|
 |
IQ needed to be a hyperglot | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Polyglots |  | |
| Walshy Triglot Senior Member Australia Joined 6941 days ago 335 posts - 365 votes  Speaks: English*, Spanish, German | Message 121 of 164 18 April 2007 at 3:49am | IP Logged | ||||||||
Speaking Spanish "poorly but with great confidence" does not mean that he is fluent, as you said earlier. I didn't realise the political context of McClellan's quotes that I posted, but I am aware of how slippery and evasive those press secretaries can be. So I'll disregard McClellan's statements. This site has some snippets from Spanish speakers whom were asked what they thought about Bush's Spanish.
Ahhh, so that's where your quote originated. Edited by Walshy on 18 April 2007 at 3:51am 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Dunn Newbie United States Joined 6431 days ago 4 posts - 4 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Cantonese | Message 122 of 164 18 April 2007 at 2:42pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
Yes, that was it.
I was under the impression that he had a poor accent, but "spoke with great Confidence" - something I took to count as fluent. However, it appears it may be murkier than this. It seems Bush probably knows Spanish at an intermediate level - he can understand it probably, but speaks it poorly though "confidently". If this is the case, I would consider this "fluent", but I can see how others may not. Maybe once Bush is out of office we can get this cleared up once and for all... Any reporters here? 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Cage Diglot aka a.ardaschira, Athena, Michael Thomas Senior Member United States Joined 6623 days ago 382 posts - 393 votes Speaks: English*, Spanish Studies: French, Portuguese | Message 123 of 164 07 June 2007 at 11:39pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
One can probably become a hyperpolyglot with a more less average IQ. Intelligence is more a function of creativity than learning something that already exists among other criteria. But does this number matter when none of us harness's more than a small percentage of our brain's ability? Isn't the main difference between someone who is fluent in 10 languages and one who is monolingual is that the former had the interest and desire to achieve this and the latter did not? The latter may have opted instead for a Ph.D. in Nuclear Phyiscs and achieved a reading knowledge of French and German for his grad program. Both are awesome accomplishments. Genius is 90% perspiration and 10% inspiration. Edited by Cage on 07 June 2007 at 11:40pm 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| leosmith Senior Member United States Joined 6549 days ago 2365 posts - 3804 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Tagalog | Message 124 of 164 08 June 2007 at 12:35pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
about 100
1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| xtremelingo Trilingual Triglot Senior Member Canada Joined 6286 days ago 398 posts - 515 votes Speaks: English*, Hindi*, Punjabi* Studies: German, French, Arabic (Written) | Message 125 of 164 08 September 2007 at 10:09pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
I.Q. does correlate with the ability to learn languages. In fact, I.Q. is all about learning ability.
Just because you have a high I.Q. does not imply you will know everything. It is your ability to learn new concepts is what is important. You can have an I.Q. of 160, but if you have never opened up a book on Mathematics. You can be pretty sure a 10 year old will still outperform you. However, DOMAIN SPECIFIC GIFTEDNESS - LANGUAGE LEARNING: I.Q. is also domain-specific. Many people can be gifted in some areas and deficient in others. This is a common. How do I know this. I've majored in Gifted Education at the University of Toronto for Physics and Mathematics. I'm a certified Physics Teacher and I did my undergraduate degree in Engineering. Does this make me intelligent? *Absolutely NOT*. So why do I tell you this? One thing I can say for sure is that I have encountered many many intelligent people in my lifetime and I have noticed very obvious differences between smart people and not-so smart people. Language in fact is a very important indicator of intelligence. Persons that are able to articulate themselves well often do better in cognitive ability tests. This might be attributed to their ability to memorize vocabulary, construct sentences logically and use them effectively. I have also worked with plenty of special-ED students, both gifted and learning-disabled. There are very clear differences in learning ability, and language is the most obvious one. In fact, each and every student in a classroom is intellectually different. There is no one-size-fits all approach. This is why I find it really comical when people on these forums as "how long will it take to learn X language?" It all varies on your personal ability. Some people can learn something half the time it would take another, some even faster and others even slower -- without changing anything significantly in the same exact cirriculum and/or methods. For those that are polyglots, this may not conclude that you have a very high I.Q. but it does suggest you do have a domain-specific gift that was opened through high motivation (which is another indicator of giftedness). Just because you are good at learning languages, doesn't mean you will be good at welding or playing chess. In a happy, utopian world; we would like to believe that everyone is equal. Most people won't complain that they can't run a 100 m race under 8.4 seconds. I.Q. follows the same premise. As some are athletically gifted, some are intellectually gifted. The problem with the latter is that, to many, "smarts" are innate and seem to hold a greater importance in the long-term sceme of things. This is why I.Q. is a topic that often bothers people, because it is considered innate, permanent and unchangeable. MOTIVATION AND PRACTICE CAN IMPROVE I.Q/LEARNING ABILITY TO SOME DEGREE: The truth is, I.Q. can be increased and/or improved. Donovon Bailey (1996 Olympic 100 m Gold Medalist) did not just get out of bed one morning, run the race and win. He practiced, had alot of motivation, determination and practice. This practice strengthened his muscles, it fine-tuned his brain for athletic (particularly running) performance. Your brain can also be fine-tuned for intellectual pursuits as well, whether it be learning languages, mathematics, software programming etc. You can become good at things through practice. This is why it is always important to be consistent and do your homework! It will develop and promote more blood flow to those areas in your brain, it will promote better neural linkages and strengthen those areas of your brain. Therefore we can say, there is such thing as physical excercise and there is such thing as MENTAL exercise. This is why many polyglots will say once they have learned a new foreign language, they find learning all other consecutive/concurrent languages so much easier. Many might attribute the ease of acquiring another language because of correlated grammar, vocabulary etc, however most people forget that much of their increased language-learning performance has simply to do with the practice they have given their brain in acquiring the language -- not the actual language itself. As for I.Q. Generally speaking from my own academic studies about this topic. You can expect that students with an IQ range of 110+ (with high motivation) would be optimal for multiple language learning. Below that, it wouldn't be a surprise if they still have problems with their mother tongue -- let alone learn a new language. To make sense, lets put it this way. To be a polyglot, for the different profile of the person. Low Motivation to learn requires therefore higher overal I.Q. High motivation to learn requires therefore lower overall I.Q. Optimal. High motivation, High I.Q. Unhelpful. Low Motivation, Low I.Q. AS FOR RACE/IQ DIFFERENCES: As for the RACE/IQ debate. No studies have adequately proven without significant/obvious BIAS the differences among ethnic/racial groups with regard to IQ. As a teacher, that works in Toronto (considered one of the most multicultural cities in the world), I have had students from virtually every background on Earth. I have had smart students from all backgrounds -- yes including black students. However, the differences I find with background has nothing to do with learning-ability, but moreso with cultural attitude and encouragement. Some cultures don't emphasize or prioritize academic achievement as opposed to say athletic or musical achievement and others are quite the opposite. Of course a Chinese kid (stereotype) whose parents are Neurosurgeons might place particular emphasis on Mathematics and Science. Whereas a Black child (stereotype) whose father is in jail and grew up with a single uneducated mother might have different responsibilities and aspirations. However this does not imply that they have different or inferior learning abilities whatsoever. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| William Camden Hexaglot Senior Member United Kingdom Joined 6271 days ago 1936 posts - 2333 votes Speaks: English*, German, Spanish, Russian, Turkish, French | Message 126 of 164 23 September 2007 at 2:48pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
I have not read all the large number of posts on this topic and I may be repeating what someone else wrote. But I am not convinced knowing foreign languages is all that closely connected to intelligence. I think it is environmental to a large degree. Native English speakers often have a poor reputation as linguists (an interesting subject in itself) but I think the ubiquity of English is a factor in that. Whereas someone living in a border region may well be exposed to one or more foreign languages. Somebody who speaks French and German very well may not be especially intelligent - they may simply be from Luxembourg.
Polish Jews who left records of the Nazi occupation mentioned that the German SS individuals they encountered who spoke Polish at all, albeit often badly, did so because they were from Prussia or Silesia - German territory close to Polish-language areas (and Silesia actually had a Polish minority at the time). They weren't necessarily smarter than the other SS - they simply had more exposure to Polish. For one reason or another, quite intelligent people do not learn a foreign language or do not try in the first place. I posted on another thread about the expatriate American film director Joseph Losey (died 1984), who lived in Paris for much of the 1970s but never learned the French language. He is said to have explained this by saying that he did not like doing something he could not do well right away. Obviously you do not know a foreign language well within a few days of starting it. He basically lacked the patience to learn it, I think. Losey made films in French during his stay there, some of them very good, but relied heavily on interpreters. Edited by William Camden on 13 October 2007 at 7:34am 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| ChrisWebb Senior Member United Kingdom Joined 6262 days ago 181 posts - 190 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Korean | Message 127 of 164 25 October 2007 at 8:31am | IP Logged | ||||||||
I second the sentiment here. I think GWB is more in control than he likes to appear, often it can be an advantage to be 'misunderestimated' afterall. I'm no fan but I'm pretty sure Bush is no fool. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| William Camden Hexaglot Senior Member United Kingdom Joined 6271 days ago 1936 posts - 2333 votes Speaks: English*, German, Spanish, Russian, Turkish, French | Message 128 of 164 25 October 2007 at 4:07pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
1 person has voted this message useful |
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
