Old Chemist Senior Member United Kingdom Joined 5172 days ago 227 posts - 285 votes Speaks: English* Studies: German
| Message 9 of 39 02 October 2010 at 5:46pm | IP Logged |
Mmm, fluency ... a very interesting issue. Being fluent certainly doesn't amount to speaking with perfect grammar or syntax, as can be clearly seen when we listen to or read what a native speaker has written or said. Unbelievably, despite what "experts" have said, it is perfectly possible to make elementary mistakes in one's own language. I remember once, when tired, making the plural of child "childs," which made my friends laugh, as they consider me reasonably intelligent. Probably fluency, for me, is being able to communicate in the subjects you want to communicate in, be they rocket science, anatomy or football.
3 persons have voted this message useful
|
fireflies Senior Member Joined 5180 days ago 172 posts - 234 votes Speaks: English*
| Message 10 of 39 02 October 2010 at 5:51pm | IP Logged |
I have decided not to worry about trying to define fluency or judge my own progress towards it. The important thing is to make progress.
Fluency seems to mean different things to different people anyway.
I suppose a good standardized test would always answer the fluency question if you are not sure how good you are.
Edited by fireflies on 02 October 2010 at 8:57pm
1 person has voted this message useful
|
Old Chemist Senior Member United Kingdom Joined 5172 days ago 227 posts - 285 votes Speaks: English* Studies: German
| Message 11 of 39 02 October 2010 at 6:23pm | IP Logged |
Hello Fireflies. Yes, I agree with you, there are many technical, jargon words that even a native speaker would have to learn. They change over time too. I believe sodium bicarbonate was once bicarbonate of sodium and to chemists (hence my soubriquet, but I am only a graduate student) IUPAC - International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry nomenclature makes it sodium hydrogen carbonate, which is probably paralleled in Spanish, as IUPAC was meant to help standardize and "internationalize" Chemistry.
1 person has voted this message useful
|
Iversen Super Polyglot Moderator Denmark berejst.dk Joined 6702 days ago 9078 posts - 16473 votes Speaks: Danish*, French, English, German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, Swedish, Esperanto, Romanian, Catalan Studies: Afrikaans, Greek, Norwegian, Russian, Serbian, Icelandic, Latin, Irish, Lowland Scots, Indonesian, Polish, Croatian Personal Language Map
| Message 12 of 39 02 October 2010 at 7:07pm | IP Logged |
If I have to perform advanced smalltalk then I have to watch the local sitcoms, quizzes and music programs, I have to know gossip about the local celebrities and I have to know about the formalities that the local authorities have imposed on the population. Those things are as daunting as learning a few technical terms.
1 person has voted this message useful
|
s_allard Triglot Senior Member Canada Joined 5429 days ago 2704 posts - 5425 votes Speaks: French*, English, Spanish Studies: Polish
| Message 13 of 39 02 October 2010 at 7:27pm | IP Logged |
While we are talking about technical terms, why not start with some housecleaning right here. I would like to remind everybody that fluency is a technical term in linguistics and refers to fluidity of speech. It should not be confused with proficiency or competence. I know that I've long ago lost the battle here at HTLAL on this issue, but I persist in bringing it up because I think most discussions about fluency get totally bogged down in vagaries of definition. I would also remind people that all these issues have been thoroughly researched and formalized in the CEFR system of definition of proficiency. Why must we reinvent the wheel?
7 persons have voted this message useful
|
Splog Diglot Senior Member Czech Republic anthonylauder.c Joined 5668 days ago 1062 posts - 3263 votes Speaks: English*, Czech Studies: Mandarin
| Message 14 of 39 02 October 2010 at 7:34pm | IP Logged |
Iversen wrote:
If I have to perform advanced smalltalk then I have to watch the local
sitcoms, quizzes and music programs, I have to know gossip about the local celebrities
and I have to know about the formalities that the local authorities have imposed on the
population. Those things are as daunting as learning a few technical terms. |
|
|
And this only gives you current smalltalk. The problem I constantly face is that locals
in social gatherings continually make cultural references that are almost impossible to
learn. For example, dropping in quotes from childhood TV adverts, or imitating the
voice of some long gone cartoon character. It always makes me feel like an outsider.
The inability to absorb a lifetime of cultural references is why I am always wary of
ambitions to be mistaken for a native. Put any fluent English speaker who was not born
in
the UK with me and a group of brits, and within less than a minute they will think we
are talking a completely unknown language.
"Oh, no Bungle Bonce, you've really done it this time!"
"Do be quiet Zippy!"
or
"Hey, kids, should we look through the round window, or the square window?"
All the brits will be laughing, and the non-brit will be left cringing.
It is an uncomfortable feeling, and one I experience at least once a week.
Edited by Splog on 02 October 2010 at 9:20pm
3 persons have voted this message useful
|
Thatzright Diglot Senior Member Finland Joined 5671 days ago 202 posts - 311 votes Speaks: Finnish*, English Studies: French, Swedish, German, Russian
| Message 15 of 39 02 October 2010 at 8:04pm | IP Logged |
s_allard wrote:
While we are talking about technical terms, why not start with some housecleaning right here. I would like to remind everybody that fluency is a technical term in linguistics and refers to fluidity of speech. It should not be confused with proficiency or competence. I know that I've long ago lost the battle here at HTLAL on this issue, but I persist in bringing it up because I think most discussions about fluency get totally bogged down in vagaries of definition. I would also remind people that all these issues have been thoroughly researched and formalized in the CEFR system of definition of proficiency. Why must we reinvent the wheel? |
|
|
Some sort of restructuring of the proficiency system around here would indeed be in order. Competence or proficiency is definitely a much better term to describe one's abilities in a language, and along with the European Framework system even makes it a bit easier to assess what level one actually is on in a language. I, for example, constantly waste some of my precious time talking about what makes you fluent and what in turn not in numerous threads around here, but just taking away the term "fluency" from all of this could wipe away these problems :-) How brilliant that all the admittedly somewhat useless debates we see around here about the definition of "basic fluency" etc. would be ended once and for all, as the CEFR would have all the answers.
Edited by Thatzright on 02 October 2010 at 8:06pm
2 persons have voted this message useful
|
Cesare M. Senior Member Canada youtube.com/user/CheRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 5169 days ago 99 posts - 135 votes Speaks: English*
| Message 16 of 39 02 October 2010 at 9:08pm | IP Logged |
Volte wrote:
Cesare M. wrote:
fireflies wrote:
I am
not a professional linguist but I think
fluency (at its most basic level) is being able to get through a
day of being immersed in a language while understanding
what is said to you and being able to clearly (and flexibly)
respond with a minimum of errors. You should be able to
make
typical small talk too (not necessarily about rocket science or
advanced anatomy and physiology).
It is worth pointing out that poorly educated native speakers
sometimes have terrible grammar and pronunciation. These
people are still considered fluent because they can
communicate clearly enough to be understood. Additionally,
illiterate people are still considered fluent.
I never saw fluency (or even status as a native speaker) as the
complete mastery of a language. I see fluency as being able to
handle a linguistic situation so that you understand and are
understood. I see proficiency as handling a linguistic situation
with style and skill. |
|
|
Yes finally someone agrees with me.
|
|
|
Not really. None of your languages, other than English, seem
to have 'a minimum of errors' - based on the ones I can
evaluate or have seen evaluations for, at least.
A solid start is to be commended. It also tends to imply making
mistakes; this is natural, and not grounds for criticism. Claiming
that a solid start is actually a significantly higher level tends to
elicit more critical responses.
You clearly have a passion for languages. You have clearly
learned some things. Accurately assessing where you are and
indicating this accurately would probably be worth your time,
though.
|
|
|
Oh so youre saying that that user is wrong as well? Also do
you know how to speak all those other languages? Finally I
learned Italian when I was little so I know Italian so do not
judge me by my Italian because if you actually knew Italian you
wouldnt be saying that.
Per favore parle Italiano a mi e va a guardo che come tu
scrive.
Edited by Cesare M. on 02 October 2010 at 9:11pm
2 persons have voted this message useful
|