303 messages over 38 pages: << Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 37 38 Next >>
tarvos Super Polyglot Winner TAC 2012 Senior Member China likeapolyglot.wordpr Joined 4708 days ago 5310 posts - 9399 votes Speaks: Dutch*, English, Swedish, French, Russian, German, Italian, Norwegian, Mandarin, Romanian, Afrikaans Studies: Greek, Modern Hebrew, Spanish, Portuguese, Czech, Korean, Esperanto, Finnish
| Message 289 of 303 17 April 2013 at 2:53pm | IP Logged |
beano wrote:
We could easily invent lots of what-if scenarios, but the thread deals
with the prospects of adult learners reaching native-like levels in a foreign language.
I assume we are talking about people who are born, raised and educated in an
environment where only language X is spoken. Could they attain native competency in
language Y if they have no serious exposure to it until adulthood? |
|
|
The answer is a conditional yes. It is possible, if you have the motivation, the time,
and the willingness to integrate into the culture and area where the language is
spoken. If we include accent formation then you have to be willing to learn to produce
the correct sounds.
The question to me is not "can we" (the answer is yes and there is evidence aplenty)
but "how long do we take to get to an adequate level?" But that adults have learned
languages to native-like fluency at an older age has happened aplenty.
1 person has voted this message useful
| beano Diglot Senior Member United KingdomRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 4623 days ago 1049 posts - 2152 votes Speaks: English*, German Studies: Russian, Serbian, Hungarian
| Message 290 of 303 17 April 2013 at 3:00pm | IP Logged |
patrickwilken wrote:
beano wrote:
We could easily invent lots of what-if scenarios, but the thread deals with the prospects of adult learners reaching native-like levels in a foreign language. I assume we are talking about people who are born, raised and educated in an environment where only language X is spoken. Could they attain native competency in language Y if they have no serious exposure to it until adulthood? |
|
|
I guess if you live in a country with lots of immigrants (e.g, Australia, USA, UK) the answer would seem an obvious 'yes'. Am I missing something? |
|
|
But do they really learn to native level, if exposure to the target language was scant during their youth? For example, someone from Sweden who has English hammered into them between the ages 3-18 is hardly a typical adult learner upon arrival in the UK.
1 person has voted this message useful
| tarvos Super Polyglot Winner TAC 2012 Senior Member China likeapolyglot.wordpr Joined 4708 days ago 5310 posts - 9399 votes Speaks: Dutch*, English, Swedish, French, Russian, German, Italian, Norwegian, Mandarin, Romanian, Afrikaans Studies: Greek, Modern Hebrew, Spanish, Portuguese, Czech, Korean, Esperanto, Finnish
| Message 291 of 303 17 April 2013 at 3:03pm | IP Logged |
I know plenty of people (Danes, for example) who came here in their teens and learned how
to speak practically fluent Dutch in a coupl years, achieving conversational proficiency
within less than a year. Eventually their proficiency is so good they are almost
indistuinguishable from a native and are easily used on technical topics on TV.
It has happened to many. The only thing which some people lack is a perfect accent maybe.
3 persons have voted this message useful
| patrickwilken Senior Member Germany radiant-flux.net Joined 4534 days ago 1546 posts - 3200 votes Studies: German
| Message 292 of 303 17 April 2013 at 3:04pm | IP Logged |
beano wrote:
But do they really learn to native level, if exposure to the target language was scant during their youth? For example, someone from Sweden who has English hammered into them between the ages 3-18 is hardly a typical adult learner upon arrival in the UK. |
|
|
My mother and grandmother did. They were Lithuanian, and who had no real knowledge of English when they arrived in Australia. My Italian neighbours did, who again didn't really know that much English before immigrating.
I really don't think you need to have a language hammered into you before 18 in order to speak it at native level later. All that really seems necessary is to be using it a lot. The immigrants I know who haven't become fully fluent are the ones who stick to their own language communities, and generally don't live in the TL.
Edited by patrickwilken on 17 April 2013 at 3:05pm
1 person has voted this message useful
| beano Diglot Senior Member United KingdomRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 4623 days ago 1049 posts - 2152 votes Speaks: English*, German Studies: Russian, Serbian, Hungarian
| Message 293 of 303 17 April 2013 at 3:36pm | IP Logged |
But it is possible to be fully fluent, where natives instantly understand everything you say, without actually speaking at native level.
1 person has voted this message useful
| tarvos Super Polyglot Winner TAC 2012 Senior Member China likeapolyglot.wordpr Joined 4708 days ago 5310 posts - 9399 votes Speaks: Dutch*, English, Swedish, French, Russian, German, Italian, Norwegian, Mandarin, Romanian, Afrikaans Studies: Greek, Modern Hebrew, Spanish, Portuguese, Czech, Korean, Esperanto, Finnish
| Message 294 of 303 17 April 2013 at 3:44pm | IP Logged |
beano wrote:
But it is possible to be fully fluent, where natives instantly
understand
everything you say, without actually speaking at native level. |
|
|
What's the difference, really? A few idiomatic expressions and a slight
mispronunciation
of the most complicated and subtle phoneme of that language? Some intonation issues?
I'll make this even better - if I listen to someone speaking Brabantian dialect, they
are entirely raised through the Dutch school system and they will be native speakers of
"Dutch" (more like Brabantian actually). I can fully understand them, they are fully
fluent, but they will still use different expressions, different pronunciation, even
slightly different grammar. They will sound somewhat foreign and have an accent that is
clearly noticeable when they are not making an attempt to speak any standard register
of Dutch (in which case these mistakes will be less but still noticeable, i.e. a use of
the soft g sound, r pronunciation, diphthong pronunciation, some words).
If a foreign language learner speaks within the possible dialectal variation boundaries
tolerated by native speakers of the language, then he or she has native-fluency. I have
spoken to foreigners who were much easier to understand than any given farmer from
Twente.
Edited by tarvos on 17 April 2013 at 3:48pm
3 persons have voted this message useful
| patrickwilken Senior Member Germany radiant-flux.net Joined 4534 days ago 1546 posts - 3200 votes Studies: German
| Message 295 of 303 17 April 2013 at 4:12pm | IP Logged |
beano wrote:
But it is possible to be fully fluent, where natives instantly understand everything you say, without actually speaking at native level. |
|
|
I think I have already said yes to that.
But what does it mean to understand everything anyway? One test suggests I know 24400 words groups in English, which implies I am in the top 25% of English speakers in terms of vocabulary. Does that mean that anyone who knows fewer words than me isn't native? Or course not. What if they knew about 18000 word groups (which is about average for English speakers)? But number of words known depends a lot on age, as you gradually accumulate vocabulary as you get older. So what is average for an 18 year old is below average for a 28 year old, which is below average for a 38 year old and so on.
I am a native speaker, with a relatively large vocabulary, have worked as an editor, and I don't instantly understand everything. Who does?
Personally, I don't think people should aim for native level when learning a language, I think they should aim for better than native. Why not? What's so great about how natives speak anyway? It's not like it's some holy unreachable goal. At least not if you read some rag like the Sun or Bild.
Edited by patrickwilken on 17 April 2013 at 4:26pm
4 persons have voted this message useful
| okjhum Pentaglot Groupie Sweden olle-kjellin.com Joined 5205 days ago 40 posts - 190 votes Speaks: Swedish*, Japanese, English, German, Russian Studies: Spanish, Polish, Greek
| Message 296 of 303 17 April 2013 at 4:53pm | IP Logged |
In the realm of pronunciation (segmental as well as suprasegmental), instead of "native level" or "native-like level" I advocate "listener-friendly pronunciation". I.e., a pronunciation with only very minor deviations that will not distract the listener from the contents of what's being said. A strong foreign accent as well as a distant regional variety/dialect will indeed distract the listeners's attention. Sometimes it will even pose an obstacle to perception and comprehension and force the listener to put undue effort into his/her listening. This is tiring, even measurable on a neurological level, and as a consequence, natives might try to avoid such conversations. The foreigner (or distant-dialect speaker) might then feel ostracised.
The listener-friendly pronunciation is easily achievable with the right instructions, whereas the efforts needed to brush off the last traces of non-nativeness may not be worth the time. Except for some of us nerds! :)
Edited by okjhum on 17 April 2013 at 4:54pm
7 persons have voted this message useful
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum - You cannot reply to topics in this forum - You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum - You cannot create polls in this forum - You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.4844 seconds.
DHTML Menu By Milonic JavaScript
|