First-year Russian language textbook "Golosa"

[Randolph J. Herber]

I hope that a few comments from a student that has finished his first year and
has been unable to start his second year for a number of scheduling problems
will not be unwelcome in this mailing list.  If they are, I apologoze
therefore, in advance.

My class used the Clark textbook.  I discovered an need for extensive
additional support materials as there were severe deficiencies in grammar,
vocabulary, stylistics (e.g. when does one use v and when does one use na
when discussing a geographic entity), and idioms.  However, I did not expect
the textbook to teach Russian culture and history; it had a more than
sufficient treatment of those topics.

I understand why pronunication and handwriting must be covered very early.
It harder to understand why vocabulary is built before the means to use
it properly and fully are presented.

We did not cover non-present tense until mid-year.  And, the imprefective
vs prefective was never made very clear by the textbook.  As small examples,
the use of the `dummy' po prefectiving prefix and the imprefecting -iv-
root suffix, were never described let alone explained.

I discovered that these are common characteristics of the first year
textbooks written by non-Russian speakers.

I discovered the Thomas Wade grammar which helped considerably.

I discovered the Oxford (one volume for each direction) and Katzner
bidirectional bilingual dictionaries which helped considerably.  Since
then I have added the Academy of Sciences Russian language (4 volume(?)),
the large Russkij Yazyk bilingual (several volumes each), and the Dal`
(4 volume) dictionary sets to my collection.  Finally, I can usually
handle the first page of Izvestiya most of the time.  I consider being
able to read the front page of a newspaper as minimal reading competency.

The equivalent of the Oxford Advanced Learners dictionary for English
for Russian would be very welcome indeed.

I still have not discover good materials for stylistics and idioms.

Reading the Vlasti history of the Russian language helped my understanding
of some of the `corners' of the Russian language, such as the vestigial
dual number, why the inanimate/animate behavior in the accusative and about
the nearly extinct vocative case.  It was interesting for me to learn that
millenium old Russian is closer to modern Russian than Chaucer is to modern
English; it seems almost as close as Shakespeare.  Millenium old English
gives one Beowolf which looks more like German or Icelandic.

Having college educated, many to the candidate level, coworkers available
to me to talk with and write to, on the other hand, has been a great aid.

I have had trouble communicating to some instructors that my primary need
is reading, then writing, and conversation is lowest priority.  It seems
that the instructors' priorities are the opposite.  Such students should
not be punished by the instructiors' priorities.

I am still trying to learn how to translate some aspects of the English
verb into Russian; but I have learned that sometimes those aspects become
particles or idioms.  Consider translating accurately the following sentence
into Russian:

        If I would not have shouted then, I would not have been being
        carried from the burning building when that picture was taken.

Randolph J. Herber, herber at dcdrjh.fnal.gov, +1 708 840 2966, CD/HQ
(Speaking for myself and not for US, US DOE, FNAL nor URA.)
(Product, trade, or service marks herein belong to their respective owners.)