Yeah, found the same to be true concerning user friendliness. Community is also important if not mobile apps (as I've never owned a mobile phone).
PaulKorean: While that maybe true with Norwegian and Swedish but not quite with Danish though. I have heard many Swedes and Danes tell me that they CANNOT understand each other even though their languages are similar and had to switch to English in order to communicate. However, they can still read each other's languages without too much difficulty. What you also seem to fail to understand is that there are people who are probably more interested in going to Norway and their language rather than going to the neighboring country and speaking Swedish in Norway. It would be inappropriate to tell someone of Norwegian decent to learn Swedish when they want to learn the language of their own culture not settle for a "similar" one. I just so happen to be one of the few people learning Norwegian here on LingQ, and I would rather communicate with the Norwegians in their native language then use Swedish or English (even though I could communicate with them and understand 90% of what they are saying), as a way of showing that I am interested in their culture as well.
Yes I am aware that Norwegian isn't exactly the most useful compared to Cantonese, Hebrew, Greek, Catalan, and what have you but I have an interest in it and want to learn it. What's wrong with that? I also practice with a friend who is a native speaker so but no means is it useless to me in anyway.
As for other BETA languages I am interested in Czech, Polish and Turkish but I am not currently focused on them right now as working on others at the moment.
Yes I am aware that Norwegian isn't exactly the most useful compared to Cantonese, Hebrew, Greek, Catalan, and what have you but I have an interest in it and want to learn it. What's wrong with that? I also practice with a friend who is a native speaker so but no means is it useless to me in anyway.
As for other BETA languages I am interested in Czech, Polish and Turkish but I am not currently focused on them right now as working on others at the moment.
I was very eager to have Dutch added to LingQ, but I just haven't had the time to properly study it. But, it's been gathering content, and when I'm ready (hopefully soon) to give it some real time, it'll be there. I thought that was sort of the point of Beta languages - give them time to develop their library and then maybe eventually be promoted to full language status.
Also, I thought the whole facebook thing was intended as a promotion for LingQ. If it has brought new members to LingQ, then it's been successful. I'm not in a position to say how successful it has been.
Personally, I never really liked the facebook voting system. Every language needs at least one main provider of content. More is better, but just one will do. They can translate LingQ's 3 main beginner content items, and they can also provide their own beginner and intermediate content items. They can also record conversations with their friends for advanced content. There is quite a lot that one person can do. But there's no point having a language that doesn't have a main content provider. Perhaps one will come along one day, but if not, then it probably would have been better to have added a different language.
I think it would be better to have a system where people can express their interest in being a content provider, and then prove that interest by actually providing content - ie, LingQ's standard beginner material. Once all that material had been completed, then the language could be added. If this person was a long-standing and active member of LingQ, that would be even better, as they would be more likely to then continue added content and maybe tutor as well.
Also, I thought the whole facebook thing was intended as a promotion for LingQ. If it has brought new members to LingQ, then it's been successful. I'm not in a position to say how successful it has been.
Personally, I never really liked the facebook voting system. Every language needs at least one main provider of content. More is better, but just one will do. They can translate LingQ's 3 main beginner content items, and they can also provide their own beginner and intermediate content items. They can also record conversations with their friends for advanced content. There is quite a lot that one person can do. But there's no point having a language that doesn't have a main content provider. Perhaps one will come along one day, but if not, then it probably would have been better to have added a different language.
I think it would be better to have a system where people can express their interest in being a content provider, and then prove that interest by actually providing content - ie, LingQ's standard beginner material. Once all that material had been completed, then the language could be added. If this person was a long-standing and active member of LingQ, that would be even better, as they would be more likely to then continue added content and maybe tutor as well.
Bortrun: Yeah, that's what I thought too. I figured that if I waited for a while, more content would be available eventually and then would be given as you say: "Full language status" but the Facebook voting made me wonder though.
Does anybody just vote for the language they want (both members and non-members) and then if it gets enough votes, the new language gets added or is there something more to it?
Does anybody just vote for the language they want (both members and non-members) and then if it gets enough votes, the new language gets added or is there something more to it?
@Imyirtseshem, I agree. I think reading Latin and Ancient Greek would be much more practical than listening. There are no native Latin or Ancient Greek speakers.
@Steve. I wasn't knocking so much Norwegian, as opposed to the current trend of languages picked up at the time. I believe Latin, Esperanto, and Norwegian were all chosen together. I don't feel that Norwegian is a useless language, because it's not. But in terms of adding it when it was added did not add much variety to the LingQ database, and after two languages where there are no native speakers, I was pretty distraught. I agree Norwegian was a good choice, as were Finnish and Turkish. But adding Latin and Esperanto were essentially pointless because they really aren't pragmatic languages. We've got great variety on link; Romance languages, East Asian languages, Scandinavian languages, Slavic languages, including beta Middle Eastern languages. All awesome variety. I felt that Latin and Esperanto didn't add much variety and neither did Norwegian, but it's certainly not a useless language by any means.
That is why I think if the beta system is going to work we need staff regulation of the languages being put on. Obviously something like Modern Greek or Tagalog we will have more content available as opposed to something like Wolof or Khmer, and certainly more than Ancient Greek or other dead languages. To me LingQ is best utilized for practical purposes; there are no grammars, no in-depth explanations, so it's certainly not focusing on textural languages, it's focusing on listening and using that knowledge through interaction. Ancient Greek and Latin are solely textual, and I absolutely agree there is an importance to them in terms of education. But a site like LingQ which emphasizes listening doesn't really help the language in terms of practicality.
What about voting on monthly or so beta languages but having LingQ staff narrow it down to a few languages that you guys know will have an abundance of resources? That way you guys can regulate what LingQ is capable of and what languages we know there will be content for?
@Steve. I wasn't knocking so much Norwegian, as opposed to the current trend of languages picked up at the time. I believe Latin, Esperanto, and Norwegian were all chosen together. I don't feel that Norwegian is a useless language, because it's not. But in terms of adding it when it was added did not add much variety to the LingQ database, and after two languages where there are no native speakers, I was pretty distraught. I agree Norwegian was a good choice, as were Finnish and Turkish. But adding Latin and Esperanto were essentially pointless because they really aren't pragmatic languages. We've got great variety on link; Romance languages, East Asian languages, Scandinavian languages, Slavic languages, including beta Middle Eastern languages. All awesome variety. I felt that Latin and Esperanto didn't add much variety and neither did Norwegian, but it's certainly not a useless language by any means.
That is why I think if the beta system is going to work we need staff regulation of the languages being put on. Obviously something like Modern Greek or Tagalog we will have more content available as opposed to something like Wolof or Khmer, and certainly more than Ancient Greek or other dead languages. To me LingQ is best utilized for practical purposes; there are no grammars, no in-depth explanations, so it's certainly not focusing on textural languages, it's focusing on listening and using that knowledge through interaction. Ancient Greek and Latin are solely textual, and I absolutely agree there is an importance to them in terms of education. But a site like LingQ which emphasizes listening doesn't really help the language in terms of practicality.
What about voting on monthly or so beta languages but having LingQ staff narrow it down to a few languages that you guys know will have an abundance of resources? That way you guys can regulate what LingQ is capable of and what languages we know there will be content for?
Paul, I've got materials for both Wolof and Khmer. :D But I'm total language nerd with too much time on my hands. :)
I understand how this decision can be very disappointing for those who wish to study a language that hasn't been added yet but personally I think this change in policy makes sense. There are known issues that need corrected in the core product and I don't know about the iPhone app but the Android app just isn't where it needs to be right now. If moving focus away from beta languages means faster improvement in the core product and mobile apps I'm all for it.
And certainly, if it's a matter of choosing between improving the functionality of the site and the apps versus adding beta languages, then I'd vote for improving the site and apps.
I like the idea of adding some sort of "blank" language slot that people could use to study a language which is not already on LingQ.
I like the idea of adding some sort of "blank" language slot that people could use to study a language which is not already on LingQ.
@odiernod - We appreciate the offer but it isn't really about contracting out pieces of functionality. The fact is that there is overhead involved in setting up would be developers, explaining how our site is built, setting up systems to integrate external contributions into our system and managing the whole process. Not to mention that you would need to be familiar with our development framework in order to contribute. It's a good idea but not something we can do at the moment. (although in theory would be great!)
@mark, yes, as a software engineer I do understand the overhead involved in preparing new developers to enter a system. In fact training newbies on our infrastructure is one of the responsibilities I have at my day job, being a senior engineer on my team. And of course you would indeed have to trust whatever developers you were letting see your source. For important bug fixes and time sensitive updates you would have to take an active role in training for your specific architecture, but for functionality enhancements which do not have strict time restrictions, you could let a trusted developer take the time to figure the system out themselves. At any rate, keep me in mind for the future if you ever see this becoming a possibility.
Steve wrote:
"It is not 'no work' to add languages, and to deal with requests for dictionaries, and other issues. In fact it is a distraction at various levels, one which gives little benefit to LingQ and most of LingQ's members. It is also not a good thing when someone expects to study a language at LIngQ and finds that there is little content."
I perfectly know adding a language every month requires some additional work on your side to satisfy a small number of members. Your policy change was understandable (and I do respect it, though I don't like it). What disappointed me most was something else:
1) Why were we not warned in advance about this choice and the fact that Cantonese would not be added, and thus the second most voted language would be added instead?
2) why was the Facebook poll completely reset? Just to push Greek back, so that an even longer time will pass until a language reaches that absurdly high threshold? I would understand it if you required 500 votes, but 1000?!
Anyway, I was also glad to read that "in the future when we have solved other more pressing issues, we can focus on adding more languages". How would you choose them?
Thanks for your job and I look forward to the "exciting developments in the plans that we are sure all of you will enjoy"! :)
"It is not 'no work' to add languages, and to deal with requests for dictionaries, and other issues. In fact it is a distraction at various levels, one which gives little benefit to LingQ and most of LingQ's members. It is also not a good thing when someone expects to study a language at LIngQ and finds that there is little content."
I perfectly know adding a language every month requires some additional work on your side to satisfy a small number of members. Your policy change was understandable (and I do respect it, though I don't like it). What disappointed me most was something else:
1) Why were we not warned in advance about this choice and the fact that Cantonese would not be added, and thus the second most voted language would be added instead?
2) why was the Facebook poll completely reset? Just to push Greek back, so that an even longer time will pass until a language reaches that absurdly high threshold? I would understand it if you required 500 votes, but 1000?!
Anyway, I was also glad to read that "in the future when we have solved other more pressing issues, we can focus on adding more languages". How would you choose them?
Thanks for your job and I look forward to the "exciting developments in the plans that we are sure all of you will enjoy"! :)
I just want to add that I think it should have been understood that Cantonese wouldn't be added. It uses traditional script and we know that the site doesn't support it yet.
I'm just saying there are other alternatives, especially if some languages won't be added in the near future.
@Yirtse: that COULD NOT have been understood by those who have no knowledge of any Asian languages! I had no idea of it.
I also feeling requiring a language to get 1000 votes to add it, is setting the threshold a bit too high and is kind of a way of not having to deal with beta languages for a while. In 6 months, no language got anywhere near 1000 votes, I'd be surprised if any language ever hits 1000.
@PaulKorean - In fact, setting the threshold at 1000 votes will at least ensure that someone has made an effort to mobilize some votes. Adding languages that had managed to accumulate 200 votes in 6 months doesn't really make sense. From our point of view, if we are going to add languages, we need to see some return. By setting the voting threshold at 1000, we hope that those who are truly passionate about getting their language added here will figure out how to get those votes and in the process help spread the word about LingQ.
Mikebond,
1) There was some see sawing on the poll and it was not evident which language would win until near the end of the month. That is when we started looking seriously for a way to handled traditional characters and also those characters specific to Cantonese. This took up valuable programmer time, which we only committed once it was certain that Cantonese would win.
2) As Mark has explained, we think 1,000 is a reasonable number to ensure that there is enough interest in the language. I suspect that many of the languages that might be candidates as Beta languages will not generate any content for the library without a considerable effort to mobilize support.
3) On the positive side we have added 10 languages during this first Beta period.
1) There was some see sawing on the poll and it was not evident which language would win until near the end of the month. That is when we started looking seriously for a way to handled traditional characters and also those characters specific to Cantonese. This took up valuable programmer time, which we only committed once it was certain that Cantonese would win.
2) As Mark has explained, we think 1,000 is a reasonable number to ensure that there is enough interest in the language. I suspect that many of the languages that might be candidates as Beta languages will not generate any content for the library without a considerable effort to mobilize support.
3) On the positive side we have added 10 languages during this first Beta period.
Ok, Steve, understood. Still, being able to gather 1000 votes is no guarantee of more members and content providers. Anyway, I accept the challenge as Mark described it: "those who are truly passionate about getting their language added here will figure out how to get those votes and in the process help spread the word about LingQ".
And, of course, I'm thankful for the languages that were added these months.
And, of course, I'm thankful for the languages that were added these months.
Steve: I particularly like the third point. I'm studying 2 of those 10 languages which have been added. Thanks a lot!
@Farrago - No definitive answer as of yet, but if Cantonese won it wouldn't hurt :)
Hi I'm new here but I still have things to say ^_^ I'm sad about the Cantonese. I'm an ABC (American born Chinese), my first language is Cantonese although English has been my most fluent language since I was about 6 y/o or so. I can speak but I can barely read or write. Almost all Chinese newspapers and books since the 1920's are written in Mandarin, which makes learning how to read more difficult. Before the 1920's we wrote Classical Chinese, which was closer to Cantonese, and probably would have been easier for me.
Oh well, I can still watch Canto movies w/ Chinese subtitles. On lingq, I'm going to try for Mandarin and Hebrew! I'm excited about this vocabulary oriented learning process; I have been using Rosetta Stone and it's just. so. slow. . .
I'm military, and I want my FLBP - foreign language bonus pay - http://publicintelligence.net/ufouo-u-s-navy-st... If I test well in enough languages, I can earn 1000$ bonus a month! Which is awesome. And which makes me wish Farsi were added as a language here. I can get 500 bucks a month for fluency in that one alone! Unfortunately Cantonese has a 3 next to it, meaning the needs of the military are satisfied for that language, no bonus pay.
One last thing. Not to disrespect but I'm 24 and am one of many who don't use Facebook, and I'm a little bemused as to why one would host the poll there. Do people even have to be using lingq to vote? Can you not create a poll on this forum? I'm sure you have your reasons. Just sayin'. =)
Peace
Oh well, I can still watch Canto movies w/ Chinese subtitles. On lingq, I'm going to try for Mandarin and Hebrew! I'm excited about this vocabulary oriented learning process; I have been using Rosetta Stone and it's just. so. slow. . .
I'm military, and I want my FLBP - foreign language bonus pay - http://publicintelligence.net/ufouo-u-s-navy-st... If I test well in enough languages, I can earn 1000$ bonus a month! Which is awesome. And which makes me wish Farsi were added as a language here. I can get 500 bucks a month for fluency in that one alone! Unfortunately Cantonese has a 3 next to it, meaning the needs of the military are satisfied for that language, no bonus pay.
One last thing. Not to disrespect but I'm 24 and am one of many who don't use Facebook, and I'm a little bemused as to why one would host the poll there. Do people even have to be using lingq to vote? Can you not create a poll on this forum? I'm sure you have your reasons. Just sayin'. =)
Peace
Hi,
welcome to LingQ. It was interesting to read your story.
Many people like you have asked to be able to vote on LingQ but the answer has always been no. You can:
1) create an empty profile to use just for the poll;
or
2) ask a friend who is on Facebook to vote for you.
Good luck,
Michele
welcome to LingQ. It was interesting to read your story.
Many people like you have asked to be able to vote on LingQ but the answer has always been no. You can:
1) create an empty profile to use just for the poll;
or
2) ask a friend who is on Facebook to vote for you.
Good luck,
Michele