1.

Юная душа, где ты летала,
По каким заоблачным мирам?
Сколько тайн великих ты познала?
Не заглянешь ли теперь и к нам?
Отворились ветхие засовы,
С грустью ты покинула эфир.
Юная душа, прими оковы,
И добро пожаловать в наш мир.

П.1:
Мир, о чьих законах и порядках
Слухи не стремятся распускать,
Где человек, потерянный в догадках,
Сам себя не может отыскать…

2.
Юная душа во сне летала,
А проснулась – слезы льет ручьем.
Рано, слишком рано, слишком мало…
Ты еще не знаешь ни о чем.
Ты еще надежд не знаешь краха
И желаний наших черных дыр.
Юная душа, прими без страха
Этот страшный, этот чуждый мир.

П.2:

Где судьба в нервических припадках
Может то калечить, то ласкать,
И человек, потерянный в догадках,
Сам себя не в силах отыскать…

3.
Ты спишь, но время близится к рассвету,
Солнца луч упал тебе на грудь.
Впредь всегда иди навстречу свету,
Чтоб, проснувшись, снова не заснуть.
Ангелы слетелись к изголовью,
Демоны отправились на пир.
Юная душа, прими с любовью
Этот странный, этот чудный мир,

П.3:

Мир, в чьих угощениях горько-сладких
Скрыта неземная благодать,
И человек, затерянный в загадках,
Сам себя не в силах разгадать…

Юная душа

Diner Guy

Primera grabación- Presentación

Les petits incidents pendant mon trajet

The mere fact that it's always been a certain way isn't a strong enough justification for it to remain as such.

TRANSCRIPTION
Hello everyone, and welcome to Elsewhere with G. My name is Guyomar, and today I’d like to talk to you about what happens when we challenge convention. I’ve noticed that people often react very negatively, very vehemently when a new idea is presented that goes against conventional wisdom, that suggests a different way of doing things, that’s not what people have been doing for a long time. Often, there’s an appeal to tradition – “Well, we’ve always done this, so it must be good”; “It’s always been this way, so we should keep doing it like this. There’s been no disaster, no catastrophe, so this is good enough.” But what if it can be better? There may be not be any catastrophe in some cases, but there may be no real benefit, and the results may be inferior to what you could achieve if you changed something.

I understand that new ideas should be challenged. I’m also against innovation for innovation’s sake. I don’t believe that what’s new, what’s contemporary is necessarily better than what’s old, what’s classic and I hate the popular narrative of progress, that we’ve come so far and that we’re so much more knowledgeable, so much wiser and more sophisticated than our ancestors. I don’t think that’s the case. I’m neither somebody who likes appeals to tradition nor am I in love with our contemporary world. I just think that if it’s obvious that something isn’t working, we should try to do better, and if evidence suggests that something new works better, I think that we should have an open mind and not become so vehement, not become so emotional and attached to what’s familiar that we don’t see clearly. 

For example, in language learning, there’s often very strong and almost angry pushback against natural methods, against learning through comprehensible input, against the idea that grammar doesn’t have to be taught explicitly. People say that it doesn’t work, that it’s for people who aren’t thoughtful, aren’t analytical, just want to have a good time, have fun, want edutainment and that teaching traditionally – teaching grammar explicitly – gets you results faster. But I don’t think we’re comparing the same thing. I think that in some cases, teaching grammar directly and doing the traditional drills may get you to perform faster on familiar tasks where you’ve learned the format and you know the cues, but I’m not at all convinced, based on what I’ve read, that it leads to language acquisition.

Language acquisition is slow. By nature, it’s going to require a lot of time, but it happens, and it can happen in a matter of a few years depending how far your native language is removed from your target language. The point is that it gets you there. It gets you to acquire that language, to understand it and to have good instincts about how to speak, to communicate naturally, whereas I’ve heard countless stories – I think we’ve all heard them – about people who’ve studied English formally since childhood as a second language and who still have trouble understanding a vary basic conversation and who don’t feel they can say a word fifteen years later, or sometimes twenty years later. Therefore, it’s clear to me that there’s something that doesn’t work about the traditional method.

Argumentum ad antiquitatem (click here for the transcript)

Do you already speak English but want to improve your comprehension of the spoken language and fluency? Have you always loved good books, compelling narratives, and deep conversations? Then, you're in the right place. Here, I'll tell you stories, real stories from my own life, from those of friends, and even from the world of fiction, in clear, slightly simplified English. Sometimes funny, sometimes sad or strange, the stories will always be memorable. My goal is to help you acquire English and enjoy the process, by providing you with compelling "comprehensible input." Ideally, you'll want to spend more time with the language because listening to these stories will bring you pleasure.

Argumentum ad antiquitatem (click here for the transcript)

Elsewhere with G

Related tracks