(Continued from Page One)

by Mark Kaiser

• Fourth, there is no reference grammar. Even if we were to agree that explicit teaching of grammar is to be avoided, shouldn't we make grammar explanations available to students if they want to access them? Many students want and benefit from an analytic approach to language.

• Fifth, the vocabulary is not presented on the basis of a word frequency list. How important is the color "lilac" for a beginning student of Russian? Are sentences of the type

  
  

  'On me is the shirt which was on my father' or

  
  

  of any use at all? The latter is another example of the English basis of the software, because the original English probably was "The cow belongs to the farmer, but it isn't a pet", but "pet" is not used in Russian. For English 'pet' a dictionary will give an explanatory phrase 'domashnee zhivotnoe', where domashnee = 'house (adj.); domesticated' and 'zhivotnoe' = 'animal'. In Russian this sentence makes little sense, since a cow is, of course, a domesticated animal.

• Sixth, it is unclear for whom the program is intended. Fairfield Language Technologies would like us to believe that it is appropriate for both beginning and intermediate students (can't hurt sales), but a beginning student will be lost, because there is no introduction to the sound system and alphabet and no guide to the grammar, and an intermediate student will find little of use for the development of reading or speaking skills. One might debate whether listening to sentences so divorced from a cultural and social context can develop any kind of meaningful listening comprehension skill.

• Minor points: there is no on-line keyboard help, the meaning of the icons on screen is not always intuitive, the abundance of running modes is confusing. And perhaps not so minor is the $300 one must spend to obtain so little.