We've just said goodbye to my parents at Toulouse airport after a tiring but very enjoyable eight days. While not happy to stray too far from home without us, they spent a good deal of time exploring the shops and the Friday market and sitting at cafes in the Place de la Republique, grateful for the sunshine and the warmth of Limoux's welcome. They managed very well the brief conversations they had with local sellers and with our neighbours, thanks to hours spent gardening or ironing to the rich, slightly rasping tones of Michel Thomas.
I've listened to Michel Thomas' CD's and was surprised at the level of linguistic sophistication achieved after only forty minutes. In some respects, my mum,whose had no formal tuition for sixty years, speaks 'O' level French. The fact that she has found it difficult to understand the responses of others is hardly surprising given local accents and rapid-fire French. Her accent, too, was surprising and at least as good as the majority of Brits RESIDENT around here. I'd like to hear some of the big wheels who have given Michel Thomas testimonials - Mel Brooks (is he still with us?), Lucille Ball (surely she'd be a voice from the tomb). I wouldn't need a medium to hear Angie Dickinson speaking French, but would I understand her?
But how useful is the MT system? It seems to offer greater linguistic flexibility than learning a phrasebook by rote but does it allow the speaker to start enjoying and re-deploying the nouns and verbs they've picked up? There are certain phrases ("ça ne vaut pas le peine") which seem to stick and sentence constructions using devoir ("Je dois faire quelque chose...") are super-handy. Teaching novices the use of aller in forming the future tense takes them through four years' 'O'level preparation in an instant. But how much does the speaker understand of the words they use? Do they need to understand grammar and syntax? And how do people fare when it comes to writing? If mastering French with Mr T allows a medical journalist to feel "perfectly able to talk to delegates in French" at an AIDS conference in Stockholm (MT website), why are the beginners' French classes nationwide filled with people who have used MT CDs?
Maybe it's a question of confidence. Perhaps that's what Michel Thomas gives people. Not sufficient French to retire to France and to sit in the local bar with with village maire discussing the pros and cons of the CPE over a glass or two of pastis, but enough French to give one the confidence to get by. Certainly enough confidence to holiday, shop, and let the mechanic know that you'll be back for the car in two hours. My mother was happy enough to hit every bread and cake shop in town, a considerable feat in a week! She may not have understood every word spoken but her efforts were appreciated and she got what she wanted.
I'd be sad if I thought foreigners believed Michel Thomas' system sufficient, simply because it allowed them to get what they wanted. It's heartening to see so many residents attempting to learn enough French so that they can contribute as well as consume.
I'm not knocking the man or his system. I'm asking questions from those who might know better the strengths and flaws of this method. If it works, why are the principles not being applied more widely? If it works, should I use it to recover some of my lost Spanish? Any experiences with MT that you'd be willing to share, I'd be happy to read, so all comments welcome.
And finally Monsieur Thomas, should I shell out some hard-earned dosh on the Spanish CDs or ça ne vaut pas la peine?