[rpb92]

You've inspired me to rethink my approach to Anki. I've used it on and off for the last few years, but always fall in the trap of creating cards that were too convoluted. Sounds like I could benefit from some deliberate "laziness".

Did you ever feel like you were answering correctly, on close cards specifically, not because of an improved understanding but because you were associating the correct answer with the prompt/excerpt? Would appreciate any advice on how to avoid this!

[ekidd]

> Did you ever feel like you were answering correctly, on close cards specifically, not because of an improved understanding but because you were associating the correct answer with the prompt/excerpt?

I actually suspect that associating the word with the context helps, as surprising as that might be.

Let's say I grab a few sentences from an interesting article, and I boldface a word. I'll mark the card as "pass" if I at least sort of understand it in context.

On day 1, I honestly might find the word fairly confusing. I can explain what it means, but maybe the grammar is unfamiliar. Ditto for the first few reviews. But then around day 8 or so, the card disappears until day 20 or 30. And the next time I see that card, suddenly the odd bit of grammar is completely natural and obvious. There's maybe some kind of medium-term memory consolidation mechanism occurring? Something happens when I'm not looking at it.

Seeing the word in context somehow allows my brain to grab on. The human brain contains some incredibly powerful language learning machinery. In adults, that machinery still exists. Even if it's a bit rusty. And that machinery seems to work best on semi-comprehensible speech in a natural context. So think of Anki less as a set of facts you must learn, and more as a tool to distill and concentrate natural language so that you can let your brain work on your weak points. (And as soon as possible, start reading lots of books and watching TV! I learned the hardest 10% of my vocabulary using Anki, and much of the rest from context reading books.)

Also, I find it fascinating that LLMs are trained using a very similar process. Either "predict the next word" or "fill in the blank". Now, they need a lot more input than any human does, but the fact that fill-in-the-blanks works so well in both cases is fascinating.

Here are two of the most interesting experiments I tried with Anki:

http://www.randomhacks.net/substudy/ https://blog.beeminder.com/hieroglyphs/

(The only language I ever bothered to push to a high level was French. Spanish and ancient Egyptian were basically experiments to see how quickly I could pick up the basics, using the tricks I learned while working on French. A language that you can use at a professional level is a bit like a pet; it requires ongoing care.)

[jamager]

That is a legitimate problem of SRS (recognition vs knowing), I use a few ways to avoid it:

-Don't do many repetitions of the same card. Eg. if i want to learn 5 new specific words, maybe I use 6-8 sentences that each use 2 new words, so that each new word shows in 2-3 cards. Then I only review each cards 6-8 times in a 2-month period (normally).

-Use long intervals. I rather forget than learn to recognize the thing. But even if I forget, I almost never click "fail". You learn with retrieval effort, even if you just forgotten the thing (that's science)

-Even so, by the 4-5th rep I start recognizing cards, so I be mindful when reviewing, and force myself to really think the answer (occasionally, writing down the answer, for instance). This clashes with my principle of going fast, so there is deff a balance.

-I don't track "streaks", but if I struggle or I have the feeling that something shows up too much, I archive and create more cards.