Learn or study?

It seems to me that the wrong approach to mastering foreign languages ​​comes from the language error inherent in the Russian language, because of the ambiguity of the word to learn and the common root with the word to learn, because of which their semantic fields are blurred and confused. In English, these words are clearly and unambiguously distinguished:

to teach - to teach in the sense of teaching

to learn - to learn in the sense of learning, to acquire the skill (learn to swim, learn to read, learn to write)
')
to study - to learn in the sense of studying, researching, learning (to study mathematics, to study the theory of swimming styles)

to drill - to teach in the sense of training, training

Also delimited by these words and direction:

to study (at) - to study somewhere

to learn (from) -to learn from someone

be an apprentice - learn some craft, skill.

Thus, completely different things for an English-speaking person are how to learn English - to master, acquire practical skills, and to study English - to study theory, research, learn laws and rules - for a Russian-speaking person they sound the same - to learn English, and in accordance with the rule The carry-overs start and mean the same!

Because of this transfer, instead of teaching, training, giving language skills, unhappy children and adults are forced to study theory, laws, rules and exceptions. It’s like, instead of reading the primer, first-graders would begin to talk about the features of the use of part-time turns in Dostoevsky’s early work.

It sounds stupid "my child is studying walking - he has already taken three steps" or "my cycling research ended at the third pillar" - we learn to walk, talk, ride a bicycle. Why, because of a ridiculous linguistic error, we do not learn the language, but learn it?
source - Philolingvia