|
 |
Can one speak better than understand? | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : General discussion |  | |
| s_allard Triglot Senior Member Canada Joined 5374 days ago 2704 posts - 5425 votes  Speaks: French*, English, Spanish Studies: Polish | Message 73 of 186 22 September 2012 at 2:26pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
This is really strange for me, the idea that if I don't understand what other people say then my speaking skills are better than my listening skills because I can speak to myself. By that same logic our speaking skills are always better than our listening skills because most of us never approach native-like listening skills.
For many people, but obviously not all, this goes against common logic. When I see in a job interview that a candidate has written "speaks French" on the cv, one of the things I do is ask some questions in French. If the candidate can't answer the questions properly because he or she doesn't understand them, what am I to conclude? I don't think my French is that strange. In fact, I go out of my way to speak carefully and simply. I really don't care if that person can speak excellent French to the mirror or to the cat. If the job requires interaction with people, then I want to know if they can talk with people. Frankly, I"m always leery of people who say that can speak better than they can understand because there is no way of testing this interactively. In my observation, people tend to overrate their speaking capability. I know that listening comprehension requires work, but are there people who really believe that it's easier to speak than to listen? Are there people who really say, "I have no problems speaking language x, but I can't understand it very well?" I would be very curious indeed to hear them speak the language. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Serpent Octoglot Senior Member Russian Federation serpent-849.livejour Joined 6541 days ago 9753 posts - 15779 votes 4 sounds Speaks: Russian*, English, FinnishC1, Latin, German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese Studies: Danish, Romanian, Polish, Belarusian, Ukrainian, Croatian, Slovenian, Catalan, Czech, Galician, Dutch, Swedish | Message 74 of 186 22 September 2012 at 3:09pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
Of course if people don't understand anything they'll be modest about their active skills, even if they know the grammar and vocab and can use it *quite well*. I repeat, when you ENJOY grammar more than you enjoy movies, you can learn to produce good (maybe not always perfect) sentences. If you also like music this will help you develop a good accent. But if you don't like watching news nor movies nor sports, you may find yourself learning unnecessarily subtle grammar before you're able to understand a simple news report or especially an ordinary native speaker. And yes, that's only slightly more extreme than where I've been with Finnish. Yet another way to look at it: can your writing be better than your listening? Absolutely, if you don't listen. This doesn't necessarily mean that your pronunciation will be incomprehensible - this depends on the language and on how you've learned the pronunciation (if at all). So if you master the grammar before mastering enough vocabulary passively, yes, you'll be able to speak and write but not to listen. Of course it makes sense from an employer's point of view that if you can't interact with people, it doesn't matter whether you can talk to your cat. But like it's been said: is the glass half-empty or half-full? The optimistic view would be that you mostly need to work on your listening if you can speak but not converse. (In my - more recent - experience, listening gives a boost to your speaking skills. If you do listening your transition from writing to speaking might happen automatically) 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Bao Diglot Senior Member Germany tinyurl.com/pe4kqe5 Joined 5710 days ago 2256 posts - 4046 votes Speaks: German*, English Studies: French, Spanish, Japanese, Mandarin | Message 75 of 186 22 September 2012 at 4:24pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
May I summarize?
1. It is certainly possible to feel more comfortable speaking than listening at the same level, about the same topics. The reasons for this might be that one's studies concentrated on grammar and neglected listening comprehension; that one dislikes ambiguity and therefore assesses one's ability differently; that one has trouble with non-standard speech or a strong devide between standard and colloquial speech; or that the language in question is particularly challenging in that regard for another reason. 2. Some people are good at making use of their conversation partner's language skills and so can handle situations that they couldn't without using that kind of assistance. This skill can be seen as independent from you actual language skills.* It also depends on how experienced and willing the other person is to interpret your utterings. 3. The statement 'I speak better than I understand' isn't useful when asking for guidance to improve your language skills, or when telling other people what skills you have (job interview, planning group activities etc). It is useful when your conversation partner overestimates your comprehension, but I personally would choose a humbler way of phrasing it. *I can survive just fine in everyday life just using body language and facial expressions only, and letting other people do the talking and guessing. I usually choose not to because I fear they might find it annoying. But it's amazing how much you can convey that way. I also made some experiments with my Spanish host mum - as long as I just mumbled just about anything and gesticulated, her mind filled in the gaps. But when I resorted to doing the same gestures without talking she complained that she couldn't understand me if I didn't talk. (XD) Edited by Bao on 22 September 2012 at 4:24pm 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Kerrie Senior Member United States justpaste.it/Kerrie2 Joined 5339 days ago 1232 posts - 1740 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Spanish | Message 76 of 186 22 September 2012 at 5:32pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
I don't learn languages to be tested, or to prove anything to anyone.
You can stop with the derisive cat remarks already. You are having a different conversation than everyone else is. They are discussing speaking. You are discussing conversation skills. The difference between speaking and comprehension is the timing. When you are speaking, you are thinking before the words are uttered. You have time to formulate what you are going to say, within the confines of your present knowledge. You formulate your speech based on the vocabulary and grammar you are familiar with. On the other hand, when you are listening (and trying to understand), you are thinking after the words are spoken. Even assuming the speaker stays within the confines of your vocabulary and grammar knowledge, you have to be able to process the information fast enough to keep up with the speaker. This decoding process is what some people have a harder time with, especially when they do not have a lot of listening exposure. 10 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Bao Diglot Senior Member Germany tinyurl.com/pe4kqe5 Joined 5710 days ago 2256 posts - 4046 votes Speaks: German*, English Studies: French, Spanish, Japanese, Mandarin | Message 77 of 186 22 September 2012 at 6:25pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
Please define both. For slow people like me, who can see other conversation skills that surpass speaking ability, yet can't see speaking as independent from conversation skills as a whole. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Kerrie Senior Member United States justpaste.it/Kerrie2 Joined 5339 days ago 1232 posts - 1740 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Spanish | Message 78 of 186 22 September 2012 at 6:43pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
According to thefreedictionary.com: TO SPEAK 1. To utter words or articulate sounds with ordinary speech modulation; talk. 2. To convey thoughts, opinions, or emotions orally. TO CONVERSE 1. To engage in a spoken exchange of thoughts, ideas, or feelings.
Edited by Kerrie on 22 September 2012 at 6:45pm 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Serpent Octoglot Senior Member Russian Federation serpent-849.livejour Joined 6541 days ago 9753 posts - 15779 votes 4 sounds Speaks: Russian*, English, FinnishC1, Latin, German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese Studies: Danish, Romanian, Polish, Belarusian, Ukrainian, Croatian, Slovenian, Catalan, Czech, Galician, Dutch, Swedish | Message 79 of 186 22 September 2012 at 6:56pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
For example, you can understand something early in a conversation and tell a story related to that. Perhaps you simply recognize a geographical proper name and say: Oh, X? I've been there... And then you speak about your trip. This could even be a prepared Schechtmann-style "island" but then this doesn' prove your speaking is good. But if you produce this on the spot, yes, you speak well even if you can't answer the follow-up questions (which means your listening/conversation skills are poor).
3 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Bao Diglot Senior Member Germany tinyurl.com/pe4kqe5 Joined 5710 days ago 2256 posts - 4046 votes Speaks: German*, English Studies: French, Spanish, Japanese, Mandarin | Message 80 of 186 22 September 2012 at 7:43pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
The first definition of 'speaking' does indeed not mention the listener, but the second one does (convey). Language is a communication medium. In order for it to serve its purpose, there needs to be a speaker, the medium, and an audience. The medium needs to follow certain conventions to allow the speaker to convey their thoughts etc. to the listener, who in turn needs to know the conventions well enough to be able to decode the utterances. If too many of those conventions are broken, the meaning will not be conveyed. It still does fit the first definition of speech, but so does reciting dadaist poems. A conversation, on the other hand, is an exchange, meaning: Speaker and listener change roles regularly. What I am trying to say is that even though you don't need the role reversal of a conversation in the act of speaking, you cannot look at speaking as independent from communication. Edited by Bao on 22 September 2012 at 7:50pm 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. |
