Register  Login  Active Topics  Maps  

Language competence

 Language Learning Forum : General discussion Post Reply
80 messages over 10 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 5 ... 9 10 Next >>
Juаn
Senior Member
Colombia
Joined 5350 days ago
727 posts - 1830 votes 
Speaks: Spanish*

 
 Message 33 of 80
06 October 2010 at 8:58pm | IP Logged 
Why disregard or subordinate writing and reading when evaluating "competence" though? If anything, they should take precedence. While my pronunciation would instantly betray my foreignness, and notwithstanding the occasional mistake, I would regard my English to lie above native level, if we take this to mean the skill of the average speaker, who cannot distinguish it's from its, habitually writes would of instead of would have and probably doesn't know the meaning or usage of ubiquitous or pertinacity. Having a reasonable command of the grammar and possessing a more abundant vocabulary certainly implies a far deeper knowledge of a language than simply being able to carry on phonologically-competent small talk.
4 persons have voted this message useful



Andy E
Triglot
Senior Member
United Kingdom
Joined 7108 days ago
1651 posts - 1939 votes 
Speaks: English*, Spanish, French

 
 Message 34 of 80
06 October 2010 at 11:35pm | IP Logged 
s_allard wrote:
Secondly, there is very comprehensive system of assessment of second language skills known as the CEFR and based of many years of research and discussion. We don't have to use it, but I can't fathom why we don't at least acknowledge the existence of it.

My humble suggestion is that rather than starting from scratch and rehashing for the umpteenth time definitions of fluency or proficiency why not see how we can improve what already has been accomplished?


Oh I wonder how many times this particular road has been traveled in the five or so years I've been here...

I admire your tenacity on this but I've long since given up.


3 persons have voted this message useful



Romanist
Senior Member
United Kingdom
Joined 5287 days ago
261 posts - 366 votes 
Studies: Italian

 
 Message 35 of 80
07 October 2010 at 10:51am | IP Logged 
Volte wrote:
I had a classmate at one point, in an intermediate Italian class. Native Italians were shocked that we were in the same class; at least some of them thought she was a native speaker. Her writing was terrible, though - it was quite filled with non-native grammatical errors.

More generally, I know quite a few people who are very fluent in spoken English, but write significantly worse than they speak, while making very non-native errors.


Good point. But this type of case is actually pretty well known, isn't it? There must be loads of people out there who speak a foreign language very well but write it at a significantly lower level.

I can think of two tutors I had at university: they were both native Germans, and they both spoke English very well indeed - well enough to take classes and give lectures at an English university without any problems. Yet their written English (as seen in course hand-outs, etc.) had a very strong "German flavour" to it. In one case it was bordering on being quite poor, in fact.


Edited by Romanist on 07 October 2010 at 10:53am
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 36 of 80
07 October 2010 at 3:50pm | IP Logged 
Andy E wrote:
s_allard wrote:
Secondly, there is very comprehensive system of assessment of second language skills known as the CEFR and based of many years of research and discussion. We don't have to use it, but I can't fathom why we don't at least acknowledge the existence of it.

My humble suggestion is that rather than starting from scratch and rehashing for the umpteenth time definitions of fluency or proficiency why not see how we can improve what already has been accomplished?


Oh I wonder how many times this particular road has been traveled in the five or so years I've been here...

I admire your tenacity on this but I've long since given up.



The scales have fallen from my eyes. I think I understand why so many people refuse to rethink the (mis)use of the term fluency and refuse to consider using a standardized assessment model like the CEFR. It has become clear to me that the fuzziness in the usage of the word fluency allows many people to make all sorts of assertions about their foreign language ability. With the right self-serving definition anybody can say they are fluent in a given language. Hence all these unverifiable claims about speaking many languages.

Usage of an assessment model like the CEFR can bring some of these lofty pretensions down to earth. Instead of all this balderdash about kinds of fluency, one is forced to rate oneself or be rated with some objective or standard criteria. I suspect that when push comes to shove there are a lot more A1 than C2 self-styled fluent speakers. Rather than confront a cruel reality and think of ways to improve the situation, they keep rejigging the definition of fluency to best camouflage their weaknesses.
14 persons have voted this message useful



Volte
Tetraglot
Senior Member
Switzerland
Joined 6444 days ago
4474 posts - 6726 votes 
Speaks: English*, Esperanto, German, Italian
Studies: French, Finnish, Mandarin, Japanese

 
 Message 37 of 80
07 October 2010 at 10:10pm | IP Logged 
s_allard wrote:

The scales have fallen from my eyes. I think I understand why so many people refuse to rethink the (mis)use of the term fluency and refuse to consider using a standardized assessment model like the CEFR. It has become clear to me that the fuzziness in the usage of the word fluency allows many people to make all sorts of assertions about their foreign language ability. With the right self-serving definition anybody can say they are fluent in a given language. Hence all these unverifiable claims about speaking many languages.

Usage of an assessment model like the CEFR can bring some of these lofty pretensions down to earth. Instead of all this balderdash about kinds of fluency, one is forced to rate oneself or be rated with some objective or standard criteria. I suspect that when push comes to shove there are a lot more A1 than C2 self-styled fluent speakers. Rather than confront a cruel reality and think of ways to improve the situation, they keep rejigging the definition of fluency to best camouflage their weaknesses.


I really doubt that's the issue here.

3 persons have voted this message useful



Romanist
Senior Member
United Kingdom
Joined 5287 days ago
261 posts - 366 votes 
Studies: Italian

 
 Message 38 of 80
08 October 2010 at 11:59am | IP Logged 
s_allard wrote:
I suspect that when push comes to shove there are a lot more A1 than C2 self-styled fluent speakers. Rather than confront a cruel reality and think of ways to improve the situation, they keep rejigging the definition of fluency to best camouflage their weaknesses.


Oh c'mon!

Anyone at A1 level who claims to be in any sense "fluent" is either a complete fool, or is knowingly and deliberately making a fraudulent claim about his/her ability.

No doubt there are plenty of folks out there who would fit into either of the above categories. But it has to be baloney to suggest that people right here in this discussion are trying to kid themselves that they are "fluent" when they are really just beginners!

In my experience most serious language learners (including most people here at this forum) tend if anything to err on the side of caution and to underestimate the level they have reached.

Edited by Romanist on 08 October 2010 at 12:10pm
6 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 39 of 80
13 October 2010 at 7:02am | IP Logged 
Romanist wrote:
s_allard wrote:
I suspect that when push comes to shove there are a lot more A1 than C2 self-styled fluent speakers. Rather than confront a cruel reality and think of ways to improve the situation, they keep rejigging the definition of fluency to best camouflage their weaknesses.


Oh c'mon!

Anyone at A1 level who claims to be in any sense "fluent" is either a complete fool, or is knowingly and deliberately making a fraudulent claim about his/her ability.

No doubt there are plenty of folks out there who would fit into either of the above categories. But it has to be baloney to suggest that people right here in this discussion are trying to kid themselves that they are "fluent" when they are really just beginners!

In my experience most serious language learners (including most people here at this forum) tend if anything to err on the side of caution and to underestimate the level they have reached.

I certainly agree that most serious language learners are rather humble about their levels of proficiency because they are all too aware of what it takes to really master a language. But that is not the real issue here.

The fundamental issue is that as long as we use vague and rather meaningless terms such as fluency in all its variations there is no way to really compare levels of proficiency. I really believe that most people are quite honest. It's just that we don't really know what fluency really is. We have seen not long ago on this very forum an individual claim to speak 39 languages with some fluency. After viewing the youtube video which was edifying to see the least I had to agree with the individual: he did speak the languages. The problem was really how well or how badly.

The advantage of a standard system of assessment is that it allows to compare apples with apples and oranges with oranges. The CEFR is one system inter alia. One may debate its shortcomings, but fundamentally we can agree on the distinctions. So, if somebody says to me they are C2 in 10 languages I have a sense of their proficiency in the various languages. On the other hand if someone says to me they have achieved advanced fluency in 10 languages I am lost. It must be more than basic or intermediate fluency, but I still don't know what it is. That's the whole point.
5 persons have voted this message useful



Aineko
Triglot
Senior Member
New Zealand
Joined 5453 days ago
238 posts - 442 votes 
Speaks: Serbian*, EnglishC2, Spanish
Studies: Russian, Arabic (Written), Mandarin

 
 Message 40 of 80
13 October 2010 at 9:47am | IP Logged 
s_allard wrote:

The scales have fallen from my eyes. I think I understand why so many people refuse to
rethink the (mis)use of the term fluency and refuse to consider using a standardized
assessment model like the CEFR. It has become clear to me that the fuzziness in the usage
of the word fluency allows many people to make all sorts of assertions about their
foreign language ability...

Even if we assume that so many people are sticking to the term 'fluency' simple
for the purpose of self-delusion, I don't see why would this "problem" disappear if HTLAL
implements CEFR scale. People would still be left to judge their own abilities when
filling the language profile, right?


4 persons have voted this message useful



This discussion contains 80 messages over 10 pages: << Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  Next >>


Post ReplyPost New Topic Printable version 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 0.3589 seconds.


DHTML Menu By Milonic JavaScript
Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved
No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization.