>> If you wanted to teach beginners.
Would you have this task be a possible task for beginners
and if so what would your objectives be?
What would your goals be?
Yes?
>> I would probably not have it for beginners
in that form, in this format.
I would probably render it
or make it a little easier to understand.
>> Yes?
>> I would take some parts out,
but I think it would be a good exercise to start off
if you are actually going to show a movie beforehand.
>> Okay, other thoughts, yes?
>> It could be really helpful just to make them acknowledge
that they can understand some words.
They can understand some structures.
It is not as foreign as it seems at the very beginning,
like they can catch some things.
And it's fine, it's part of reading.
It is part of getting familiar
with the language and the culture too.
>> I think even with beginners you could use full text
of articles, you just have to choose them very carefully
and you can use them to show kind of the process of reading.
So you could have these two articles like you had in English
and the L2 and then they will be able to pick out the cognates
and then compare that the structures are the same.
That they use similar ways to describe this movie or book
or whatever and that could get the students into thinking more
that reading is a process rather than the linear reading
that you were talking about.
>> And it goes back to looking at their definition of reading
and your definition of reading, which may not be the same,
but you would like them to at least consider a definition
of reading that is less linear
in the approach, less word for word.
Yet our very instructional procedures
and particularly text books actually teach linear reading,
why?
Why do I make that point?
>> Well when you give a text typically a lot of times,
we want to throw in some vocabulary items in the text
that we want you to learn in this chapter,
but then all the other words we kind of have as primes
or something that you are supposed to already know,
so then you are expected to know every word in the text,
whereas in a text where there are lots
of unfamiliar words you can't do that
and that is just the way we teach.
>> Yes and so you want might this type of exercise as a sort
of counter, as people start reading more and more
to have them experience the fact
that this will be a different kind of reading
than the reading we have been doing
in the textbook till this point and time.
There was a hand here, Anke?
>> Not only the words, like the vocabulary,
also the sentence structure to familiarize them
with the difference in sentence structure.
>> Yes exactly and to get comfortable with the fact
that now knowing every word is okay, yes?
>> Even as a beginner just doing it myself,
there were stylist differences that I noticed
by the exclamation points and making that analysis
between the style, comparing the styles
of the articles is possible to do also.
>> Did any of the rest of you notice any stylistic differences
and could you point to any specific things that emerged
for you in the reading?
>> Actually, I didn't read the New York article,
but I thought it looked already very complex
and it had less pictures, so actually starting off
with Norwegian right away was what I did.
>> Yes, that felt comfortable to you, which is perfectly fine.
Yes?
>> It was also interesting what they talked
about in those articles.
I think as far as I understand in Norwegian.
[ Laughter ]
>> As far as you understood, yes.
>> They talked more about the actors
and how they are presented in the film and not so much
about the technology behind the movies and differences
in culture were important.
>> Yes, the New Yorker was very interested in the technology
and also in a very negative way, much too fast,
a bunch of 15-second commercials and so forth,
not at all viewer friendly from that reviewer's point of view.
And you get a completely different display
in the Norwegian text.