Reading Fluency

[whitecastle]

My question is exclusively about reading.
I will give the exemple of my english: I like to read what some people could describe as "a difficult reading", ancient authors, history, philosophy, classic novels. In terms of grammar is pretty rare that I encounter some difficulty, so in the majority of cases my only problem is vocabulary. When I get the definition my "problem" disappear.
So my question is: after you reach a strong b2 in a language, is it only a question of vocabulary for you to be able to read "a difficult book" (in my case these books would be the classics, philosophy, etc)?

[rdearman]

My question is exclusively about reading.
I will give the exemple of my english: I like to read what some people could describe as "a difficult reading", ancient authors, history, philosophy, classic novels. In terms of grammar is pretty rare that I encounter some difficulty, so in the majority of cases my only problem is vocabulary. When I get the definition my "problem" disappear.
So my question is: after you reach a strong b2 in a language, is it only a question of vocabulary for you to be able to read "a difficult book" (in my case these books would be the classics, philosophy, etc)?

For many English speakers these books, classics and philosophy are generally considered difficult because the vocabulary and grammar are ancient or because the vocabulary is not common. So if you're reading a Shakespeare comedy, some of these words, or grammatical constructs don't exist any longer and the punchlines which were topical in the 1600's is completely lost on a modern reader. So the answer to your question is, yes vocabulary is probably the only thing which will hold you back, but if you then try to speak that way to a modern English speaker you might sound like an over-educated pirate.

So you might want to throw in a modern fiction author on occasion.

[reineke]

Whitecastle, even though you may think you've learned a rule, it is very easy to make a grammar mistake, miss it and keep making similar mistakes over and over again. I like to endulge in reading after I am comfortable with the spoken language. Vocabulary is only a part of the story

I think it's unfair to equate the classics with Dante, Shakespeare, antiquated vocabulary, and difficult- to-read novels like Moby Dick. Incidentally, it would be nice if someone occasionally mentioned syntax.

"A classic is a book accepted as being exemplary or noteworthy," Wikipedia

William Golding's Lord of the Flies (1954) can easily be described as a classic.

A book that qualifies as ancient philosophy can be a rewarding, easy read. Btw, "history" and similar subjects may include living authors. Whitecastle will do just fine.

[moo]

I like to read what some people could describe as "a difficult reading", ancient authors, history, philosophy, classic novels. In terms of grammar is pretty rare that I encounter some difficulty, so in the majority of cases my only problem is vocabulary.

Yes but if you continue to read these without any modern works ; these ancient authors , philosophy, etc it could have a negative effect on your spoken English as the vocabulary you learn will not be commonly used. So I second reading a few modern works too . But that is up to you. Good luck And it's great to hear someone else who likes philosophy

[Kundera]

As a matter of fact, literature use to have a different vocabulary from spoken language. That difference, if there's any at all, isn't uniform, since some languages shows a higher degree of diglossia, some not. Still, the "interference" of written vocabulary on spoken ones will happen only if a given speaker relied too much on written sources. As long you keep both inputs, you'll be able to differentiate both.

Concerning reading fluency, I think that C-levels offers some grammar difficulties to any learner, but it is not a matter of a new "input", but rather having a grammatically correct "output". Aside that, reading fluency relies mostly on vocabulary. I shall highlight that this assumption is a double-edged sword: one can have a "C2 English" level and still struggle when reading Byron - most of native speakers would struggle too.

[Xmmm]

I think it's unfair to equate the classics with Dante, Shakespeare, antiquated vocabulary, and difficult- to-read novels like Moby Dick. Incidentally, it would be nice if someone occasionally mentioned syntax.

Agree. I was an English major in college back in the day when that meant you had to read everything by Chaucer, Shakespeare, and Milton to graduate.

1. Is Shakespeare "the best"? Well, possibly, but he wrote plenty of uninteresting plays ... people really only talk about the top ten or twelve. Also, it's not his language that is so difficult, it's the changed cultural context. If you have to understand every joke by reading footnotes explaining why it is funny, is it still funny? Also -- he wrote plays. They are meant to be watched, not read. You would learn more about what Shakespeare was about from watching Kurosawa's Ran or that Finnish movie Hamlet Goes Business than by reading the plays.

2. Is Shakespeare "the most difficult". No. The most difficult texts in English are the seventeenth century essayists who perfected "the masculine style." I could read Shakespeare backwards and forward, but I got a headache from these guys. These essayists deliberately left out every "unnecessary" word in order to have what they considered at the time to be concise, punchy prose. But the actual effect is that you have to read every sentence ten or twenty times to know what it means, which is why no one uses "the masculine style" anymore.

More readable classics

Graham Greene -- Brighton Rock, The Quiet American, The Power and the Glory
F. Scott Fitzgerald -- The Great Gatsby, The Beautiful and the Damned
Frank Norris -- McTeague
Philip K. Dick -- The Man in the High Castle

[DangerDave2010]

Once you are aquainted with basic sentence formation, grammar is mostly redundant.

[luke]

I like reading those kinds of books when I'm at the level you describe. Another challenge with these types of books can be the very long, nuanced sentences. Don't let that stop you though. I find multiple readings/listenings over a period of time helps unlock the meaning. Parallel texts can be helpful too. Most of those books are in the public domain, so you may be able to find electronic copies in your target and native languages.

[IronMike]

More readable classics

Graham Greene -- Brighton Rock, The Quiet American, The Power and the Glory
F. Scott Fitzgerald -- The Great Gatsby, The Beautiful and the Damned
Frank Norris -- McTeague
Philip K. Dick -- The Man in the High Castle

Adds:

Evelyn Waugh -- The Loved One, Scoop, Sword of Honour
Kingsley Amis -- Lucky Jim
Tom Sharpe -- Porterhouse Blue, Riotous Assembly, Indecent Exposure, Wilt

[yong321]

When it comes to vocabulary, not all "difficult" books are created equal! The difference is between amount and depth. Literary books require a large number of words memorized in your brain. Books on philosophy, on the other hand, don't need that many words but most technical words need an in-depth understanding. The difficulty in reading the latter category is independent of the language (I assume basic reading skills have already been acquired). It's more analogous to reading a quantum mechanics book. It's difficult no matter whether it's written in English or another language.