|
 |
Why do people lie about being fluent? | ||
Tags: Fake Reviews | Fluency | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : General discussion |  | |
 Iversen Super Polyglot Moderator Denmark berejst.dk Joined 6498 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 9 of 88 27 April 2011 at 9:35am | IP Logged | ||
|
In an earlier discussion it was suggested that "fluent" should b restricted to those cases where you can speak without stop (maybe even without thinking), and instead the word "proficient" should be used for the situation whre you know a lot of words and a lot of grammar and you can form correct sentences - but maybe not speak fluently in the literal sense. This would partly solve the problem - the only problem is that it is too late, the word "fluent" is already used in both cases.
The result is that we have some persons that can't accept that anybody is fluent unless that person both speaks like a waterfall AND in absolutely impeccable phrases with a pronunciation at the level of a native speaker. And at the other end of the scale we have those beginners who see themselves as fluent if they can order a beer in Swahili (the Dunning-Kruger syndrome). A formal test might settle matters, provided that the test itself was administered in a fair and balanced way. But formal tests are for those who might need a score for their career, or who like the safety of an independent test. My own definitions for active fluency - which follow the system of this forum, but otherwise are totally unfounded and unauthorized - are as follows: I'm a mere beginner until I have reached the level where I can construct simple phrases in my head. Then I'm intermediate until the moment where I can survive discussions with natives sufficiently well to do a monolingual journey - that level is called basic fluency. And I gradually become advanced when I have weeded out the most glaring errors AND can perform without using dictionaries and grammars to check the things I already have said or written. The other side of the medal is passive fluency where I generally is at least one step ahead. As you can see this is a mixture of the speaking-without-pauses and the proficiency definitions, but this is not worse than disregarding up the chiasm between active and passive skills, and between skills based on writing and aural/vocal skills. PS: I also find it irritating when people claim fluency just because they can order the aforementioned beer. But I would only feel sick about it if they got the job I wanted by falsely claiming fluency. Otherwise it is not something that really matters. Edited by Iversen on 27 April 2011 at 10:02am 20 persons have voted this message useful | |||
| Bao Diglot Senior Member Germany tinyurl.com/pe4kqe5 Joined 5561 days ago 2256 posts - 4046 votes Speaks: German*, English Studies: French, Spanish, Japanese, Mandarin | Message 10 of 88 27 April 2011 at 10:07am | IP Logged | ||
|
Apart from what's been mentioned so far - you always sound more fluent and eloquent in your own head, unless you belong to the minority of people who seem to use non-verbal thought strateges even for things that are easier to consider with the help of an internal monologue.
My own idea of levels is relatively similar to Iversen's, though I won't claim basic fluency until conversation becomes more or less effortless and natural for my conversation partner. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| Nguyen Senior Member Vietnam Joined 4888 days ago 109 posts - 195 votes Speaks: Vietnamese | Message 12 of 88 27 April 2011 at 10:29am | IP Logged | ||
|
I think an answer to your question would be to look at human nature. People often boast about their income, education, sexual conquests etc.. This is a sign that these people are dealing with self doubt and insecurity.
Some people also just have a boastful nature and like to show off. As far as the fluency, proficiency debate; I don't think that was the OP's intention. As far as promoting ones language ability beyond it's boundaries. This seem's to be quite normal given the whole Polyglot You tube thing! Better to post this question in a psychiatric forum I think... 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| Bao Diglot Senior Member Germany tinyurl.com/pe4kqe5 Joined 5561 days ago 2256 posts - 4046 votes Speaks: German*, English Studies: French, Spanish, Japanese, Mandarin | Message 13 of 88 27 April 2011 at 12:39pm | IP Logged | ||
|
No, you are correct, Nguyen.* The OP seemed either to want to complain about people who grossly overestimate their skills, or get visitors for their own blog. I'm not sure, I never visit links given in such a context. But that doesn't mean that we can't waste out time on the umptieth discussion about this kind of thing, does it? =)
(If the internet throws spam at you, open the tin.) One of the things one might keep in mind that it can be helpful to slightly overestimate one's skills and just learn the rest on the go. *and I will likely never sort out in which languages I am supposed to disagree with the topic the other person I agree with disagrees with, and in which I am supposed to agree with the other person. Edited by Bao on 27 April 2011 at 12:39pm 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| Haukilahti Triglot Groupie Finland Joined 4759 days ago 94 posts - 126 votes Speaks: Finnish*, English, Polish | Message 14 of 88 27 April 2011 at 1:56pm | IP Logged | ||
|
Bao, I actually visit the link and found the blog post better and differently written than the original post here.
But yes, let people claim fluency. It's such a subjective concept, as long as they don't fake language certification exams. 3 persons have voted this message useful | |||
| s_allard Triglot Senior Member Canada Joined 5225 days ago 2704 posts - 5425 votes Speaks: French*, English, Spanish Studies: Polish | Message 15 of 88 27 April 2011 at 3:35pm | IP Logged | ||
|
As Iversen mentioned, the word "fluency" is grossly misused around here. But that's a battle for another day. In my opinion, the problem isn't really about people lying about the level of proficiency; it's really one of underestimating what speaking a language really means and also the impossibility to define language performance with vague words. As imperfect as they are, the scales such as the CEFR do give some idea of the level of performance. If someone says to me I'm about a B2 in French, I have a better idea than "I'm pretty fluent in French, but my vocabulary sucks."
5 persons have voted this message useful | |||
| Romanist Senior Member United Kingdom Joined 5077 days ago 261 posts - 366 votes Studies: Italian | Message 16 of 88 27 April 2011 at 3:37pm | IP Logged | ||
If she is able to "hold a coversation", then she is fluent - end of argument. Holding a conversation implies the ability to participate in and sustain a meaningful exchange of information, while not being able to control or predict exactly which direction the exchange will take. If you can do that, you must have at least basic fluency. Having said that, it's not at all clear from the original post whether the lady in question actually IS able to "hold a conversation" in Spanish... Edited by Romanist on 27 April 2011 at 3:41pm 2 persons have 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. |
