MacGyver wrote:
Um, Polyglot, why even mention this?
I wouldn't know. You were the one who brought that up.
MacGyver wrote:I don't know if were are really on the same page here. My point was a polyglot is not the be all and end all of language learning, and in many cases there are far better options.
I agree with your point. I made it several times already, starting from my first post in this thread to the post where I said our opinions probably don't differ that much.
Like I said, my own point was that being a native speaker isn't the end-all-be-all of teaching and in many cases, there are far better options. More specifically, many schools are far too eager to employ as teachers monolinguals with no background whatsoever in teaching on the
sole basis that they are native.
Polyglots have more to offer to self-learners, for instance on a forum like this one, and monolingual native speakers have more to offer as conversation partners. Both can also make good tutors, for different aspects of language learning.
MacGyver wrote:I don't know if were are really on the same page here. My point was a polyglot is not the be all and end all of language learning, and in many cases there are far better options. I don't know what these scenarios really prove.
I also agree that these scenarios prove nothing. For the most part, you are the one who brought them up, not me. I answered because you asked. As I said, I was never interested in discussing polyglot vs other options scenarios, since my point was about the over-emphasis placed on native speakers.
Edit: But I realize that this discussion of native speakerism is off topic, so I will stop.