R_jay wrote:This may be because of my profession perhaps I have an analytical approach to everything, and need to see the reason for why things are the way they are, otherwise I have trouble remembering. I'm sure different people respond to different learning methods.
I'm on the analytical side myself. I pretty much speak unconscious Mandarin now without reference to rules, but every once in a while I think back to rules long since forgotten and try to make sure I'm doing it right.
On the flipside, and correct me if I'm wrong since I really don't know the TRPS/CI approach, but very generally speaking, the CI approach seems very similar to what I semi-naturally do with my son. His noun vocabularly has slowly been built up, and we use the nouns that we know he knows a lot more frequently than nouns we know he doesn't. We have taught him a lot of words through translation. If he knows the English word, we tell him the word in Mandarin, or vice versa. We also expose him to a lot of different grammar patterns (probably more of the simpler ones than the complex ones). I may be getting CI wrong but it was my sense that it involves some variation on this theme. Every so often, my son just out of nowhere produces a sentence using new grammar he has probably heard many times from us, and it always strikes me as amazing. Now of course you can't compare adults and toddlers, but what struck me was the vague similarity of CI with "natural" language learning. And obviously we know natural learning works for toddlers.
So I too am still on the curious rather than convinced side, but I'm very analytical too, and still I see how CI is promising.