Verbs in Russian Stage One and Two

[Greg Thomson]

I was interested in the following interchange, in that it seems to imply a
surprisngly (to me) traditional philosophy of language learning.


At 17:05 -0500 03-25-1999, J. Douglas Clayton wrote:
>Can anyone explain why in the grammar explanations in these two textbooks
>the second conjugation is placed before the first? (e.g., in Russian Stage
>Two, Appendix XI, pp. 382-3). This seems like just another complexity to be
>explained to students.



At 17:45 -0600 03-25-1999, Benjamin Rifkin wrote:
>As the author of a textbook (Grammatika v kontekste) in which second
>conjugation verbs are presented before first conjugation verbs, I can tell
>you that MY decision was pedagogical.  The terms "second conjugation" and
>"first conjugation" are arbitrary anyway.  The reason that I presented the
>verbs in this order is that there are fewer subtypes of the second
>conjugation than there are of the first conjugation.  It is easier for the
>students to master the second conjugation and then move on to the more
>complex first conjugation.


At 18:36 -0500 03-25-1999, Wayles Browne wrote:
>And why are they called "first conjugation" and "second conjugation"
>given that not all sources agree as to which is first and which is second
>anyway? "i conjugation" and "e conjugation" are much more memorable
>and clear.

I find an idea such as "master the second conjugation and then move on to
the more complex first conjugation" surprising in 1999. Is such a
traditional philosophy of language learning widespread in American
university Russian programs?

Regards,
Greg

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Morning by morning new mercies I see
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Greg Thomson, Ph.D. Candidate (gthomson at gpu.srv.ualberta.ca)
SIL/Thomson, Westpost P.O. Box 109, FIN 53101,
Lappeenranta, FINLAND
Phone: 7-812-246-35-48 (in St. Petersburg, Russia)