Explicit VS Implicit Language Knowledge

What is the relationship between explicit and implicit language knowledge? Dr. Jennifer Noonan discusses.
This is a clip from our podcast episode, "Second Language Acquisition for Biblical Studies with Jennifer Noonan."
You can view the full episode here: • Second Language Acquis...

[@GandalfTheWise0002]

Awesome series here. A few issues I've run across in my research into non-traditional learning and education and practice:
1. Different people have different capabilities with regard to their short-term/working memory, procedural (implicit) memory, and declarative (explicit) memory. This is related to differences in IQ and similar measures. My understanding is that studying differences in working, procedural, and declarative memory is an active area of research with trying to figure out how in the world to even measure them well being a priority among some right now.
These differences strongly suggest that some people can more easily use the scaffolding of explicit learning to move to implicit skills; for others, it is more difficult. This means different people will likely require different materials and methods to efficiently make progress for the time and effort they put in. The choice of materials and methods for a particular course is largely choosing the winners and losers before students step into a classroom or open a textbook. My extensive reading of self-taught polyglots strongly suggests that different people find different balances of implicit vs explicit learning at different stages of progress most efficient for them to gain skills. It is this efficiency that allows them to make much progress in many languages. It is lack of this efficiency that leads to many burning excessive time and effort with few results to show.
My personal experience (as a physicist/mathematician) is that explicit learning of skills such as languages (grammar) or musical instruments (music theory) overwhelms my brain to the point where it blocks me from implicit usage. I'm very good at explicit learning, which perhaps contributes to this issue. If I do not start with heavy implicit learning first for skill based learning, it is very difficult for me to drop out of analysis mode where I am processing rules as I do something. I quickly hit a plateau that is difficult to get off because I hit the limit of how fast I can process rules in my head. For me, starting w/implicit allows me to quickly improve while later adding in explicit learning to troubleshoot and hone my automatized implicit skills for more quality. I suspect that this differs from person to person.
2. Most Christians view immediate perfection in understanding as being far more important than continuous improvement of reading skills. IOW, most would prefer to spend hours researching a single passage to gain some level of mastery over it now. In contrast, far fewer would rather read several pages per day with limited, but improving, comprehension willing to celebrate the small victories for a lifelong skill of increasingly fluent reading of scripture. We usually treasure masterful exposition of a passage as a higher priority than imperfect daily devotional reading where we are willing to leave some things as not fully understood until the next time we run across it. I'd guess it is this prioritization that causes most schools to focus on explicit learning of languages as a basis for discussing a passage in English.
3. Most courses are based on our assembly line system of western education of micro mastery of long lists of items according to a deadline. In other words, most students of Greek and Hebrew are forced to memorize paradigms and vocab lists to pass tests. Any implicit practice of reading or study is often seen as a means of improving grades rather than a beautiful rewarding end in itself. My observation is that many implicit practices advocated for Greek and Hebrew learning are primarily for the purpose of aiding explicit learning by improving vocabulary retention or verb parsing,
4. There is often a tacit and unproven assumption that implicit learning is somehow inferior to explicit learning because explicit learners can wax eloquent in English using grammatical terms about Greek or Hebrew. This is like comparing how well fish or monkeys can climb trees or swim. Explicit learning evaluation is rooted in waxing eloquent in English talking about Greek or Hebrew. Implicit learning evaluation is rooted in how fluently our brain responds directly to reading or listening to Greek or Hebrew without resorting to English processing. They are two different things with different characteristics and different benefits. My sense is that most Christians fail to make this distinction and fail to offer students the option of focusing on exposition and analysis mastery or reading fluency. Most seem to assume that reading fluency in Greek or Hebrew is an advanced skill for super-learners rather than the natural consequence of using implicit methods of practice.