From the Inside Out

Yahoo! The Rosetta Stone software arrived today. I eagerly opened the package, ready to immerse myself in the Italian language. At first glance, the bundle seems impressive. It comes with a USB headset and microphone to allow the application to check your pronunciation using speech recognition technology — nifty, eh? It also includes user guides, quick start guides, Italian keyboard guides, and two packages of audio companion CDs. These CDs can be used after completing the online lessons to help reinforce what you just learned. You can listen in your car, on the stereo, or via your MP3 player. Finally, the package includes a sticker of the Rosetta Stone logo. I’m not sure what I’m supposed to do with that, so I’ll be keeping it secured safely in the box for now.

The software and lessons are easy to install. It only takes a few minutes, and then you will be ready to get started. I was able to make it through the first three lessons tonight. It was an interesting experience — very different from anything I’ve done before. Typically, I listen to audio CDs — and read the accompanying vocabulary booklet — learning by using repetition and memorization. First, I hear (or read) the English word, then the corresponding Italian word. Even in the conversational Spanish class that I took, the method was similar.

Rosetta Stone approaches the learning process in a completely different, interactive manner. When the lesson starts, you are instantly presented with Italian words and phrases along with corresponding images. Never do you see any English words in the lesson. They call this the dynamic immersion method. You learn by associating the words with the pictures. According to the Rosetta Stone materials, this is a more natural way of learning a language. They claim it’s similar to how you learned your first language, by connecting words to objects and events around you.

The course incorporates all four language skills — reading, writing, speaking, and listening. It offers multiple lessons and interactive activities to help you achieve competency in all of these areas. At first, I felt like I wasn’t learning anything, but as I begin to progress further, I realized that I was beginning to comprehend the words and phrases — not just by reading the text, but also hearing it. I’ve always found it easy to recognize the written words, but to understand the spoken word was much more difficult for me. With Rosetta Stone, it’s odd. It almost seems to easy. I didn’t feel like I was grasping it, but I was. It just seemed so natural, and the exercises were easy and fun. By the end of the lessons, I was surprised at how much I knew.

The speech recognition feature is also helpful. It ensures that you are pronouncing the words correctly. I would like to see more of it incorporated into the exercises. That’s the only area of potential weakness that I’ve noticed so far. It doesn’t offer many opportunities to speak the language without the words written on the screen. I’m a visual person so it’s easy for me to read the word and remember their meanings. But once the word is gone from the screen, it’s much more difficult for me to recall it. I wish there were more “recall” exercises without text on the screen. Maybe this will change as the lessons progress.

Overall, I’m very pleased with the software. It seems to be an effective yet entertaining way of learning another language. I’ve only completed three lessons so it’s too early for a final verdict. I’ll keep you posted over the coming weeks and give a final report after my trip to Italy in the fall. In the mean time, if you are considering Rosetta Stone, I would recommend it as an excellent learning alternative to the audio-only CDs.

It’s been six years since The X-Files finished its 9-year run on television. Since that time, fans have eagerly awaited the reunion of their favorite FBI duo on the big screen. Tonight, the long wait ended.

Even though the movie was met with lukewarm-to-negative reviews, I was still ready to attend the midnight opening. After all, I am one of those eager fans.

The funny thing is that I didn’t start watching The X-Files until very late in its run. Back then, I mocked people who enjoyed sci-fi. Eventually, I watched the movie on video and became a fan. The X-Files offered something different — a skeptic who questioned everything and tried to explain bizarre, paranormal happenings through scientific reasoning.

Scully didn’t believe. She needed proof and a credible explanation. I identified with that character. For some reason, I have a tough time accepting things without proof, and it’s difficult for me to completely suspend reality (even in fictional entertainment). Even though many of the things presented in The X-Files would never happen in real life, the show tried to provide a plausible scientific explanation, and I appreciated that.

Walking into the theater, my expectations were low. They had been tainted by the early reviews. I was excited to see the movie, but recognized that it probably wasn’t going to be as good as I had hoped.

I Want to Believe tells a stand-alone story void of the popular X-Files conspiracy mythology. I think this was a disappointment to many fans and reviewers. For me, I was okay with it. I don’t mind a good stand-alone story. The problem is that the movie only delivers a decent story, making it feel like an average episode of the TV show. Don’t get me wrong. I still enjoyed it. Seeing Mulder and Scully back together again was great. I also enjoyed that we got to see the evolution of the couple’s complicated relationship. Still, I wish the movie had more of the traditional X-Files elements that fans expect.

If you are a fan, I recommend that you check out the movie. There are many elements you will enjoy. Just don’t go into it expecting the sequel to be as good as the first.

Derrick hooked us up with tickets to an advance screening of Hancock Tuesday night at the Legacy Cinemark in Plano. I wasn’t feeling great, but since I’m a big fan of Will Smith I wasn’t going to turn it down. I’ve been looking forward to this movie for a while, and it didn’t disappoint.

Douglas Young on Imdb.com describes Hancock as “an unhappy and reluctant superhero who is living in his own world. For some unknown reason, Hancock is depressed and has started drinking very heavily. He has saved many lives in Los Angles over the years, but in doing so, he has no regards for damaging buildings, trains, roads, cars, or anything that gets in his way to get the job done. The last time he captured several criminals, it cost the city $9 million to fix the damages. The public has had enough of Hancock, and they want him to stop or go to another city. Then one day, Hancock saves the life of Ray Embrey (Jason Bateman) from being run over by a train. Ray is a Public Relations executive who now can go home to his wife and child, because Hancock was there. Ray owes Hancock his life, and he makes it his mission to change his superhero’s image and have the public cheering him.”

The movie has garnered lukewarm to negative reviews from the critics. However, I’m not a critic; I liked the movie. It was a fun summer flick filled with humor, adventure, and action. Hancock is not a complex movie, but it did have more of a plot than I had originally expected. The movie isn’t deep, but I don’t think anyone seriously expects it to be that way. C’mon, it’s a summer blockbuster after all.