|
 |
"Rule of Seven" | ||
Tags: Number of Languages | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : General discussion |  | |
| frenkeld Diglot Senior Member United States Joined 6724 days ago 2042 posts - 2719 votes  Speaks: Russian*, English Studies: German | Message 65 of 78 06 April 2010 at 2:19am | IP Logged | |||||
The "rule of seven" as commonly understood certainly aims higher than "basic fluency". Whether "near-native" or just "advanced" is implied isn't clear, so perhaps the following two criteria may be of some interest: (a) you have to be able to correspond with someone without them realizing without specially looking for it that you are a non-native; (b) you have to be able to watch a typical movie in the language and follow most of it in a relaxed way, without having to strain to follow it. (Exceptions allowed for recent non-standard slang, rare dialects, etc.) This would be less than than "near-native", but more than "basic fluency". To be able to satisfy those two criteria in 7 languages would seem to be quite a challenge. Edited by frenkeld on 06 April 2010 at 2:21am 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| datsunking1 Diglot Senior Member United States Joined 5366 days ago 1014 posts - 1533 votes Speaks: English*, Spanish Studies: German, Russian, Dutch, French | Message 66 of 78 06 April 2010 at 3:57am | IP Logged | |||||
I'd be VERY happy with near native skills in just one language. However I have goals of a possible 4 canidates. Spanish, German, Russian, Japanese in that exact order. (Notice how it progresses in difficulty.) hahahahah :D 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| frenkeld Diglot Senior Member United States Joined 6724 days ago 2042 posts - 2719 votes Speaks: Russian*, English Studies: German | Message 67 of 78 06 April 2010 at 4:15am | IP Logged | |||||
The Rule of Seven gets quite a few people exercised. There seem to be too broad categories: serial polyglots, who chafe at the idea of any natural limitations, and those who prefer quality to quantity and dream of having near-native skills in few languages, possibly just one. The problem is that setting the bar too low makes it easy to puncture the rule, while setting it too high makes it unrealistic for anyone to ever attain number seven. It may be worthwhile to reformulate the question and ask what set of criteria would allow someone like Mezzofanti to just about reach number 7. Then the rest of us can see how many languages we think we can handle at that skill level, without the need to argue about definitions. ADDED: A practical criterion suggested to me by another forum member: within no longer than a two-year period, one has to take and pass a C1 exam for each of the languages one has been able to learn and maintain to that level. (I questioned him whether the C2 level should be targeted instead, if this approach is to more or less correspond to the level of knowledge that the Rule of Seven was meant to apply to.) Edited by frenkeld on 06 April 2010 at 9:16am 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
 Iversen Super Polyglot Moderator Denmark berejst.dk Joined 6484 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 68 of 78 06 April 2010 at 9:29am | IP Logged | |||||
I think that b) would be much easier to accomplish than a), which sounds like a reformulation of the notion of near-native fluency. So we still have room for interpretation. Having just visited Loch Lomond this discussion makes me think of a line in the famous song: "O ye'll tak' the high road and I'll tak' the low road, ..." Edited by Iversen on 06 April 2010 at 9:54am 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| frenkeld Diglot Senior Member United States Joined 6724 days ago 2042 posts - 2719 votes Speaks: Russian*, English Studies: German | Message 69 of 78 06 April 2010 at 9:48am | IP Logged | |||||
The room for interpretation becomes much narrower if we choose to use official knowledge levels instead. We can then have "The C1 Rule of ..." and "The C2 Rule of ...". There are clearly limitations on the number of languages one can maintain at a high level, and this number is not intrinsically unquantifiable. Edited by frenkeld on 06 April 2010 at 10:15am 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| frenkeld Diglot Senior Member United States Joined 6724 days ago 2042 posts - 2719 votes Speaks: Russian*, English Studies: German | Message 70 of 78 06 April 2010 at 7:51pm | IP Logged | |||||
|
Here is the relevant passage (in Russian) about the "Rule of Seven" from Spivak's book, "How to Become a Polyglot". It starts on page 110 of the book.
"Не будем искусственно нагнетать напряжение и первый секрет полиглотов откроем тут же, на пороге. Он состоит в том, что полиглотов... нет! Ну вот, скажете вы, приехали. А как же быть с тем, о чем мы читали с самого начала книги? 200 языков там, с полной свободой и блеском… Неужели это неправда? И да, и нет. Дело в том, что, по-видимому, ни один человек не может свободно знать больше чем 7 языков (точнее, от 5 до 9, но в среднем 7). Этот «закон семерки», как окрестили его специалисты, действует во многих областях человеческой деятельности. Скажем, если нескольким людям показать ряд предметов и спросить, сколько они запомнили, то кто-то назовет 5, кто-то, видимо с цепкой памятью, – 9, однако в среднем все равно будет 7. Примеры легко умножить, но достаточно сослаться на народную мудрость: «Семь раз отмерь – один раз отрежь», «Семь бед – один ответ», даже «У семи нянек дитя без глазу» и так далее. В чем тут дело – до конца неясно, хотя объяснений предложено более чем достаточно. Не будем вдаваться в подробности, скажем только, что речь идет о глубинном, очень сложном механизме человеческого мышления, общем для разных языков и культур. Итак, свободно можно знать около 7 языков. Другое дело, что еще на десяти можно говорить с акцентом, еще на пятнадцати – читать газету, на двадцати – объясняться и далее в том же духе. Вот почему каждый раз, когда вы слышите о полиглоте, освоившем более 10 языков, знайте: до 7 можно смело верить, но сверх того – с большой поправкой. И самые крупные полиглоты ничуть не стыдятся это признавать. Так, сам Н.Я. Марр говаривал, что владеет всего 3 языками, а остальными пользуется по работе. Кстати, вам знакомо это имя? Советую его запомнить. Даже у бывалых полиглотов загораются глаза, когда речь заходит о нем." The phrase he uses to characterize the relevant level of knowledge is "to freely know" the language. This is not unambiguous, of course, but some idea of the level he is thinking of can be gleaned from this sentence, "So, one can freely know about 7 languages. It's another matter than one can speak 10 more with an accent, in 15 more - read a newspaper, in 20 - communicate, etc. That's why every time you hear of a polyglot who has mastered 10 languages, be advised: up to 7 feel free to believe it, but beyond that - only with a big grain of salt. And the greatest polyglots are not ashamed to admit it." It is clear that he is not talking about "basic fluency" in connection with the Rule of Seven. Edited by frenkeld on 06 April 2010 at 10:19pm 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| Iversen Super Polyglot Moderator Denmark berejst.dk Joined 6484 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 71 of 78 06 April 2010 at 8:23pm | IP Logged | |||||
|
OK, Spivak is speaking about at least advanced fluency, maybe even more. This will of course make it more likely that the treshold of 5-9 languages won't be exceeded. It is worth noticing that Spivak doesn't give 7 as a fixed limit, but somewhere between 5 and 9 languages. This is an important point because it makes the rule much more plausible, and in that form it may even be correct (even though a limited number of persons due to lucky circumstances and hard work can have achieved higher numbers).
But there is another thing in the quote that still bothers me: Spivak refers to the number of things you can keep in your short time memory, which also happens to be around 7 (i.e. 5 to 9). However learning something as complex as a language almost to perfection has certainly nothing to do with the ability to keep 7 random numbers in your short-time memory. That those numbers coincide can't tell us anything about the nature of advanced languages skills, and it would had been better not to hint at any connection. Edited by Iversen on 06 April 2010 at 8:34pm 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| Siberiano Tetraglot Senior Member Russian Federation one-giant-leap.Registered users can see my Skype Name Joined 6274 days ago 465 posts - 696 votes Speaks: Russian*, English, ItalianC1, Spanish Studies: Portuguese, Serbian | Message 72 of 78 06 April 2010 at 8:39pm | IP Logged | |||||
|
Spivak also mentions and implies the force of a more general "rule of sevel", that's, according to him, reflected in proverbs and sayings. I don't think this is a relevant proof of the rule. Certainly, a human's mind can't keep in memory too many objects at the same time, but speaking languages is a different story.
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. |
