the article was padded in history of the author and other nonsense. I asked ChatGPT to summarize only what's in the article. Here's it's summary

TL:DR;

What the article ultimately says is “best”

From the researchers’ perspective:

Early learning is driven by exposure and statistical pattern recognition

Progress requires sustained immersion-like input

True fluency demands long-term interaction, feedback, and social use

Technology helps but does not replace traditional instruction or real communication

There is no endorsement of one magic method. The article’s conclusion is essentially:

Language learning is slow, exposure-driven, cognitively grounded, and requires long-term human interaction.

--- long summary ---

1. We learn languages through statistical pattern detection

The experiment highlights cross-situational learning (CSL) — the brain’s natural ability to:

Track recurring sounds

Notice patterns in how words co-occur

Gradually infer meaning from frequency and context

Do this even without explicit instruction or feedback

The researchers argue this reflects how language learning works in real immersion environments: You are exposed to lots of ambiguous input and your brain extracts structure from repetition.

People can learn very fast by keeping track of statistics in the environment.

So the article emphasizes that language acquisition begins with pattern recognition under exposure, not formal grammar lessons.

2. Microlearning can help — but only at an early stage

Short, repeated sessions (30 minutes per day in the experiment) produced measurable improvement in both Portuguese and Mandarin tone tasks.

However, this was:

Basic vocabulary mapping

Artificial or simplified input

Early-stage acquisition

The article does not claim this leads to fluency.

3. Prior language experience improves pattern extraction

The author performed unusually well in Portuguese partly because:

Knowledge of French and Spanish helped detect grammar patterns.

Familiarity with how languages work improves recognition of structure.

So experience strengthens your ability to exploit statistical learning.

4. Memory capacity and phonological sensitivity matter

The researchers identify core abilities involved in language learning:

Good ear for pronunciation and rhythm

Ability to detect subtle sound differences

Working memory capacity (holding sentences in mind while processing them)

These cognitive factors influence success.

5. Fast fluency claims are unrealistic

The article is explicit:

Achieving fluency requires sustained exposure, interaction, feedback and social use over many months or years.

It references the US Defense Language Institute:

Up to 7 hours per day

~64 weeks to reach basic professional proficiency

So rapid-fluency marketing claims are contradicted by real-world data.

6. Technology is supplementary, not sufficient

Apps, chatbots, VR, and microlearning tools:

Provide additional practice

Improve access

Offer feedback

But they do not replace high-level, deep language study or human interaction.

7. Real proficiency requires human interaction and cultural nuance

The article stresses that:

Knowing words is not the same as understanding what people say back.

A large portion of language is common vocabulary, but real conversation includes rarer words and cultural meaning.

Cultural nuance and idiomatic understanding come from social use.

What's the best way to learn a new language?