|
 |
Intermediate vs. Advanced Fluency | ||
Tags: Intermediate | Fluency | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : General discussion |  | |
 Keith Diglot Moderator JapanRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 6566 days ago 526 posts - 536 votes  1 sounds Speaks: English*, Japanese Studies: Mandarin Personal Language Map | Message 9 of 19 06 January 2007 at 6:38am | IP Logged | ||
|
I like solidsnake's definitions.
If you say you are fluent, you should be able to say anything you want to express with ease. You no longer need to think about how to say anything. You do not become flustered or intimidated when using the language. You have no trouble communicating. Fluency is not something you just decide one day that you have reached. Rather, it is that which one day you realize you have been fluent for quite a long time. Advanced fluency has been acquired when people start assuming you grew up in the country despite your outward appearance. "Oh, I just thought you grew up here." And natives start remarking how you know more than they do. As for the ratings on language courese, I don't much believe in them. They would like you to think you can attain fluency, or the intermediate level. But no course provides that much material. They only give you the easy stuff to learn. Any part of language which can be broken up and easily explained is really only beginner level material. The higher levels of language development require hours and hours of listening and reading. The companies don't bother trying to give you all of that. You also have to start interacting with people and make the language a part of you. I think people often finish those courses and believing in what the publisher promoted the course as, they will believe they have reached a certain level. They can have simple conversations and they feel they are fluent. Perhaps they even reach that level in the country that speaks their target language. They run out of time, go back home, remember all the nice little conversations they had and think that that was fluency. 3 persons have voted this message useful | |||
| solidsnake Diglot Senior Member China Joined 6830 days ago 469 posts - 488 votes Speaks: English*, Mandarin | Message 10 of 19 06 January 2007 at 12:14pm | IP Logged | ||
|
I dont think I've ever agreed with a single post on these boards more than
yours, Keith. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
 Iversen Super Polyglot Moderator Denmark berejst.dk Joined 6492 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 11 of 19 06 January 2007 at 1:35pm | IP Logged | ||
Sorry, I do not agree. If you demand of an L2 learner that he/she should as fluent in his/her L2 as in his/her native language to be ascribed even basic fluency, and that an L2 learner should surpass an educated (!) native's language, then you are are becoming way too ambitious. It may be your goal to surpass the native speakers, and if you attain it you can certainly be called an advanced learner (or rather 'more-than-native'), but you rip the notion of basic fluency of any meaning if you expect it to mean that you should speak as effortless in your L2 as in your native language. Fluency means that you can think, read, write, understand and speak the L2 language without being hampered by holes in your vocabulary or grammar, but if you expect the result to be perfect already at the basic stage then it would not be basic, - it would in every sense of the word be advanced. If you can use your L2 as freely as your native L1, then your are in fact claiming that your L2 is near-native. I have noticed that those who put up such high criteria for basic fluency typically are Westeners who have chosen to study East-Asian languages. Have you chosen these languages because you were more ambitious from the beginning, or have the difficult languages (or maybe rathers scripts) you are studying forced you to become more severe with yourself, and by implication with the rest of us poor lazy people? ... and here I should put a smiley, because somewhere I do admire people with high goals. Edited by Iversen on 06 January 2007 at 2:34pm 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||
| Journeyer Triglot Senior Member United States tristan85.blogspot.c Joined 6657 days ago 946 posts - 1110 votes Speaks: English*, Spanish, German Studies: Sign Language | Message 12 of 19 06 January 2007 at 7:52pm | IP Logged | ||
What are four-character idioms? I didn't mean this thread to become specified around Japanese or Eastern languages, I meant it in general way for any language. I was just curious about how in depth a grammar reference can be, as far as grammar goes. I know that Barron's Japanese Grammar won't bring you to fluency by itself, but as far as grammar goes, would it give you what you need to speak intelligently (even if it isn't enough to write a poem or sound native), provided you work with vocabulary, slang, script, idioms, etc? But basically it applies to any language. :-) I know that grammatical sketches aren't enough, and I try to get my hands on the most thorough grammar I can find when I study, but in the event I can't find a dense grammar reference, I wondered how are I could go with something else. I guess the answer is, just try it, and I probably will someday. Part of what spurred this question was reading that Sir Richard Burton, who, when he mastered the grammars of his several languages, apparently used only the essential grammar structures to learn quickly (in addition to his other resources, which I know one needs as well). I don't know much about him, and haven't read any biographies on him, but this is what got me thinking. Way back last year, when I was reading the thread about Ziad Fazah and finally spoke with him on the phone, I asked him what the best learning material for grammar was: super-detailed grammar books, or things a bit lighter and more user friendly that were easier to digest. He said "The best tool is your brain." Granted, some stuff is a rip off, and you can't expect to learn a language just from Teach Yourself books or whatever, and that the better your materials are, but more likely you are to have more success. It goes without saying here that fluency, whatever that is, is something that requires a lot of work. Like what Iversen said, I also admire the people who are ambitious and put forth that effort, but it Chinese, Japanese, Spanish, or a language spoken by four elderly people up in the Andes, if that's their choice. Edited by Journeyer on 06 January 2007 at 7:54pm 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| Raincrowlee Tetraglot Senior Member United States Joined 6491 days ago 621 posts - 808 votes Speaks: English*, Mandarin, Korean, French Studies: Indonesian, Japanese | Message 13 of 19 06 January 2007 at 8:06pm | IP Logged | ||
There are a large number of idioms in Japanese and Chinese that are four characters long. Apparently, in the two languages, four is thought to have a "balanced" sound. There are also idioms with more characters, but four is the most common number. 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||
| Journeyer Triglot Senior Member United States tristan85.blogspot.c Joined 6657 days ago 946 posts - 1110 votes Speaks: English*, Spanish, German Studies: Sign Language | Message 14 of 19 06 January 2007 at 8:21pm | IP Logged | ||
|
With regards to idioms, I agree that they are an essential part of knowing a language. My lack of knowledge in them is one of the reasons I still don't feel advanced in my Spanish. But I also think a person can know a language relatively well without them. It just sounds a bit stilted and unnatural, and isn't always as fun. "He's guilty" vs. "He got caught with his hand in the cookie jar."
1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| luke Diglot Senior Member United States Joined 6994 days ago 3133 posts - 4351 votes Speaks: English*, Spanish Studies: Esperanto, French | Message 15 of 19 06 January 2007 at 9:24pm | IP Logged | ||
|
Knowing idioms is also useful for comprehension. Having a good set of idioms in your bag of tricks may be a key aspect of advanced fluency. Barrons has books on idioms in several languages. One fellow told me Barrons Spanish Idioms was one of the books that helped him the most, although I never did hear him say much in Spanish. I think it's easier for me to learn idioms from dialogues than encyclopedic handbooks. So far, browsing the idiom book has mainly helped me realize how much more there is to learn.
1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| solidsnake Diglot Senior Member China Joined 6830 days ago 469 posts - 488 votes Speaks: English*, Mandarin | Message 16 of 19 06 January 2007 at 9:50pm | IP Logged | ||
|
western usages of idioms are quite different than in the east. In the west,
they are almost referred to as simply cliche sayings like "one finger pointing means three back at you" or the "silent bullet is the one that kills" etc. and sound very kitsche and uncreative on the speakers part. In the east, because these idioms have 2 to 3000 year old roots, the speaker sounds quite educated and well-read. Not to mention that culturally speaking, most chinese-origin idioms are thinly vieled ways of expressing criticism, and fit in quite usefully with the whole "indirect" approach favored by our friends from the east. 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. |
