Mnemonics - Backward linking L1 to L2

Hi Guys, I have had good success with the mnemonics. In conversations in L2, phrases and words are started to jump to head and tongue when answering questions and simple conversation. My problem is going from L1 to L2. Starting a conversation or just saying my simple thoughts as they occur.
I lack the backward link to the sound in L2. making conversation stiff. Am I doing something wrong in the link method? If someone asks me to interpret something, the L1 sound are not creating images or words in my head of the L2.

Thanks for any advice.

Thanks bjoern, (L1 English / L2 Bahasa Indonesia)
I think I found a good explanation in the thread
“Many(and I mean it) useful tips you need to learn massive vocabulary with Mnemonics”.

If you know the alphabet in forward order, you may not be able to rattle it off in reverse order.
Just like in programming, links are one directional. A bidirectional link is a pair of links. In other words, linking back to the previous item is something you have to memorize separately.

A doubly linked list requires a pair of pointers between each pair of elements. One forward, one backwards.

No. I meant “link”.

Sorry my Question has caused more confusion than it’s probably worth and was not very clear:
Example (L1- English) (L2-Bahasa Indonesia)
L2 –Baik (good) -> sounds like “bike”; - - - - - BIKING is good for you
If you are translating between friends and the English speaker ask you in L1 English, please tell the Indonesian person, I am good.
The sound (good) doesn’t take me to “bike”, “baik”.
Works great along as everybody is using L2, (lots of images appear and I can follow more and more).
So it seems like it helps with passive activities and good for reading and listening. But when doing active activities, speaking and translating there is a gap. I will review my process and success of others.


IMO this topic merits no attention. It’s irrelevant to the OP’s question and irrelevant to the point I made. Google search frequencies mean nothing here. Nor does a creaking knowledge of software from days gone by. Many modern languages today do not use physical address pointers at all. I consider this distraction an ostentatious display of ill informed pedantry. But since it has drawn the attention of the group and wasted everybody’s time, I will explain what I meant.

In the context of software, a “link” is a generic or abstract term meaning a connection between one block of data or code and another. Like many general terms, it has no close definition. HTTP references, Dynamic Link References, File System References as well as memory blocks and data objects fall under this general category. That was all the definition needed for the purpose of of making my point to the OP. His was not a question about software definitions nor an invitation to spurious pedantry.

The target of a link may not be static, it may not even exist at the time that access is requested, as in the case of a web page which is generated on demand. In modern, memory managed languages, such as Java, C# and Javascript, there is no concept of an actual physical address. The word “pointer”, if it is used at all, is synonymous with a reference or a link. Objects are accessed by reference. When an object in memory is actually accessed, the reference is reduced to an actual address in memory but on the next access, that location might be different. That operation occurs at a level below the language itself and the programmer has little or no control.

There are single and doubly linked lists. In common speech, by default, “linked list” means singly linked. Partly because it is by far the most common implementation. Each node in a singly linked list has just one reference to the successor element. It has no reference to its predecessor. Even though it was reached from the previous node, it does not know it and in this case the Reflexive property of the Equality operator A=7, => 7=A does not hold. I don’t understand how one would even imagine it comparable - a moment’s reflection should have made that obvious. A closer comparison would be entailment.

From A => B it does not follow that B => A.

One sometimes encounters a sequence of web pages, each with a link to the next but no back links (of course you can use the browser back arrow but the web pages’ structure does not support this) Consequently it cannot easily be traversed backward.

Likewise, memorizing the Alphabet in forward order does not automatically confer the ability to repeat it backwards fluently. Therefore, it is necessary to deliberately backlink and form a doubly linked list if one wants that facility.

That was all that was needed. This thread is not about the fine definition of software terms. I apologize to the OP for the distraction spurred by my first response. I have no further interest in this nitpicking exercise.