definition of fluent

General discussion about learning languages
User avatar
leosmith
Brown Belt
Posts: 1341
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2016 10:06 pm
Location: Seattle
Languages: English (N)
Spanish (adv)
French (int)
German (int)
Japanese (int)
Korean (int)
Mandarin (int)
Portuguese (int)
Russian (int)
Swahili (int)
Tagalog (int)
Thai (int)
x 3104
Contact:

Re: definition of fluent

Postby leosmith » Mon Jul 18, 2022 7:20 pm

miles wrote:I would like to set better more defined goal posts by creating a definition of fluency for myself to work towards.
It's interesting because in the past few days I have seen two different posters in two different forums say that they want to create their own definition of fluency, then use it as a goal to work towards. To me, this is a very strange concept, one that was originally (ime) suggested by Benny Lewis.
Here is my beef with it. Why not just set a goal and work towards it? Why call the goal “fluency”? After all, you admit that you are making it up anyway. Can you not work towards a goal if it is not called “fluency”?
7 x
https://languagecrush.com/reading - try our free multi-language reading tool

miles
White Belt
Posts: 13
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2022 6:05 am
Languages: english (n) B2 French and fished pimsleur 3 spanish. i want to be fluent in some way in spanish in 2 years.
x 13

Re: definition of fluent

Postby miles » Mon Jul 18, 2022 8:08 pm

I like your line of reasoning. For some reason it reminds me of when one is playing music in a particular key. Some songs one can imagine they are in a different key and find different relationships within them. Key and fluency just seem like differentb movable limits or containers for exploration to me…
0 x

Kraut
Black Belt - 2nd Dan
Posts: 2599
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2017 10:37 pm
Languages: German (N)
French (C)
English (C)
Spanish (A2)
Lithuanian
x 3204

Re: definition of fluent

Postby Kraut » Thu Jul 21, 2022 10:59 am

There is a discussion on Reddit, sb raised the point that the two languages ought to be kept separate, one parent predominantly addressing the child in one language.

https://www.reddit.com/r/languagelearni ... _to_learn/
----------
https://www.raising-bilingual-children. ... nfo/rules/
1 x

sirgregory
Orange Belt
Posts: 171
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2019 5:22 pm
Location: USA
Languages: Speaks: English (N), Spanish
Studies: German, French
x 615

Re: definition of fluent

Postby sirgregory » Fri Jul 22, 2022 10:56 pm

The word itself suggests something that's free flowing and fluid. As a metaphor for language it would mean that the words flow readily and easily, unlike from the halting, labored speech of someone who is new to a language. For whatever reason, that is simply the word that's used in English to refer to proficiency in a foreign language. The opposite is probably "broken," as in "she speaks broken French." But I don't think there's a precise moment at which broken French magically becomes fluent French.

In Spanish, from what I've heard people tend to use the word dominar (to dominate) with languages, "I dominate Spanish" or "I'm a master of Spanish." The meaning seems similar to fluent in English but the metaphor is very different.
2 x

tractor
Green Belt
Posts: 379
Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2016 10:58 am
Location: Norway
Languages: Norwegian (N), English, Spanish, Catalan, French, German, Italian, Latin
x 773

Re: definition of fluent

Postby tractor » Sat Jul 23, 2022 10:44 am

sirgregory wrote:The word itself suggests something that's free flowing and fluid. As a metaphor for language it would mean that the words flow readily and easily, unlike from the halting, labored speech of someone who is new to a language. For whatever reason, that is simply the word that's used in English to refer to proficiency in a foreign language. The opposite is probably "broken," as in "she speaks broken French." But I don't think there's a precise moment at which broken French magically becomes fluent French.

In Spanish, from what I've heard people tend to use the word dominar (to dominate) with languages, "I dominate Spanish" or "I'm a master of Spanish." The meaning seems similar to fluent in English but the metaphor is very different.

You can also say hablar con soltura or hablar con fluidez, and that’s the same metaphor as in English.
1 x

User avatar
PeterMollenburg
Black Belt - 3rd Dan
Posts: 3229
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2015 11:54 am
Location: Australia
Languages: English (N), French (B2-certified), Dutch (High A2?), Spanish (~A1), German (long-forgotten 99%), Norwegian (false starts in 2020 & 2021)
Language Log: https://forum.language-learners.org/vie ... 15&t=18080
x 8029

Re: definition of fluent

Postby PeterMollenburg » Sat Jul 23, 2022 1:56 pm

Kraut wrote:There is a discussion on Reddit, sb raised the point that the two languages ought to be kept separate, one parent predominantly addressing the child in one language.

https://www.reddit.com/r/languagelearni ... _to_learn/
----------
https://www.raising-bilingual-children. ... nfo/rules/


I haven't read the reddit discussions, but I'll chime in to add that keeping the languages separate according to which parent is speaking with the child, as you have mentioned, Kraut, is the 'one parent, one language' approach. You may be well aware of this, but I thought I'd post to provide some insights from my experiences raising children in a multilingual environment.

There are also families who adress their child(ren) in whichever language according to location and others according to time or days of the week. For example, English outside the house, Spanish inside. Or Spanish with the grandparents at their house (which is weekdays for 2 hours/day), English elsewhere except during Spanish storytime each evening before bed. German in the kitchen!

There are many approaches and variations on raising bilingual children including code switching, which I'm not keen on myself, but who am I to tell others how to raise their (multi-)lingual kids? I'm not keen on it, as I feel perhaps chosen methods matter less than clearly defined/ clearly demonstrated language boundaries when aiming for sustainable bi-/multi-lingualism with children.

When the language boundaries are rock solid and clear for the children, defaulting to the more dominant language(s) is less likely. Why would kids bother using a minority language with the minority language speaking parent if that parent will respond without issue in the majority language anyway? Doing so erodes the perceived importance of the minority language as the need is no longer obvious.

Adressing Papa in English? Ah, no, not gonna happen in my house. ;) (edit: nor anyhere else for that matter).
2 x

parasitius
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2017 1:02 am
Languages: English (N), Mandarin, Japanese, Cantonese
x 14

Re: definition of fluent

Postby parasitius » Tue Aug 02, 2022 8:39 am

iguanamon wrote:In practice, a C2 proficient second-language learner may not be able to do the simplest things in everyday situations- like "get the car repaired" in the language


This is a particular argument form I see all over the internet, but I've never questioned it directly before. How does this make any sense?

Yeah man but WHAT IF [Some one who is a C2 level speaker] = [scenario which mostly proves this person is absolutely not C2 nor even close]?

Well the simple answer is THEY'RE NOT C2 and they're not close to C2!!
0 x

User avatar
rdearman
Site Admin
Posts: 7231
Joined: Thu May 14, 2015 4:18 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Languages: English (N)
Language Log: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1836
x 23125
Contact:

Re: definition of fluent

Postby rdearman » Tue Aug 02, 2022 11:15 am

parasitius wrote:
iguanamon wrote:In practice, a C2 proficient second-language learner may not be able to do the simplest things in everyday situations- like "get the car repaired" in the language


This is a particular argument form I see all over the internet, but I've never questioned it directly before. How does this make any sense?

Yeah man but WHAT IF [Some one who is a C2 level speaker] = [scenario which mostly proves this person is absolutely not C2 nor even close]?

Well the simple answer is THEY'RE NOT C2 and they're not close to C2!!

My grandfather lived in the USA his entire life. He only spoke English for 70+ years. He read the instructions on how to program a VCR to record his favorite TV shows, he read it and reread it again and again, and people explained it to him a number of times, but he could never manage to program the VCR and his grandchildren had to do it for him.

Therefore, using your logic, my grandfather WAS NOT A NATIVE SPEAKER, and he wasn't even CLOSE TO NATIVE!
3 x
: 0 / 150 Read 150 books in 2024

My YouTube Channel
The Autodidactic Podcast
My Author's Newsletter

I post on this forum with mobile devices, so excuse short msgs and typos.

parasitius
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2017 1:02 am
Languages: English (N), Mandarin, Japanese, Cantonese
x 14

Re: definition of fluent

Postby parasitius » Tue Aug 02, 2022 12:05 pm

rdearman wrote:My grandfather lived in the USA his entire life. He only spoke English for 70+ years. He read the instructions on how to program a VCR to record his favorite TV shows, he read it and reread it again and again, and people explained it to him a number of times, but he could never manage to program the VCR and his grandchildren had to do it for him.

Therefore, using your logic, my grandfather WAS NOT A NATIVE SPEAKER, and he wasn't even CLOSE TO NATIVE!


The person describe someone who struggled to get their car repaired... the proof they're not C2 is that they struggled with anything, not that they lacked specific knowledge or skills.

There's a simple test for this - I'm a so called native speaker of the American language. Sports are very popular in my country and actually a huge part of small talk. I am almost completely incapable of talking about sports; I know nothing. But I have the following ability:

I can effortlessly remember details in a conversation about sports because I can readily identify "ok - that thing he just mentioned must be a type of maneuver allowed in the game" "ok - that thing he just mentioned must be a role for a player in the game" etc. in spite of the fact that I have never heard these things before.

Moreover, this requires so little effort (relative to let's say a B2 speaker trying to remember anything complex with new words and manipulate it in real time) that I can actually hold a fluid conversation in spite of my complete ignorance. On top of that, the other person will feel I'm listening and actively engaged enough that they won't mind telling me everything they find interesting about the sport they're going on about.

Likewise, if I didn't know "how to get my car repaired" the missing vocabulary would be completely irrelevant, as the mechanic would realize that I could use circumlocutions with such expertise that the conversation about how we were going to get the car fixed would scarcely take longer than if I was fully aware of all the necessary specialist vocabulary.

Someone who was a true C2 would approximate these abilities VERY closely, and that's a world of difference away from "not being able to "get the car repaired". Someone who couldn't is not a C2 plain and simple. Your grandfather would have all of the above.
2 x

User avatar
Le Baron
Black Belt - 3rd Dan
Posts: 3511
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2021 5:14 pm
Location: Koude kikkerland
Languages: English (N), fr, nl, de, eo, Sranantongo,
Maintaining: es, swahili.
Language Log: https://forum.language-learners.org/vie ... 15&t=18796
x 9389

Re: definition of fluent

Postby Le Baron » Tue Aug 02, 2022 12:22 pm

parasitius wrote:This is a particular argument form I see all over the internet, but I've never questioned it directly before. How does this make any sense?

Yeah man but WHAT IF [Some one who is a C2 level speaker] = [scenario which mostly proves this person is absolutely not C2 nor even close]?

Well the simple answer is THEY'RE NOT C2 and they're not close to C2!!

What rdearman said. But also that it's about the content and aims of 'C2' certification as compared to the 'everyday language use' of either a native speaker or any speaker with a history of long-term usage. If we take the time-frame used for the certification-based learning trajectory, it's pretty short for some. Over the course of say 3-5 years. Often not in an L2 environment, not based upon daily usage for what might be thought 'trivial' exchanges.

So the C2 person will often be highly proficient with academic language (especially listening and processing it), yet still not be able to formulate language in the way the ordinary person uses it where the language is the normal currency. With all the reformulations, vernacular rules, odd and old vocabulary, accent oddities. It doesn't mean they aren't certified C2 or haven't gained advanced proficiency in the official language, but that this is not the same as free-form, vernacular speech as used by all walks of society. And that's to be expected. Everything is like this; you get your law degree with all the perfect theoretical scenarios and case studies, then you eventually start practising law, which is more chaotic and harder to manage.
3 x


Return to “General Language Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: guyome and 2 guests