Araminta wrote:I just wanted to stop by your log to say I'm so sorry to hear about your Belgian visa experience. But if anyone can make it to B2 in German in a few months, it's you. Best wishes.
Thanks. But it is even worse. I don't need any visa, I am an EU citizen, I should not be discriminated against in any way. I am struggling with residency card, because one idiot gave me wrong information on the conditions months ago and his colleagues pretend it is my mistake. That's the whole issue. It feels extremely unfair, I'm treated as if I was an illiterate poor uneducated person from a third country.
Thanks for your wish. I hope I can seriously get into this. I've just spent a few days away, and every day without 5 hours of German counts a lot.
Starting today with the new routine.
I only wish there was something I'd really like about Germany. Because so far, I have found nothing. Some people are able to learn just for money but I am failing at that. To me, it looks like the only things I liked about the germanophone country (such as the classical composers and opera) ended centuries ago.
If only I could find a few good scifi writers. There are some fantasy writers, but the amount pales in comparison with French or even with Czech. The popular music is a disaster, German radios are horrible and there is almost never any good popular music in German. I found some gothic metal I liked, but I am not always in mood for metal. And there are too few tv shows for a language of this size. It will be a struggle. But I have already learnt one language out of spite and despair, so it may work again.
Le Baron wrote:I read your other lengthy review. It was good. I'd guess that there is some serious 'flexibility' in that italki testing because above all it is a profit earning platform. To test rigorously along certified CEFR lines, with an accredited institution, means telling students what they really need to hear to progress. Quite a lot of online tests are there to massage your ego and take your money for the service.
Thanks! I am totally aware that the purpose of the test is improving the sales for the platform. That's why I find it so confusing, that it is so bad at the lower levels, and that it seriously overestimates the skills. Is flattery really the best strategy? Won't the learners react like "naah, I'm B2 already, no need to pay for tutoring"?
The ego massage is indeed comprehensible on some sites. And in most places, such a test is at best a lead on how weel you do in the particular product, nothing to do with the real CEFR. But when I read the description on the italki tutor forum, that the test is meant to help prove the progress to the learner etc, I expected something a bit better. I expected it to be at least as good as most normal level sorting tests for classes.
The sad result is, that I don't get why people hate self-assessment so much and automatically assume people who self assess must be lyers. But there is no other way to assess your level before you pay 200 euro for an official exam and risk failing it. Most online tests are total trash, and most teachers are not better than an educated guess of the learner themselves. Imagine I'd go and just pay for the nearest Goethe Zertifikat B2. I'd lose my investment and the blow to my ego and plans would be rather serious.
Perhaps I hoped for something more reliable, because the test is still far from free, and because one part of it is well thought out.
PeterMollenburg wrote:I suspected as you did - "it's not what you know, it's who you know" was playing a role as I was reading your post. Then I saw a line or two later you suspected the same. To simply not give you an interview sounds like there were things going on behind the scenes that you have no influence over (i.e. the candidate(s) had already been chosen). That's unfortunate. But
Thank you for the sympathy. It is really infuriating. It's one thing to lose in a fair competition, but this is different. I don't know, whether it was due to nepotism, or if they were just too lazy and chose to throw darts on the list instead.
On the French anglicism thing...
I am a bit of a purist when it comes to French. Oddly, I'm not as bothered by this for Dutch and i suspect it's something to do with Dutch and English being Germanic, Dutch being a smaller language and French phonetically being more different than Dutch is to English. If there's a perfectly good French equivalent, why use an English word? If there is an anglicism that is accepted into the language to the point it is in Le Robert dictionary, I'm happy to use it here and there but prefer the more original French version if one exists. To get to the point, I will use the anglicisms with their French pronunciation as listed in the dictionary in IPA format. If it's not in the dictionary and it's therefore not a recognised French word borrowed from English, shove it, I'm not using it. When listening to podcasts I often hear French people throw in random English words that definitely are not recognised in French (they are straight up English words or expressions) to sound cooler it seems or something else, but either way it annoys the hell out of me. You do not sound cooler (to me), you're just annoying me (in truth that's my problem, not theirs).
So Good luck with your German mission!
The thing is, that there is sometimes no perfectly good equivalent, and sometimes there is. And the use of the anglicisms doesn't always correlate with this reality. This recent rekindling of interest in the topic started for me on Agorima's log, where they were very critical towards anglicisms in Czech. However, majority of their examples actually didn't have a perfectly good Czech equivalent, all the closest ones meant something different.
I tend to side a bit with the purists in French too, because French doesn't actually have some of the problems Czech does. It has very rich vocab with Latin roots, so sticking to French doesn't create any supplemental barrier. It has a real tradition but can also react well to the modern world. However, some anglicisms are necessary and insisting on purism only alienates the standard with the really used language.
I mostly like your approach, with acknowledging the official anglicisms and their official pronunciation. But there are a few catches: the first is a practical one, I don't really have time to check everything in a dictionary, and will forget it by the time I find a moment. And a second one: do you treat just as harshly new purely French words? Or is there a double standard?
The perfect example is "chronophage". It is a perfect word, and there is no traditional equivalent really expressing the same thing without having to use several words. It is a French word, not an anglicism. But still, some purist don't even like such neologisms. It officially doesn't exist.
And the third issue: What is "more French" or rather "more natural" or "more native like"? Sticking to the standard vocabulary and protecting the language, or going with the flow and commiting the same linguistic atrocities as the people around you? I don't think there is any universal answer.
rdearman wrote:PeterMollenburg wrote:When listening to podcasts I often hear French people throw in random English words that definitely are not recognised in French (they are straight up English words or expressions) to sound cooler it seems or something else, but either way it annoys the hell out of me.
You might want to be careful here. There are many French words which are taken from English, but do not actually have the same meaning. E.g. the French took the word and made it their own. So they aren't just throwing in random English words to sound cool.
Some examples are: "Footing", which to the French is a verb meaning to run slowly. We use "jogging" in English for this, but jogging for the French are tracksuit bottoms (sweatpants for Americans). Pressing = Dry cleaning, Brushing = Blow-drying your hair. Or "dressing" which means the same as wardrobe in English but in English dressing is something you put on salad.
Yes, this definitely happens. It is confusing. But while we may opt to use more French words, when available, I simply don't think a non native speaker should try to correct the natives or simply avoid the normal use of these words. You will just appear more weird. And imagine just HOW uncomfortable this is for me, a non native speaker of both English and French!
I definitely wouldn't want to go as far as to using the weird anglicized corporate newspeak (which is definitely mostly a show off opportunity), but if I want to watch the wonderful fashion and looks videos in a facebook group or on youtube, I simply need to understand "brushing" and similar words. And if I want to talk with normal people about such stuff, I simply cannot be a purist, or I'll look like a typical beginner speaking like a textbook.