You are not a real polyglot if... (General discussion) Language Learning Forum

You are not a real polyglot if...
Tags: Polyglot
Share with: Delicious Digg reddit Facebook StumbleUpon
Language Learning Forum : General discussion

299 messages over 38 pages: << Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 34 ... 37 38 Next >>

s_allard
Triglot
Senior Member
Canada
Joined 5435 days ago
2704 posts - 5425 votes

Speaks: French*, English, Spanish
Studies: Polish

Message 265 of 299

04 November 2013 at 2:36am | IP Logged

Solfrid Cristin wrote:

@s allard: I understand your drive for having a neutral system, which is not based on self
assessment alone.
The question is whether it makes sense.

You can have two really opposed types of polyglots - one where they are great at speaking, but a disaster at
grammar, and one where they can read, write, translate and explain all the grammar, but where they have put
less emphasis on speech.

In my world they would both be polyglots. The problem with formal testing, is that they may not give you
credit for what you can do, but fail you for what you cannot.

I could at one point do a 10 hour conversation in Italian without really searching for words - but I could not
have given the simplest grammar rules, because I had learned the language by immersion only.

Someone else might be able to explain all the grammar, and write a brilliant essay in Italian, but might feel
shy to speak it.

Who would be the real polyglot? Both, neither?

And that is the eternal dilemma.

I'm going to be brief otherwise some people will say that @s_allard is splitting hairs again. The idea that one can
be great at speaking but a disaster at grammar, in my opinion, is contradictory. Can one speak well and
ungrammatically. For example? have a 10-hour conversation in Italian but with terrible grammar? Speaking well
implies using proper grammar.

What is true is that an explicit knowledge of grammar, i,e, being able to talk about grammar, is not necessary in
order to speak well. Native speakers are a prime example of this.

I think the big distinction that is being made here is the difference between the polyglot who is good at speaking
and the polyglot who is good at writing, which usually requires a greater awareness of spelling and formal
grammar rules.

Edited by s_allard on 04 November 2013 at 1:45pm
1 person has voted this message useful

luke
Diglot
Senior Member
United States
Joined 7210 days ago
3133 posts - 4351 votes

Speaks: English*, Spanish
Studies: Esperanto, French

Message 266 of 299

04 November 2013 at 6:19am | IP Logged

In medicine, the prefix "poly" means "more than one".
3 persons have voted this message useful

beano
Diglot
Senior Member
United KingdomRegistered users can see my Skype Name
Joined 4627 days ago
1049 posts - 2152 votes

Speaks: English*, German
Studies: Russian, Serbian, Hungarian

Message 267 of 299

04 November 2013 at 10:17am | IP Logged

s_allard wrote:

The idea that one can be great at speaking but a disaster at grammar, in my opinion, is contratictory. Can one speak well and ungrammatically. For example, have a 10-hour conversation in Italian but with terrible grammar? Speaking well implies using proper grammar.

Many immigrants speak a language confidently but with frequent grammar errors and the natives understand them just fine.
2 persons have voted this message useful

Solfrid Cristin
Heptaglot
Winner TAC 2011 & 2012
Senior Member
Norway
Joined 5339 days ago
4143 posts - 8864 votes

Speaks: Norwegian*, Spanish, Swedish, French, English, German, Italian
Studies: Russian

Message 268 of 299

04 November 2013 at 12:22pm | IP Logged

[QUOTE=s_allard]
The idea that one can
be great at speaking but a disaster at grammar, in my opinion, is contratictory. Can one speak well and
ungrammatically. For example, have a 10-hour conversation in Italian but with terrible grammar? Speaking well
implies using proper grammar.

QUOTE]

My Italian was perhaps a bad example, since when I was at at my best level I would be almost "fluent" (as in being able to speak without having to stop and search for words) - but I would have minor grammar mistakes. A better example is possibly my German, where I can say almost anything I want, and will have a farily good grasp of grammar - with one huge exception - the cases. Based on my oral output I consider myself a B1, my German teacher considers me a B2. If I were to pass a CEFR exam I might not pass an A2 exam, if too many of the grammar examples were taken from the case system. In any event, my German would not qualify as part of my "polyglot languages" for you, since you demand a C1.

Oh well, I never gained any money or status from that anyway. I'll just call myself a polychatterbox from now on:-)
2 persons have voted this message useful

tarvos
Super Polyglot
Winner TAC 2012
Senior Member
China
likeapolyglot.wordpr
Joined 4712 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 269 of 299

04 November 2013 at 12:36pm | IP Logged

Polyglot is just a name.

By s_allard's definition I'm not a polyglot - but I don't care since I could travel in
places using 8 languages. Which is more than good enough for me (I include Hebrew because
that is the feedback I just got - Hebrew went well today.)

Korean, Breton and Icelandic are the languages I couldn't travel in, with the exception
that for Breton I could probably adapt fast.
2 persons have voted this message useful

s_allard
Triglot
Senior Member
Canada
Joined 5435 days ago
2704 posts - 5425 votes

Speaks: French*, English, Spanish
Studies: Polish

Message 270 of 299

04 November 2013 at 1:42pm | IP Logged

beano wrote:

s_allard wrote:

The idea that one can be great at speaking but a disaster at grammar, in my
opinion, is contratictory. Can one speak well and ungrammatically. For example, have a 10-hour conversation in
Italian but with terrible grammar? Speaking well implies using proper grammar.

Many immigrants speak a language confidently but with frequent grammar errors and the natives understand
them just fine.

This is certainly true, but I don't think that @solfrid Cristin meant that she spoke Italian confidently with frequent
grammar errors. She said that she spoke Italian without searching for words for 10 hours.

Would you say that the immigrant in question spoke English well or spoke great English well? I would say exactly
what was said, i.e. speaks confidently but with frequent grammar errors. I myself would say "speaks fluently but
inaccurately."

Edited by s_allard on 04 November 2013 at 2:36pm
1 person has voted this message useful

s_allard
Triglot
Senior Member
Canada
Joined 5435 days ago
2704 posts - 5425 votes

Speaks: French*, English, Spanish
Studies: Polish

Message 271 of 299

04 November 2013 at 1:52pm | IP Logged

tarvos wrote:

Oh well, I tried my best. I proposed a solution to the question of how to define a polyglot. I said four languages
because that is what is commonly used, it seems to me. I was reminded that poly means more than one. Fine.

I suggested a C1 skill level, Everybody seems to get angry. These were only suggestions. They are not cast in
stone. I'm still waiting for other proposals. If we all agree that a polyglot has the ability to travel in two or more
languages, I would certainly go along.

Edited by s_allard on 04 November 2013 at 2:20pm
1 person has voted this message useful

s_allard
Triglot
Senior Member
Canada
Joined 5435 days ago
2704 posts - 5425 votes

Speaks: French*, English, Spanish
Studies: Polish

Message 272 of 299

04 November 2013 at 2:01pm | IP Logged

Solfrid Cristin wrote:

s_allard wrote:

The idea that one can
be great at speaking but a disaster at grammar, in my opinion, is contradictory. Can one speak well and
ungrammatically. For example, have a 10-hour conversation in Italian but with terrible grammar? Speaking well
implies using proper grammar.

My Italian was perhaps a bad example, since when I was at at my best level I would be almost "fluent" (as in
being able to speak without having to stop and search for words) - but I would have minor grammar mistakes. A
better example is possibly my German, where I can say almost anything I want, and will have a farily good grasp
of grammar - with one huge exception - the cases. Based on my oral output I consider myself a B1, my German
teacher considers me a B2. If I were to pass a CEFR exam I might not pass an A2 exam, if too many of the
grammar examples were taken from the case system. In any event, my German would not qualify as part of my
"polyglot languages" for you, since you demand a C1.

Oh well, I never gained any money or status from that anyway. I'll just call myself a polychatterbox from now
on:-)

Please, let's not give the CEFR exam system a bad name. If your German teacher considers you a B2, then you
probably are a B2. The word grammar is barely used in description of the can-do statements of the CEFR criteria.
The CEFR does not test the knowledge of grammar.

As for my demanding a C1, as I said it was just a suggestion. We can make it B1, B2 or whatever. Make a
suggestion.

Edited by s_allard on 04 November 2013 at 2:22pm

1 person has voted this message useful

This discussion contains 299 messages over 38 pages: << Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Next >>

Printable version

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 0.4375 seconds.