Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Learning to Learn

kevin.the.li

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 142 posts

Re: Learning to Learn

#21

Post by joshdavham »

dinobones wrote: post #7

I've been wanting to try this approach for learning a language. In English for example, learning the 800 most common words, you can understand 75% of the language: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-44569277 . I'd love to start fresh on a new language, take 800 new words, try to learn 10 a day, and see where I get after 3 months. Can I really understand 75% of text if I have perfect recall of those 800 words?

> Can I really understand 75% of text if I have perfect recall of those 800 words?

This thing you're talking about is called 'word coverage'. It's the percentage of words you know in a given text. I've created lots of word coverage graphs in the past, and, as research has shown, you won't really be understanding much until you reach the high 90s in terms of word coverage. The famous number for being able to read English texts extensively requires a word coverage of around 98%. And while it depends on the text, in order to reach 98%, you generally need to know around the top 5k words in a language.

Funny enough, when you understand 75% of the words in a text, you subjectively feel like you're understanding like 10% of what's going on.

Re: Learning to Learn

#22

Post by joshdavham »

supriyo-biswas wrote: post #11
mc3301 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Give learning Japanese a try. It's a meta-learning adventure! There are 3 distinct classes of characters (two syllabaries that each have a perfect matching pair with the other, 46 each plus some compounds) and the third are (mostly) chinese Kanji characters. Fun stuff!

I wonder if there is a similar "Pareto priciple"-esque approach that one could use to learn Japanese.

Kinda!

The frequency of words in every human language follows the Zipf distribution, which is a power law, like the pareto distribution.

Some learners create what are called frequency lists, which are lists of the most common words, and learn those words first. In general, you get (disproportionately) more bang for your buck from learning the most common words than the rarer words when it comes to understanding.

However, due to the very long tail of word frequency distributions, you eventually need to just start learning words as they come and stop trying to over-optimize with a frequency list.

Re: Learning to Learn

#23

Post by dartharva »

j45 wrote: post #12
dartharva wrote: post #2

This is something I have personally struggled with, so I wish the author elaborated more. If you are a novice, how do you quickly identify what the foundational knowledge is? How do you know what makes you an expert and not an "expert beginner" as the author says to the extent that you can build a personal curriculum about it?

I'm surprised the course by the name of this post isn't here. The post covers a great mindset, but the math really is one thing, and learning how you learn and how you can learn is invaluable. This is a great course to start learning about your learning. https://www.coursera.org/learn/learning-how-to-learn After/with this, there is a slew of adult learning knowledge that will likely make you feel better. One key is l…

I checked these out but couldn't find the answer to the questions I am asking. It tells you how to maximize efficiency while learning, but doesn't tell you how to identify what you should be learning in the first place and what the sequence of your focus should be when you start.

Re: Learning to Learn

#24

Post by quantum_state »

dartharva wrote: post #2

This is something I have personally struggled with, so I wish the author elaborated more. If you are a novice, how do you quickly identify what the foundational knowledge is? How do you know what makes you an expert and not an "expert beginner" as the author says to the extent that you can build a personal curriculum about it?

It is an iterative process. One would move forward with a baseline foundation and pay attention to the difficulties and inefficiencies in the learning process to triangulate the additional foundation needed.

Re: Learning to Learn

#25

Post by j45 »

dartharva wrote: post #23
j45 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm surprised the course by the name of this post isn't here. The post covers a great mindset, but the math really is one thing, and learning how you learn and how you can learn is invaluable. This is a great course to start learning about your learning. https://www.coursera.org/learn/learning-how-to-learn After/with this, there is a slew of adult learning knowledge that will likely make you feel better. One key is l…

I checked these out but couldn't find the answer to the questions I am asking. It tells you how to maximize efficiency while learning, but doesn't tell you how to identify what you should be learning in the first place and what the sequence of your focus should be when you start.

https://www.coursera.org/learn/learning-how-to-learn

Re: Learning to Learn

#26

Post by zfnmxt »

Posts like this that talk about learning "efficiency" always come off as soulless and dystopian to me. I think learning should be fun and that fun learning is the most effective---that's the only thing I optimize for and I certainly don't think about efficiency percentages. What a drag that would be.

Re: Learning to Learn

#27

Post by eacapeisfutuile »

dartharva wrote: post #23
j45 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm surprised the course by the name of this post isn't here. The post covers a great mindset, but the math really is one thing, and learning how you learn and how you can learn is invaluable. This is a great course to start learning about your learning. https://www.coursera.org/learn/learning-how-to-learn After/with this, there is a slew of adult learning knowledge that will likely make you feel better. One key is l…

I checked these out but couldn't find the answer to the questions I am asking. It tells you how to maximize efficiency while learning, but doesn't tell you how to identify what you should be learning in the first place and what the sequence of your focus should be when you start.

What do you specifically want to learn? What you need to learn will generally make itself known, if you have some general goal? Just starting at all is the best way to start.

Re: Learning to Learn

#28

Post by celurian92 »

zfnmxt wrote: post #26

Posts like this that talk about learning "efficiency" always come off as soulless and dystopian to me. I think learning should be fun and that fun learning is the most effective---that's the only thing I optimize for and I certainly don't think about efficiency percentages. What a drag that would be.

I so much agree with you. I understand and remember the things I learn more when I am having fun or it piqued my curiosity. But I guess shortness of time needs us to focus on the efficiency aspect of it too.

Re: Learning to Learn

#29

Post by autumnstwilight »

dinobones wrote: post #7

I've been wanting to try this approach for learning a language. In English for example, learning the 800 most common words, you can understand 75% of the language: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-44569277 . I'd love to start fresh on a new language, take 800 new words, try to learn 10 a day, and see where I get after 3 months. Can I really understand 75% of text if I have perfect recall of those 800 words?

In my experience, the words that carry the most information in a sentence are the less common ones. Here's what understanding 80% of a sentence is like:

"I went to the sdjfkdsh and got a new ghjsakgfh."

The missing words could be "dealership" and "truck" or "embassy" and "passport" or quite a lot of other pairs that change the topic entirely, so reading or listening to something with 80% understanding generally requires a dictionary in one hand to get you up to a reasonable level of comprehension. That said, I personally think language learning is enjoyable and rewarding, and tackling the most common word list is a good first step.

Re: Learning to Learn

#30

Post by sam29681749 »

zfnmxt wrote: post #26

Posts like this that talk about learning "efficiency" always come off as soulless and dystopian to me. I think learning should be fun and that fun learning is the most effective---that's the only thing I optimize for and I certainly don't think about efficiency percentages. What a drag that would be.

I somewhat disagree. Although having fun is important, I also want to make the most of my time. further, I think some aspects of learning can be a real slog, but when you get through it you find it rewarding.
Post reply on HN