Give grammar another chance I consider that you'd better give grammar another chance.(and I'm straight in saying my opinion.) As far as I know, it's exactly an analytical mind that make adults distinct from children ( and this actually give extra strength for an adult to learn a foreign language. Otherwise it would take them far more times of effort and repetence to achieve fluency, and that would somehow exhaust them ). There are crucial differences between a baby and an adult learner, though there are also critical identities. The idea of lexical chunks is valid, and we should pay full attention to it. Your method of 'chunking ' is amazing. What I argue is that language is just a code system that is made up by a mass amount of separate 'patterns'--these refers parallely to grammar, vocabulary, collates, and lexis. Language is just a system to 'transform' inner logic of the common human mind to the outer 'parameters'. And absolute fluency is based on every parameters being set up correctly. You will be floppy and disjunctive if any of these 'transformations' failed to be established clearly. I think the failure of conventional teaching is mostly due to the method of teaching patterns, e.g, grammar, vocabulary, idoms, phrases, etc. If you initially or proactively recognize a pattern in a context, and immediately give a lot of sentences or examples in the same way these patterns fall in, you will figure out the whole sense of them easily, even without knowing the names of the rules or definition of the words. The latter ones are actually not valid in setting up transformations--thus can be bypassed, but taking a sound grasp of a specific pattern cognitively is important. We can achieve this by intuition, but nevertheless you still need to work on it.

For Correction In the technical aspect, IT is a perfect complement to language learning. We can see benefits from almost everywhere due to the information technology, e.g., electronic dictionaries, contacting tools, mass accessible materials online, etc. The reason behind this is that I think IT in its very original purpose is developed to focus on treating these problems, as they are related to communication, to text, etc. But in regard of learning or effective learning, or rather the methodology of learning, IT has nothing to do with all of them. It's quite another issue. It pertains to other human activities and should really be approached with different cares. I think there's still a lot of room for both technical and intellectual innovations, and the further better apps should be somehow based on a combination of the enhancement of both these two sorts of cares.

Please Kindly Correct It Very detailed explanation. It's like deep reading. So I think the two gender are same in their inner character, that is human spirit. The 'ego' in two genders are not two but one. The difference is only valid in performance, that is, related to custom, but is not valid in regard of inner character or 'spiritual character'. So I think, in a deeper judgment, one should only set apart differences among different spiritual character types, but not in either genders. It's much like languages, we share the same thoughts, but we convey them in different languages. There's a theory called Transformational Grammar, meaning we transform our universally common inner 'logical grammar' to the very different outer grammars. I think it's quite true considering the spirit-gender factor. For example, the same spiritual virtue(or vice) can 'transform' itself in to different appearance in two genders, lilke, 'bravery' can show itself as 'fearless' in man, and as 'loyalty' in woman.