested it in a while.
        
           | creamyhorror wrote:
           | Oh hey it's that fluentcards video HTML! Bit of a blast from
           | the past. Kudos again!
        
         | lnl wrote:
         | I use PotPlayer, which can show two subtitles at once; also,
         | when you click on a word, it can search it in the search engine
         | of your choice (e.g. a dictionary). You can also add multiple
         | search engines (as well as "Copy to clipboard" command)
         | accessible when you right click a word instead of left
         | clicking. You can also assign a shortcut (e.g. Ctrl+C) to copy
         | the whole subtitle visible on the screen, to paste in Google
         | Translate etc. I use all of those features, and it
         | significantly helped in my English learning in my teens (and
         | later other languages).
         | 
         | Previously I used KMPlayer by the same developer, which
         | supported not just two but three simultaneous subtitles (which
         | I sometimes used, as strange as it may sound); but I switched
         | to PotPlayer when he sold the program and it started to be
         | bundled with ads.
         | 
         | Both programs are only available on Windows, and lack of
         | something as featureful and customizable as PotPlayer was one
         | of the reasons my brief flirtation with Linux at the start of
         | this year wasn't that satisfactory. But if all you want is
         | multiple subtitles, I found SMPlayer on Linux that did the job;
         | but the features of PotPlayer/KMPlayer is simply unmatched
         | (beyond just language learning).
        
         | cehrlich wrote:
         | https://animebook.github.io/
         | 
         | never mind the 'anime' in the name, it's just a web video
         | player that supports nearly every format and has good subtitle
         | integration.
         | 
         | you'll need a hover/popup dictionary (for example, for Japanese
         | Yomichan is popular) to go with it
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | somedude895 wrote:
         | A VLC plugin or somesuch would be nice
        
           | cehrlich wrote:
           | There's MPV plugins, but they require a lot of setup. Some
           | good web based alternatives were suggested in other replies
           | to the parent.
        
           | ad404b8a372f2b9 wrote:
           | That's what I think to myself every time those language
           | learning extensions/apps come up. Sadly the VLC code is not
           | very well documented and the extension guide on the wiki is
           | pretty bare as well. I'm guessing one would have to extend
           | the freetype text renderer but that's a tall order.
        
       | banada1 wrote:
       | Tools like this are great because they give you access to in-
       | context example sentences.
       | 
       | Textbooks often start with grammar and layer sentences on top. I
       | prefer taking a real conversation and breaking it down. If I can
       | see myself saying that sentence, then its guaranteed to be
       | useful.
       | 
       | My project tries to achieve this with a chatbot-style lesson
       | format:
       | 
       | chatlesson.com
        
       | HDMI_Cable wrote:
       | It would be really cool if this worked with Firefox. Anyone know
       | of a compatibility layer which would allow this to work?
        
       | kleiba wrote:
       | The video shows subtitles in two languages for each spoken
       | sentence. Does this use ASR or the official multilingual
       | subtitles? I found that even monolingually, subtitles can
       | sometimes divert from what is actually spoken on screen. I assume
       | that if just the existing subtitles are used, they are not exact
       | translations from one another either?
       | 
       | Also, longer dialogs are often split into two screens - this
       | should be an additional synchronization challenge between the two
       | languages, right?
        
         | shkkmo wrote:
         | Afaik it uses the built in subtitles. You can also turn off the
         | second language.
        
       | goda90 wrote:
       | I met a young woman in Chile who had an amazingly clear accent
       | when speaking English. She learned English from watching American
       | TV and listening to American music. It was way better than any
       | English I heard from teenagers learning it in school.
        
         | handrous wrote:
         | Learning English by watching Friends was so common, AFAIK all
         | over the world, that it achieved cliche status, 10-20 years
         | ago. May not be the case anymore.
        
       | bonoboTP wrote:
       | I wonder if this is legal, ie transforming creative works to be
       | language learning tools, and inserting themselves into Netflix
       | like this, and also using the Netflix name in their own name.
       | 
       | Not saying it shouldn't be legal, I'm just wondering whether they
       | could get sued by Netflix or the copyright holders and lose.
        
         | martindbp wrote:
         | I'm working on something similar, so I may be biased but I'd
         | say no. It's something that transforms and integrates with the
         | content in your browser to facilitate learning. I think fair
         | use applies because 1. it's for educational purposes 2. it does
         | not diminish or compete with the value of the original
         | copyright owner since the content is not copied to some
         | separate site, and subscriptions/ads still apply (unless of
         | course they also start a language learning business)
         | 
         | The name "Netflix" though seems troublesome, I agree.
        
           | bonoboTP wrote:
           | For-profit education does not get a free pass in fair use.
           | 
           | > transforms and integrates with the content in your browser
           | 
           | "Integrates with" and "browser" are irrelevant technical
           | details.
           | 
           | I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not sure, but for example Grand
           | Theft Auto's publisher shut down efforts in the computer
           | vision industry to use their game as a training data
           | generation engine for self-driving car research. That's why
           | I'm also wondering how the law deals with using things you
           | have a license for in different ways, for different purposes
           | than originally intended.
        
             | martindbp wrote:
             | By that logic any Chrome extension that modifies the
             | contents of a copyrighted web page is illegal. Holding up
             | an automatic translation device to translate what is being
             | said on the TV would be illegal etc. There are nuances of
             | course, but I don't think it's a problem here.
             | 
             | > That's why I'm also wondering how the law deals with
             | using things you have a license for in different ways, for
             | different purposes than originally intended.
             | 
             | I really don't know much about law, just trying to apply my
             | common sense here. I think the difference in this case is
             | that there is a single customer that _uses_ the extension
             | to modify their experience, not a large corporation using a
             | product (game engine and content) for unlicensed purposes.
             | I could see why Rockstar would potentially want to keep the
             | right to license the engine for these simulation purposes
             | in the future, in which case they'd have to block this kind
             | of use of the game directly.
        
             | yorwba wrote:
             | > Grand Theft Auto's publisher shut down efforts in the
             | computer vision industry to use their game as a training
             | data generation engine for self-driving car research.
             | 
             | Did they? The GTA5 dataset is still up
             | https://download.visinf.tu-darmstadt.de/data/from_games/
             | and widely used. I've never heard about any legal issues
             | with it.
        
           | seumars wrote:
           | Add subtitles and translation to ads and you're safe. Now
           | that I think about it this may unironically be a decent
           | selling point.
        
         | jcranmer wrote:
         | Trying to predict what a court would find fair use is
         | incredibly difficult in the US, and it's hard to have much
         | better accuracy than a coin flip if the answer is less than
         | completely obvious. In practice, it seems that fair use is
         | pretty much decided on a gut reaction first and then the
         | analysis is motivated to arrive at that gut reaction.
         | 
         | A good example of that effect is Thomas's fair use analysis in
         | Google v Oracle a few months ago, which can be summed up as
         | "Google made buttloads of money from Android, Oracle saw not a
         | dime, how can that be fair?" This kind of analysis I think
         | tends to be the more the common one in courts. _However_ , only
         | one other justice agreed with that analysis; Breyer had 5 other
         | justices sign onto his fair use analysis instead, which argues
         | (in part) that transformativeness is more important than
         | commerciality as a factor.
         | 
         | It remains to be seen how lower courts will apply Google v
         | Oracle to fair use cases; if they will see it as something
         | limited to software and ignore it for everything else. Indeed,
         | I'm not certain that you'd see the same strong majority for a
         | similar fair use ruling if it involved more traditional
         | copyrighted content such as movies.
         | 
         | That said, I'm not sure that this is even distributing Netflix
         | content in a way that violates copyright in the first place,
         | which nullifies any need for fair use analysis period.
        
       | ck_one wrote:
       | It says: "connection failure" for me. Anybody else having issues
       | accessing the site?
        
         | gansai wrote:
         | now, you can access i guess, since fastly is back
        
         | greybox wrote:
         | Strange, I've been getting these for lots of different sites
         | this morning, I wonder if this is a cloudflare issue
        
         | gansai wrote:
         | There's a related thread for this also -->
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27432408
         | 
         | Fastly is down, impacting lot of sites
        
         | jbotz wrote:
         | Getting a 503 now.
        
           | mrwnmonm wrote:
           | Met too
        
           | styrmis wrote:
           | The Varnish error is almost identical to that of the Guardian
           | (newspaper) website in the UK--wondering if they're both
           | using CloudFlare and that it's CloudFlare that is having the
           | issue?
           | 
           | Edit: Perhaps related to this ongoing Fastly outage
           | (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27432408),
           | https://fastly.com returns the same kind of Varnish error and
           | Github currently has no assets being served in their web UI.
        
         | dougmwne wrote:
         | Getting multiple 503 errors to different sites.
        
       | arkitaip wrote:
       | This is a tangent, but has any noticed just how terrible Netflix
       | subtitles can be? Occasionally, when watching with family
       | members, I will enable Swedish subtitles for English movies and
       | sometimes it's as if they have worked on a different material
       | than what the actors on screen are saying. It's bizarre to see
       | this low quality effort in movie after movie, show after show.
        
         | richrichardsson wrote:
         | I was under the impression that most of the English -> English
         | subtitles are just machine generated. So often the subtitles
         | will be homophonic to what was actually said, a mistake that a
         | human would not have made. And then what's worse is you get
         | [Speaking German] or whatever, so I have to pause, disable the
         | subtitles and rewind, just to be able to see the original
         | subtitle that was included for the vitally important to the
         | plot translation of the foreign language.
        
         | FlyingSaucer wrote:
         | Yes! The subtitles can be completely different than the dubbing
         | in some cases which makes it difficult for me to watch with
         | both.
         | 
         | Also, they sometime use a bit odd translations. I saw a Belgian
         | show and they translated smoking a cigarette into smoking a
         | fag. Which I guess is technically correct (based on the
         | cambridge dictionary), just an odd choice for general EU
         | viewership
        
           | CogitoCogito wrote:
           | > Yes! The subtitles can be completely different than the
           | dubbing in some cases which makes it difficult for me to
           | watch with both.
           | 
           | Yeah I've tried Czech dubbing with Czech subtitles, but have
           | a lot of trouble following it for this reason. I'm sure once
           | I get better at Czech it'll make more sense, but for the
           | moment it seems like I need to stick with Czech audio and
           | English subtitles or vice versa. Otherwise it's just too
           | confusing.
        
             | smcl wrote:
             | If you can access the videos on ceska televize (presumably
             | you're based here if you are learning Czech) I've found
             | them to be quite useful as they generally provide an option
             | to turn on subtitles that match the audio. Like this kids
             | show I used to watch with my teacher in our lessons:
             | https://decko.ceskatelevize.cz/chaloupka-na-vrsku :D
        
               | CogitoCogito wrote:
               | Thank you very much! I do watch things on ceska televize,
               | but I will definitely check out that kids show!
               | 
               | And no not based there, but I do have a VPN so it's all
               | good. Thanks again!
        
               | smcl wrote:
               | I also liked "Anca a Pepik" - a show about two mice who
               | solve mysteries :-D Hodne stesti!
        
           | dagw wrote:
           | _Yes! The subtitles can be completely different than the
           | dubbing in some cases which makes it difficult for me to
           | watch with both._
           | 
           | I suspect in many cases the subbing is done translating off
           | the original script, while the dubbing is done using a
           | completely different translation designed to flow better when
           | spoken.
        
             | lou1306 wrote:
             | Dub-oriented translations are also designed to "look
             | natural" when coupled with the actor's lip movements.
             | 
             | To make matters worse, sometimes shows are re-dubbed [0],
             | but may retain the subtitles that were accurate to the
             | previous dub.
             | 
             | [0]: For instance, Neon Genesis Evangelion was released on
             | the Italian Netflix with a brand-new dub, which caused
             | quite a commotion: https://comicbook.com/anime/news/neon-
             | genesis-evangelion-net...
        
             | digbybk wrote:
             | This seems to be the case. Watching the Spanish dubbed
             | version of Community on Hulu, the dubs have the study group
             | taking an English class, while the subs have them in a
             | Spanish class as in the original.
             | 
             | Side note: in the dubbed version, it's hilarious when they
             | switch to speaking bad English where they would have
             | switched to bad Spanish in the original.
        
         | ant6n wrote:
         | Basically, only English has a tradition where in closed
         | captions, the spoken word matches the text. In many other
         | languages, even for original content, even for subtitles that
         | are a hearing aid, the text often won't match. For example in
         | French.
         | 
         | I guess the desire is to shorten the text to make it easier to
         | read in time, but it's kind of ironic that it's called
         | ,,subtitles for the ones with bad hearing". Non-matching
         | subtitles are not a hearing aid, but a hearing replacement.
        
           | shkkmo wrote:
           | I've only ever seen this when something was dubbed, not when
           | the original content language matches the subtitle language.
           | Do you have any examples?
        
           | kaesar14 wrote:
           | I can't believe that - subtitles don't match the spoken word
           | outside of English? Isn't that extremely jarring if it's the
           | same language?
        
             | mongol wrote:
             | I think it is because the speed which subtitles need to be
             | shown at if it would be word for word. It would be too fast
             | for many viewers. Usually (I am talking from a Swedish
             | context), they are a 60-75% summary of what is being said.
        
             | charrondev wrote:
             | Super common in French, and was a big hurdle in learning
             | the language through movies/ TV.
             | 
             | I don't want to put English subtitles, but sometimes I have
             | trouble with accents. My best guess why would be that they
             | are translated independently and at different times by
             | different people. Some shows almost every single line is
             | different.
        
             | ant6n wrote:
             | Yes
        
         | laurieg wrote:
         | I've definitely noticed some pretty bad mistranslations in
         | Netflix subtitles but not worse than general movie subtitles.
        
         | samsari wrote:
         | I don't think this is specific to Netflix, Swedish subtitles
         | are routinely awful and badly translated across a variety of
         | media.
        
         | telesilla wrote:
         | They traditionally had trained translators, a friend worked for
         | them. He's since been let go, with no warning about quality
         | being an issue, leaving me to believe they have replaced him
         | with machines or cheaper workers. I also watch with subtitles
         | and notice the decline.
        
         | frodetb wrote:
         | I've tried watching dubbed+subbed shows, with both set to my
         | target language, and the two rarely ever match for any given
         | line of dialogue. Netflix has thankfully expanded their
         | language capabilities recently to make it easier to watch shows
         | in an arbitrary language (used to have to change the entire
         | interface into the target language), but I wish there were a CC
         | option for all choices of audio.
        
           | shkkmo wrote:
           | This is because the subtiters and dubbers usually work
           | independently and face different constraints.
           | 
           | The key is to find content that was originally produced in
           | the language you want to learn so that the subtitles will
           | match.
        
         | borroka wrote:
         | For non-major-languages subtitles, they use (mostly) machine
         | translation. For major languages, they use people.
        
           | interestica wrote:
           | Which is weird because it seems like the perfect use of crowd
           | sourced knowledge. You could probably get translations just
           | by offering free subscriptions. I think you'd see a bit of
           | national pride help fuel it too: I'd love to see regional
           | variations/dialects. (For instance, Quebec French). You could
           | even have crowd verification like what Google Translate and
           | Duolingo do.
        
             | OJFord wrote:
             | Wouldn't it be a mess? 'Reddit translates Netflix'? I see
             | what your saying about 'crowd verification', but how do you
             | filter out 'upvoted for lolz'?
             | 
             | There are things you could do of course, I just don't think
             | it's trivial.
        
       | eli_gottlieb wrote:
       | I should try this out. It's gotta be better than the quiz-by-quiz
       | no-context vocab lessons that Duolingo does.
        
         | banada1 wrote:
         | I'm working on a chatbot-style lesson format that gives more
         | context:
         | 
         | https://chatlesson.com
        
       | brainless wrote:
       | Getting an "Error 503 Service Unavailable" - is this site down
       | because Fastly is down?
        
         | atymic wrote:
         | Yep, that'd be it.
        
       | shkkmo wrote:
       | I used this tool and loved it. It works best when the original
       | content is in your content language so the audio matches the
       | subtitles.
       | 
       | LLwN provides a nice catalog to find such content which can be
       | very useful even if you don't use the browser extension (such as
       | watching on platforms that don't have Chrome.)
       | 
       | https://languagelearningwithnetflix.com/catalogue.html
        
       | deanclatworthy wrote:
       | I tried using this for a few days. I found it incredibly
       | frustrating, partially because the subtitles in Finnish were so
       | dumbed down from the actual English-language dialogue.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-06-08 23:01 UTC)