I’ve had a look through the forums and spent too long searching the Japanese subreddits and Google to find a list of what the Google Maps navigation says. I have trouble understanding spoken language (English too) and I’m 100% a visual learner (so reading and writing are much easier for me).
I’m just looking for a list of what the map navigation says so while I’m driving places I can listen for the words and therefore incorporate more practice in my day to day activities.
I’m wondering if anyone knows if such a list exists or if someone very kind could write some examples of what the map says? I’ve got some of the basics like 左方向です because they’re said a lot. But some of the less common ones I would be forever grateful if someone could help me out with!
You can ask google app for the details of a route. The preview option (taping any of the instructions) will also have the text for what it says (as far as know).
Sorry if i’m making a blunt comment and not answering your question directly, but learning styles are a myth, unfortunately a very common one, and it may benefit you a lot to be persuaded in that, especially for listening practice. Research shows that learning style has to be suited to what you are learning. For listening practice, which is harder for you and for almost everyone including me, visual learning will do almost nothing, you’ll have to do lots of listening practice, which is auditory, like everyone else.
Here are two articles, you may find more info if you search for “learning styles myth”
I don’t have the time, nor do I care enough to have an actual argument with you about this, but as someone who studied education I’m gonna go ahead and let you know that (assuming you’re intend this as an absolute rule) this is objectively false.
If you think learning styles don’t exist, you haven’t spent enough time studying how people learn, or had enough exposure to students going through the learning process. To suggest they don’t exist can make people feel they’re just incompetent when they don’t understand something, when in fact that’s usually not the case.
Please don’t continue to spread misinformation that can be damaging to learners’ motivation and self-worth.
I also don’t want to get into an argument, but there’s little to no scientific evidence for personalized learning styles (visual/auditory/verbal etc) doing much benefit, which is shown by many studies in the first article i linked, i think it would be interesting for you to read. Continued use in education doesn’t make something true. Of course you can adjust your teaching to the situation and needs of an individual learner, but that’s not the same as saying they’re an “auditory learner”. I don’t see how summarizing scientific studies is misinformation. Nor do I see how this damages anyone’s motivation or self-worth.
Actually debunking learning styles empowers anyone to delve into other “learning styles” like listening practice, it means you’re not incompetent, you just haven’t practiced enough. If anything, classifying people as “visual learners” means judging them as incompetent for other learning styles, which is actually not the case according to the studies. The science says that you should tailor your teaching more to what form is most effective for the particular lesson and knowledge ot the learner, but not predefined types. But if the scientific findings don’t convince you, I won’t argue further. It may be that education has found a successful way and science has failed to prove it yet (while producing accidental counterevidence), it’s possible.
I’m guessing here, that the learning styles refer mostly to studies that aren’t languages.
For example, if you wanted to learn more about WWII, you could read a book about it, or you could watch a documentary about it. Whether the book or the documentary makes more of an impression on you, would then be based on what learning style you prefer.
As for languages however, there’s a distinct difference between listening skills and reading skills. Especially with a language like Japanese, that has such a different writing style.
Which means, you’re both correct, but you’re both talking about different things. For me personally, language learning through reading and writing is easier than listening and speaking as well, but you need both to become fluent. Which is not the case with studying history. If you know the content, you know the content.
As for the original post and intent of this topic, I think it’s always beneficial to incorporate more practice in day to day activities. If they speak Japanese in google maps, you can visually see where to go on the map itself, so that shouldn’t be too hard. But you’d have to try to see if it actually works. I have no experience there.
Thank you to everyone who has contributed, I really appreciate you taking the time to help out.
Regarding learning styles: I don’t care about the science here, it’s not what I’m asking. I know what works for ME personally, which is why I asked the question. I PERSONALLY find if I can look at the words and practice them myself, it makes it easier for me to pick them out when I hear them.
I find native speaking to be quite fast so any assistance I can give myself in understanding what’s coming at me helps. Otherwise I try and figure out the first word I don’t know and literally miss the rest of the sentence.
Again. I’m asking this question for my own learnings and what I’m trying to do based on personal experience for what works for me.
