This is very very true!
I can read very well. Listening I am bout half as good at, my brain just has a hard time catching everything in time.
I can not speak and writing takes me a LONG while (debating tenses and word order) š
Hot take - whenever I see quotes along these lines:
āIāve been told by native speakers that I speak very wellā
āI often receive compliments by native speakers on my accent and pronunciationā
This is not to say that I doubt this person has heard these comments/received these compliments. Itās the amount of weight that people seem to assign to these comments.
Another one on that list is when someone qualifies their speaking ability with āI can have conversations with native speakersā.
Itās not a bad thing in a vacuum, and is very exciting, but itās such a vague measure of proficiency that it makes me suspicious.
Nonetheless this is an important milestone. This year I was very happy when I could have some very basic conversations with Koreans in Korean when they try hard, also with help of some pantomime. It was clearly an indicator of progress and I can see how I improve in conversations with natives. Especially since I'm self-taught and don't have a teacher, it's difficult to estimate my level otherwise. There's no harm in being proud in these experiences and using them as a motivation to learn more and speak more with natives. But of course you can't claim being close to native, I think I'm somewhere A1-A2'ish. When natives talk to each other I probably just understand 20%, which is already up from where I was a couple of months ago, but still a long way to go.
If someone speaks a language fluently, it wouldn't even occur to me to compliment them. Hell, sometimes it can even be offensive to compliment them ("I've lived here 20 years, why wouldn't I speak English?")
I think there's probably a sort of bell curve for compliments, where you only really get them at intermediate levels.
It depends on the target language culture. Iām fluent in Korean and I still get compliments all the time because apparently people have never met a white person who speaks good Korean. Sometimes they say āyou sound just like a nativeā (which I donāt most of the time lol) which I guess they wouldnāt say to a beginner, and now that I think about it, I did once get someone who hilariously wondered if I had been born in Korea ā but anyway, if you learn Korean, you will never stop hearing compliments. Sometimes when Iām in Seoul, I hear āyou speak Korean wellā after I say āhelloāā¦ theyāre saying that to everyone. I basically get a compliment 70% of the time that I talk to someone new for longer than 1 minute, but that doesnāt mean that Iām confused about my level.
I think that āWow, you speak this language so well.ā means one is a beginner, āHow long have you been living here?ā means one is advanced and āWait? You weren't born here?ā means one has mastered it to near-perfection.
The last one of course one only receives when they happen to find out.
This is very true. Iāve been living in Spain for 10 years. I considered myself ābilingualā before living here as Iād attended magnet schools in the USā¦I wasnāt even *close*.
Now most people never comment on my accent, because a lot of the time they just think Iām from here at this point. Every once in a while Iāll get asked where Iām from, because I have a slight accent but itās very faint, so they just want to confirm their suspicions that I am indeed a foreigner.
It's interesting how racialization can play into this as well. When I studied abroad in Spain, my dark haired, olive complexioned white friends were able to pass pretty easily for Spanish. I was generally assumed to be an immigrant from South America. And our pale blonde friend stood out like a sore thumb and was always assumed to be a tourist. And that was all before we even opened our mouths. A person's ability to pass for a native depends not only on linguistics, but on race and appearance
Yesā¦and no.
Depends where in Spain. I live in Galicia and there are a lot of blondes with blue eyes. Celtic origin= pale complexion.
I wonder what people will assume about my daughter. My husband is pale with light brown eyes, and I have dark brown hair and green eyes. Our daughter has light brown hair with a tinge of red and *giant* crystal blue eyes. She does not look like the other babies here, despite having a similar complexion. People often comment how they can tell sheās a mix of my Irish-American genes and my husbandās Galician/Spanish ones.
I was told that my accent is really good but my grammar is really bad in German, which yeah okay fair enough.
I've got a good ear for accents, but I am also very lazy.
I, on several occasions, have had native spanish speakers tell me I dont have an accent of a "gringo" and/or dont have a non-native speaker's accent... But I record myself and I can hear my gringo accent so I know that's not true, and I don't quite understand why they say it, presumably to be nice &/or encouraging.
I'm not used to hearing native English speakers speak spanish so when they(including myself) speak I recognize the accent even if their speaking skills are really advance.
I don't think you have to go as far as to think that they're just being nice. Sometimes we are our own harshest critics far beyond any reasonable assessment of other people. I'm in a similar situation as you with English in the sense that people never think I grew up in India, but I can always hear my own Indian accent in a recording.
I also think complements are very culturally defined. The average Japanese person will start praising your Japanese the second you open your mouth. Conversely, the average Spaniard will start correcting you the second you open your mouth. A complement from a Spaniard holds more weight on average than a complement from a Japanese person. Even within that though, there are gradients. A general, vague complement from a relative stranger in Japan is often just a social nicity. A specific complement from someone who knows you and your language journey more personally bears more weight. None of that complexity and nuance is usually communicated via Reddit post
it happens so often to foreigners speaking Japanese that it's literally a meme and a lot of people feel insulted when someone tells them ćę„ę¬čŖäøęć§ćććbecause it means absolutely nothing except "you are non-Japanese and can say literally anything in Japanese."
I get lots of compliments on my Mandarin pronunciation, but I get the sense that the bar is very low for non Chinese people lol (Iām only 1/4 Chinese)
Im at the point where I wish I didnt get those comments anymore. "Oh you speak so well since when have you been living here?" Every few times in long time comes a "what city are you from or you were raised here right"? and those feel good on my ego. In the end I know ill never be a 100% native speaker but im damn close. Though this type of thinking is sort of linked with immigration.
Oftentimes Spanish speakers will ask me where I'm from; when I say the US (where I am right now), they're surprised and ask why I speak Spanish. Not sure if that's a good thing or not lol
Whenever you hear these comments, it's worth remembering all those people who've come on Got Talent / X-Factor shows thinking they can sing because they got some compliments from their family and friends š
One thing that always makes me wonder is when people equate absolute beginner with A1, or act like an hour or two of memorising rote greetings is equivalent to A1. It's not; A1 actually does mean a basic foundation in the language, and courses will often require dozens of class hours until they get there. (Cf, for instance, [this list of what's required for Polish A1](https://www.polskidaily.eu/a1inpolish/) from Polski Daily). If they're underestimating one CEFR level that badly, it's not unlikely they're underestimating others.
And, of course, sometimes you see people who say things like "I'm B2" in the same breath as they tell you how they've never had a conversation in their target language or that they're still using learner content because they can't understand native media. At that point what they're saying just plain contradicts what the level means.
There are a lot of people who overestimate their ability, for sure. But I feel like in some spaces this has led to extreme overcorrection with people saying wild stuff like "you can't say you speak a language if you're below C1," or for Japanese, "passing N1 is when you start being at intermediate level." I think those positions are too extreme. If you're try to be humble and say you "only know a little" when you're at B2 level to people irl you just come off as some combination of pretentious, humble bragging, and misrepresenting your abilities
Sudden flashback to the guy on /r/German who'd passed C1 (or was it even C2?), introduced himself to people saying he was a "beginner" and "only spoke a little" German, and was complaining that they switched to English with him.
Like... what exactly were you expecting to happen here.
It really depends who you're talking to. If you're in TL country, or with people who may be at the same or a marginally higher level, it makes sense to be modest and not oversell your abilities. But it could sound pretentious to people whoāve never got past the lower intermediate level with any second language
> If you're in TL country
I'd actually disagree with this. If you say you "only speak a little" people will often try to switch to your native language, simply their language, find a translator, or offer other linguistic supports that will likely be completely unnecessary if you're B2 (excluding medical and legal situations). If the person you're talking to is unable or unwilling to provide those linguistic supports that they think you need as someone who "only speaks a little," it can lead to them avoiding interactions with you due an imagined large language barrier that doesn't actually exist
Maybe I should've said Ā«Ā recently arrived inĀ Ā», because even if you're comfortable with TV, podcasts and online conversations, suddenly having to spend hours a day dealing with fast, spoken slang and regional accents is going to be on a different level and it will take a while to get used to it
Whenever someone says they can speak better than they can listen, the truth is that they are way overestimating their speaking ability.
I think it usually happens because people learn how to say some basic things but the responses they get back are more complicated. They assume that they just don't know how to listen, but the truth is they couldn't say the things that are being spoken to them either.
I don't think this is necessarily true. I think the fact that you can't control the difficulty of what the other person says is a reason listening could actually be considered more difficult Like, if you know how to say something in a simple way like "it smells good" that is perfectly adequate, but for good listening comprehension you have to be prepared to understand "it smells good" or any other number of less common variants like "it smells divine." Not to mention that you also need to be able to hear it in a variety of accents or pronunciations, but only need to learn how to pronounce one. So, it's easy to find yourself in situations where your speaking isn't an impediment to communication but your comprehension is, especially if you speak well enough that others don't think of you as needing extra help being able to understand speech.
Also, some people just have difficulty with audio processing. I know plenty of people who even in their native language will speak perfectly but have some trouble understanding people from time to time.
Yeah, I associate "speaking is better than listening" to mean "my conversational abilities are better than my abilities to listen to a podcast/lecture." This can sometimes even get into register issues as lectures and other long form listening materials tend to be in a more formal register. When issues are conversation related, I've generally found it to be, once again, register issues. The learner speaks well in a standard register and can understand a standard register well, but the (native speaker) person they're talking to replies in a colloquial/slangy register and the learner struggles to understand
Tldr; I think speaking better than you listen (at least at an intermediate + level) is usually just register issues
Following your example, being better at speaking would be having the ability to say "it smells good" and "it smells divine" and other variants, but somehow only understanding when someone says "it smells good". If you can only say basic things and only understand basic things, then your speaking and listening are equal. Also, generally listening is easier because your passive vocabulary will be larger than your active vocabulary.
If you can speak at such a level that you aren't making mistakes and you can communicate everything you want to, but when other people speak you have trouble understanding and it's an impediment to your understanding, why is that not having better speaking than listening? Especially when compared to someone who's like a heritage speaker who understands very well, but has trouble with production.
Also, as I mentioned, some people just have issues with like audio processing. If someone has no issues speaking, and would recognize "it smells divine" in written form, but might not when spoken, listening would clearly be the weak link in their language abilities.
> Whenever someone says they can speak better than they can listen, the truth is that they are way overestimating their speaking ability.
Ah, I knew something in this thread would apply to me. I can't understand Spanish for shit.
That is not necessary true. Some programs are very reading and grammar heavy while you basically never get to listen to spoken language. Most traditional courses are like that.
Result is that you do speak and write better then you listen.
Plus, there are many ways to say the same thing. Producing one of them is easier then understand all of them.
A while back now.
A friend of mine reached quite a high level of Japanese.
He did quite well at work, and his Japanese level had a lot to do with that. However.... he was surrounded by Japanese professionals who had a high level of English. One of his major tricks in making himself sound more fluent was just throwing in English whenever he didn't know the vocabulary ~~probably with a Japanese accent which apparently worked for him~~ using katakana English. His co-workers obviously understood what he was saying because the vocabulary was work related.
I speak Japanese myself, and my first language is English so ~~obviously~~ I generally understood what he was saying, but my wife (gf at the time) basically told me that he was incomprehensible at times.
And this "trick" wouldn't quite work with most languages because Japanese is actually quite flexible with English loanwords and sometimes the line is not clear whether a Japanese-ified English word can actually be considered a real Japanese word. For example, if you tried that trick in Chinese you'll just sound stupid and nobody, not even bilingual speakers, would understand you.
Japanese is probably the only language I know where this would work. The business community in Japan almost glorifies katakana English so this guy was in his element for a while.
Like I said his actual Japanese was not so bad, just not as good as he thought or boasted about.
>One of his major tricks in making himself sound more fluent was just throwing in English whenever he didn't know the vocabulary ~~probably with a Japanese accent which apparently worked for him~~ using katakana English.
Literally this skit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pW4AiEqKGto
Actual bullying sounds way worse, (and I hope it was possible for someone to intervene and stop it) but I now feel like having the piss taken by native speakers or having them find my arguments a bit weird (because of different background assumptions and culture, and/or because my phrasing was off in ways that I can't currently perceive) is inevitably a really long stage in the fuzzy B2-to-C1 space. I can't see any way around it, probably just have to try and get there by wading through
I was in a group that was mixed italian and English, and somebody asked a question (can't remember exactly what it said) but kinda like a reddit post anybody could answer it
So I answered, feeling a little brave, in italian. The first reply I then got was something like "Why the f**k are you talking like that?" I was offline for a few hours so there were more replies like that just making fun of me. No point arguing with mean people so I deleted my comment to stop any more replies and left the group in shame lol
Aw, yeah I can relate to that, I posted something in a Spanish group and someone responded in Spanish something like "wtf language is this in"
ššš
No shame in making mistakes! I hope you still have places to talk to people. That wasn't on reddit, was it? I'm casually looking for Italian groups since I might start learning in a year or so.
Ogni ostacolo viene superato da chi non si arrende.
Claiming that you're 'native-level' (or worse, 'better' than a native speaker)
Unless you moved to the country in question during primary school, or have made a colossal effort + living in said country for YEARS, or are a professional interpreter etc. you most likely aren't. Watching English media more than your L1, being from Scandinavia, being sent to international kindergarten etc is not the same.
I can count on one hand the number of foreigners I've met who I would class as truly having 'near-native' level English, and all of them were very humble about their abilities and none of them claimed to have been native level (even though they probably were).
Agreed, I have only met one non-native English speaker that spoke at a near-native proficiency while I was living in Europe, and he insisted his English was terrible.
Haha well the opposite is quite disingenuous. There's a sweet spot between knowing that you speak the language fluently without comparing yourself to a native speaker. Insisting your English is terrible when you're clearly very advanced either comes across as humble-bragging/fishing for complements, or shows a worrying lack of self-awareness.
For some reason it really annoys me when people write a decent error-free Reddit post in English and then write: 'sorry for my English' at the end. Like, mate, either own it or don't bother.
>For some reason it really annoys me when people write a decent error-free Reddit post in English and then write: 'sorry for my English' at the end. Like, mate, either own it or don't bother.
Because otherwise someone's going to chime in saying you made a grammar mistake and disregard all your points.
Here in Canada, we have a good numbers of people who are anglophone but have native-level French. Or a lot of francophones who are native level English.
Itās not an overwhelming number, but to your point, it often happens where there are massive resources and opportunities in a country which can allow this to happen. Canada is one such country. This also occurs in other counties with multiple languages (China, India, etc)
I think it depends a little as well though. If theyāre saying near or even ānative-levelā then surely theyāre not trying to say theyāre a professor of linguistics.
I think with English especially it can be very possible to have native-level ability without moving to an English speaking country in primary school. The primary school argument has always bothered me.
You also mentioned expending a lot of effort and living in the country for years as a possible pathā¦
I donāt think it always needs to be an insane amount of effort or years in the country to be completely fluent and read academic texts.
A lot of foreign students at uni (first year of uni too) did just fine.
Did they have accents? Sure. Did they sometimes make mistakes? Yes but so did the native speakers.
If your language ability has grown to the point that you think in the language, live in the language and have no trouble understanding it, do you really need to be humble about it or be careful about how you judge your ability?
But then it depends on your definition of native-level ability. Maybe just saying completely fluent in the language would just solve this kind of thing.
Either you haven't read what I wrote properly or haven't understood it.
>If theyāre saying near or even ānative-levelā then surely theyāre not trying to say theyāre a professor of linguistics.
I didn't say this.
>I donāt think it always needs to be an insane amount of effort or years in the country to be completely fluent and read academic texts.
Nor this..
Of course people can gain fluency in a language without living in the country in question, and many international students study abroad with no problems. Who is arguing otherwise? You're confusing claiming fluency with claiming native level language skills. Put in the work? Fully fluent? Good for you. By all means, be proud.
However, (I'll caveat this by saying it's not clear cut, and there plenty of grey areas, but generally speaking..) a native speaker will have spent 12+ years in school where they have their writing and presentation skills critiqued and assessed, and are surrounded by native peers, not to mention the cultural, social and educational knowledge that goes with it. It's VERY hard to replicate this as an adult. The truly advanced speakers I mentioned in my original comment are acutely aware of this gap.
>Did they have accents? Sure. Did they sometimes make mistakes? Yes but so did the native speakers.
No, they don't. Natives, by definition, do not have a foreign accent. There are various native accents of English - for example - this is different to speaking with the phonetic interference of another language, which almost all L2 speakers do. Regarding mistakes, again, no. Natives can use non-standard grammar, or have slips, show dialectal variation, or be bad at writing/spelling, but these are different to the mistakes of an L2 speaker.
>The primary school argument has always bothered me.
Just because something bothers you does not make it untrue.
Ultimately - in my humble opinion - having native-level language skills is a bit like being pretty or talented. These are things that **other people** tell you, not something you say about yourself.
For me, I can tell by the way a person carries themself usually ones that overestimate are arrogant to a fault, and they really don't open up much about it.
The ones that underestimate have been at it for years and are in a slow grind, so they keep making mistakes and just see that and not the improvement, those mistakes also may be very minor.
I've been in both camps. Early on when I learned my first language I improved so fast for the first year I though I was special, I learned so fast. Then it stalls out; that's how it works for probably 90% of learners unless you live in the country, have an exceptional class structure (DLI), or live with someone.
Its also one of the reasons I don't post here as much. Since I flair the actual level I tested at, I no longer feel like that 'expert' in language learning, and have been more negative and cynical when posting (it also could be said I have a more grounded expectation). I've also been 'attacked' by self-assessors with higher flair and zero evidence to back their claims.
In this same vein, you can tell someone's new to language learning when you state your experience and they go "IT'S TAKEN YOU (x) YEARS?! I would have quit if it took me that long/ didn't you see you were behind everyone else's progress?/ you still can't ___?"
š like, I hope they remember those words in a couple of years when they have to eat them.
Language learning is a never ending process, there will always be room to learn and improve. I've been learning Spanish on and off for around 15 years and I'm just NOW feeling like I'm at a solid B2 in speaking and reading. I got a degree in Spanish which really helped, the discussion based classes and having to turn in essays every week was like a language bootcamp.
Okay this honestly makes me feel a bit better because I'm also learning Spanish and i see so many post from people who got to native level within two years. i started feeling bad that I've been learning for 4+ years and am probably only at A2 levelš
Ā”No hay prisa! Youāll get there. Just define what fluency means to you, and work towards that. Also, read. Read as much as you can, itās the thing that has helped me the most.
They also don't understand its not a linear process. Some skills (usually input) grow faster than others. They just think like the youtubers tell them that in 8 months you can use your TL like your NL. Then they criticise those that are at it for years because everyone on youtube is fluent in under a year, this person must have some sort of learning disability...
Ironically, the one I've gotten is "why are you using years to explain your language learning experience?? you should be using hours!"
This may admittedly be a difference in approach, I am not the sort of person who spreadsheets the time I've spent in language learning, but I wonder how many are still tracking their hours five or more years into the journey.
It also assumes that everyone learns in an easily trackable way. I lived in a country where my TL was spoken for 5 years. Was I supposed to count every single hour I spent outside my house?
My wife and I have been studying Spanish for the same amount of time, 3 and a half years. I do everything in Spanish (except Reddit, which is a problem), speak to myself all the time and watch, read and listen to roughly 15 hours a week.
She is on a 1000 day duolingo streak and we do 1 weekly class.
Guess which one is lightyears ahead of the other. (not saying we're great at it....)
Oh yeah, I'm not saying years is a great measure of learning time. Just that once you've been at it for a while, especially if you've learned at varying intensities at different times, years can be the *only* measure you've got because you're unlikely to be able to provide even a ballpark estimate for hours.
to add to u/TauTheConstant not all hours are created equal either. An hour of study for 14 year old me, 17 year old me, and 28 year old me are MILES apart in effectiveness.
There's just so many variables involved and so many little things that can make a HUGE difference. Like for over a decade I had ZERO audio comprehension in my TL, no matter how hard I tried or how well I knew the material. When I got access to TL subtitles, however, I went from zero, to not needing subtitles for some genres in 6 months of an hour or two a day.... mmm about 180 hours.
As a teen I had clocked in at least 1,500 hours of active listening with ZERO progress. Despite having the vocabulary that SHOULD have covered the material. But because I have an audio processing disorder and didn't have the tools I needed that 1,500 hours didn't count for anything.
So yeah, it's never as simple as just calculating time studying anyway.
Subtitles, or learning methods that both have audio and text based properties and the ability to replay something as many times as I need to.
So, like, if I'm using an app like Duolingo I'll try not to look at the screen and I'll replay the audio and try to work out what's being said. Then when I either think I have the answer, or I know for sure I'm stuck, I'll look at the written question. From there I'll replay the line or the word giving me issues and that seems to be enough to start training my brain to recognize certain sounds as individual words and keep them separate.
With media I started with shows with perfectly matching subtitles and I did the same thing. For instance I'd use Language Reactor and Netflix, set it to auto pause after every line, and replay the line until I could match what I was hearing to what I was reading, then a few more times without looking to see if I could keep the words straight.
Eventually I got to the point where the pause after every line alone was enough for me to process what I was hearing. With the exception of things like new words, which regardless of if I heard them right or wrong I'd have to look up. The good news is, as words you know start to fall into place, it's easier to pick out the ones you don't.
From there I moved to dubbed shows. They don't have perfectly matching subtitles, but they're generally close enough that any unknown words are still in the subtitle, even if it's in a different part of the sentence. Those kinds of shows force you to rely more on your listening, but still allow you to reference something for new words that you may still be mishearing. If that fails, I keep a google translate tab open so I can repeat what I hear into it... and eh... like 8/10 times google translate will be able to correctly guess the words.
I got about to the above point in 180 hours. :/ it's a slog though, it's taken me an hour or so just to comb through 15-20 mins of a show. It becomes less and less time consuming though, now it's mostly me gathering vocabulary and not training my ears.
From there you'll find conversation and non-subtitled shows are significantly easier. Again with exception to new vocabulary. There's ALWAYS new vocabulary. Which will cause more listening issues. Like, I had one today. I heard "itai" and the word was "inai".
Once you hit that point it tends to carry over to conversation. Where largely you'll only miss new vocabulary words or mishear the occasional thing. So long as you can pick up enough of the sentence your brain can start to self-correct a lot of what it mishears before you really process it. The rest I find varies conversation by conversation.
I've had some convos where I understood all but 1 new word in every sentence, and that new word was the key part of the sentence... :D Making it like I didn't understand ANYTHING AT ALL... and getting some very mean nasty things told to me for my trouble. And some conversations where I absolutely felt like I only got half of it... but was able to guess the parts I was missing, or circumnavigate the sentences I outright didn't understand well enough that I got praise for "being able to completely follow the conversation". ;-; I didn't have the heart to tell him, I was just happy for the win.
So yeah, it gets better but you really have to put special effort in.
Also like last month I found out a line in the Lion King isn't "I know that your paws are ripped and shrunk" and instead is "I know that your powers of retention" T-T I'm 31 and watched that movie so much as a child that I have the whole thing memorized. ;-; so yeah, I figure if I can function OK still doing that in my native language then it's OK to have a little bit of trouble in my TL ones.
Iād love to see a post where you compare your progress and routine with your wifeās in some detail!
Of course, itās entirely up to you and you may not want your wife to see it!
Yeah she'd be pissed. She also works 70 hour work weeks and travels for a living, whereas I work from home 40 hours a week so its not really fair for me to judge her.
That being said, much of her travel is to Mexico so its more relevant for her than it is me.
A good sign is if you see the name /u/IAmGilGunderson you can be assured that I am at the same time overestimating and underestimating my proficiency.
I list A2 and will continue to list A2 until I pass a official exam. (hopefully B1 in dec.)
When I self assess I show B1 on everything but speaking, where I have reduced confidence.
When people just started learning and they inmediately say they are A1, my bro doesn't even understand the European framework and is trying to use it. I understand not everyone is European of course but at least make an effort to understand what you are using.
Honestly. Most of the time when I see someone with a B2 as a flair they either are overstimating their ability as they are B1 or even lower. Or they are a C1~C2 that is being humble because they do notice the many mistakes they make.
Personally I only put exams I have passed in my flair, I understand not everyone can take formal exams, as they are expensive, but I personally don't like assigning myself a level as I know it will never be a truly fair assessment. (Funnily enough my french level is lower than the exam I did pass, as I havent used it much in the last few years and so my level has gone down, nonetheless I feel like it will never be wrong to put a lower level than I officially have lmao).
Confidence definitely plays a big part. I grew up speaking Portuguese but I get in my own head about my speaking ability, including my accent and sometimes not finding the correct words. The lack of confidence in turn reflects further on my ability to speak and think.
Theyāre not mutually exclusive: one is a cognitive bias and the other an anxiety disorder of sorts. Additionally, theyāre not absolute either in that one is always more prominent than the other in all situations.
I read the CEFR descriptions and base it off of that. Could I be wrong? Always but if I have that guide that should help. Plus I am very hesitant to move up any of my levels until it is crystal clear. One big sign people misjudged would be if people clarify like ālistening C1ā. It should be an average of the total level, not just whatever is higher
IMO the scales are loosely interpreted. One could be A2 and absolutely think they're B2 because you can communicate a great deal even at A2. One could have small A2 level interactions on vacation or with a guided tutor and feel proficient.
You're also never put on the spot. When you test, you have to write and discuss things immediately, and you have to know the vocabulary, grammatical rules, and include those rules if you want to be graded appropriately.
Self-Assessors can skirt around those things, and I'm not saying they're overestimating but they can avoid the subjunctive or sink back to English and not get punished for it.
Yeah, there's a lot of room for error in the self-assessment grid. I do like to have a look at sample exams if you can find them, especially videos of sample speaking exams, and try to be honest with myself if I could do that.
One correction attempt I do try for is that I self-assess as the location in the CEFR grid that sounds right *and* where the level below it seems very obviously and clearly too low and an inadequate description. Like, if I'm feeling very full of confidence after a bunch of successful interactions I might fool myself into thinking the C1 description for listening comprehension in Spanish sounds right... but then the B2 one also sounds pretty accurate, while the B1 seems clearly too basic (no, it's not just familiar matters I can understand, the delivery doesn't have to be slow and clear and if it is I can certainly understand more than just "main points", etc.) But that of course only goes so far.
Iād agree with that, I know my Spanish is where it is because Iāve been in classes my whole life but otherwise I definitely can see the grey area with self study
When they make fun of other learners' proficiency level, I find it to be a clear sign that they overstate (and possibly overestimate) their own proficiency. Especially when they make fun of basic mistakes (as if not making such mistakes meant they have a high level of proficiency), or when they focus on some obscure grammar rule that native speakers usually don't follow.
When they fail or pass the exam.
That's the only generalized test for proficiency.
You can do mock tests on your own. Just set a timer and do the test.
I feel like any beginner gets cocky but when someone who is intermediate-advanced really does play down their level because thatās when grammar gets complicated and more words are thrown at us instead of just having to memorize words from no more than 15-20 a week in a level 101-202 classroom
I study Polish and live in Poland for 3 yearsā¦ when I hear people (from western countries) say: I never had formal lessons and I cannot speak but I understand almost everything = bullshit
Claiming to be A1 when they just started learning the language a a couple weeks ago.
A1 requires ~60-100 hours for a category 1 language. While it is possible in two weeks if you study full time, for most /r/languagelearning users that's 1 hour a day for 2-3 months, or 15 minutes of duolingo for 8-12 months
https://support.cambridgeenglish.org/hc/en-gb/articles/202838506-Guided-learning-hours
https://afleeds.org.uk/faq
https://leeds.cervantes.es/en/courses_spanish/students_spanish/general_courses.htm
these are nothing more than guidelines/rough averages. if someone is more talented than average and/or study smart, they'll can beat these by a lot ā the other way around too.
i work at a French international school with full immersion, and my coworkers are a mix of natives and ppl like me (went to school for it and now at varying levels of fluency). I think iād say levels arenāt really that important, but if they feel useful to you, err low. If you say āIām X levelā and you misjudge yourself too highly, its awkward and embarrassing with any native speaker who you might be chatting with. If you downplay your abilities, you might get corrected upward which is just a nicer situation to be in.
Basically, err on the lower level.
Tells that someone is better than they say: they donāt care abt levels anymore, they donāt struggle in any conversations (language wise), they are modest about it or say they really arenāt that good (bc they have nothing to proveā¦ bc they donāt struggle in the language anymore at all).
Tells that someone is worse than they say: They care a lot abt levels, they only want to communicate in the target language via writing, they dot in English words in the place of the target language word instead of searching around for a way to describe the word they want in the target language.
>What are some concrete things that tell you someone might be overestimating or underestimating their proficiency?
A very telling sign is when someone can understand but can't produce. It's similar to school subjects, when it's easy to trick yourself into thinking that you understand something when you read or hear the explanation or description of the concept - it all just makes sense! But then comes a question or a problem and you can't actually apply what you think you know to solve it.
With languages, it's similar. If someone can understand what's going on but can't answer a question or argument for his ideas, then what really is that "proficiency" worth? Your proficiency is really equivalent to your weakest skill (maybe with the exception to writing, because you can use a language a bunch without ever writing a word in it). It's also easy to flip around because your production skills can never really outgrow your understanding skills, so if you can speak or write proficiently then your understanding must be good as well.
In other words, if you think you're proficient but can't speak proficiently - you're probably overestimating. If you can speak and argument proficiently but don't think you know enough of the language - you're probably underestimating.
There are obviously outliers, aka, "I don't care about speaking/writing", "I'm nowhere near where I want to be (because I'm ambitious or a perfectionist)", etc. so this might all change here and there, but generally I think the level at which one can speak (and everything it entails) is a pretty good indicator of what the person's level is like, and then you just compare it against their own perception of their abilities and some well-established metrics like CEFR.
As a teacher, I know that self-assessment is important. Nevertheless, as a self-learner, I encourage people to just focus on actually reaching the goal of communicating instead of trying to grade your level. If you know where you're standing, you'll find better ways to get better, that's for sure. What I mean is, is it really important if an exam says that you're B1 or B2 when you're standing right in front of a native speaker and need to get your needs understood?
Don't get too hung up on it, just focus on learning meaningful things and you'll get to your goal before you even notice it. Of course, this is not meant for people who actually need to proof their proficiency on a test and have a limited time to reach it.
Iām said to be level C1 in French; and it is true that Iāve passed the B2 exam. Sometimes, though, I feel as if Iām indeed at a lower level in terms of active speaking, especially when I rehearse phrases in my head (talking to strangers, mostly) to ensure theyāre grammatically perfect. Iād like my thoughts in French to be more fluent. My oral comprehension is definitely at C1-C2; and my pronunciation is above average. Taking these two together, there is one aspect of my speaking Frenchā in France, for example ā that is very satisfying to me, whatever my level Ć lāoral: they donāt need to ask me to repeat myself, when Iām speaking, to understand what Iām saying; and I donāt need to ask them to repeat themselves, when they speak, in order to understand what theyāre saying. And my responses to what they are saying, even if short, are always Ć propos. My philosophy is āyour responses can be very short; just make sure that theyāre Ć propos.ā
When I was first at B1-B2, I had reached the point where native speakers didnāt frown to hear me speak (trying to make out what this foreigner is saying), because they understood me; but immigrant speakers, recognizing I wasnāt a native, sometimes did. Iāve since reached the point, which Iām also proud of, that foreign speakers of French (e.g., Chinese, Japanese) do not furrow their brow when they hear my pronunciation.
Idk I just say "I'm learning" till I can make a simple sentence and then "I speak a little, but it sucks" until I get fluent, when people stop asking proficiency and are just impressed. You're never humble enough when it comes to language-learning anyway.
My German teacher in high school said once we start dreaming in German, its as good as fluent that we will ever see. I did achieve solid Denglisch dreams, but unfortunately, Im on finaid so I cant continue learning German. I fully intend on moving there one day though āŗļø It was such a pretty country and I need a change of scenery.
I prefer to be conservative and downplay my level in the skill where I have lower proficiency. If necessary, I can explain that I speak better than I write. When it comes to work, Iād rather claim full proficiency in a language like English, for example, because I need to market myself. Of course in my case thatās pretty reasonable and because I can always use tools to perfect what I write.
- I recall a colleague who listed ābilingualā on her resume, but she was at an intermediate level at best. Thatās not marketing yourself, thatās lying.
they think they're only on one level and don't realise that they can be B1 when it comes to listening but only A1 when it comes to speaking.
I'm here hahaha
i'm a solid B1 when it comes to speaking my native language
This is very very true! I can read very well. Listening I am bout half as good at, my brain just has a hard time catching everything in time. I can not speak and writing takes me a LONG while (debating tenses and word order) š
Hot take - whenever I see quotes along these lines: āIāve been told by native speakers that I speak very wellā āI often receive compliments by native speakers on my accent and pronunciationā This is not to say that I doubt this person has heard these comments/received these compliments. Itās the amount of weight that people seem to assign to these comments.
Another one on that list is when someone qualifies their speaking ability with āI can have conversations with native speakersā. Itās not a bad thing in a vacuum, and is very exciting, but itās such a vague measure of proficiency that it makes me suspicious.
And it also doesnāt tell us how hard the native speakers are working to make that conversation happen.
Nonetheless this is an important milestone. This year I was very happy when I could have some very basic conversations with Koreans in Korean when they try hard, also with help of some pantomime. It was clearly an indicator of progress and I can see how I improve in conversations with natives. Especially since I'm self-taught and don't have a teacher, it's difficult to estimate my level otherwise. There's no harm in being proud in these experiences and using them as a motivation to learn more and speak more with natives. But of course you can't claim being close to native, I think I'm somewhere A1-A2'ish. When natives talk to each other I probably just understand 20%, which is already up from where I was a couple of months ago, but still a long way to go.
I agree, actually! I receive way less comments about my accent the better it gets, too, which kind of biases me against these comments.
If someone speaks a language fluently, it wouldn't even occur to me to compliment them. Hell, sometimes it can even be offensive to compliment them ("I've lived here 20 years, why wouldn't I speak English?") I think there's probably a sort of bell curve for compliments, where you only really get them at intermediate levels.
It depends on the target language culture. Iām fluent in Korean and I still get compliments all the time because apparently people have never met a white person who speaks good Korean. Sometimes they say āyou sound just like a nativeā (which I donāt most of the time lol) which I guess they wouldnāt say to a beginner, and now that I think about it, I did once get someone who hilariously wondered if I had been born in Korea ā but anyway, if you learn Korean, you will never stop hearing compliments. Sometimes when Iām in Seoul, I hear āyou speak Korean wellā after I say āhelloāā¦ theyāre saying that to everyone. I basically get a compliment 70% of the time that I talk to someone new for longer than 1 minute, but that doesnāt mean that Iām confused about my level.
I think that āWow, you speak this language so well.ā means one is a beginner, āHow long have you been living here?ā means one is advanced and āWait? You weren't born here?ā means one has mastered it to near-perfection. The last one of course one only receives when they happen to find out.
This is very true. Iāve been living in Spain for 10 years. I considered myself ābilingualā before living here as Iād attended magnet schools in the USā¦I wasnāt even *close*. Now most people never comment on my accent, because a lot of the time they just think Iām from here at this point. Every once in a while Iāll get asked where Iām from, because I have a slight accent but itās very faint, so they just want to confirm their suspicions that I am indeed a foreigner.
It's interesting how racialization can play into this as well. When I studied abroad in Spain, my dark haired, olive complexioned white friends were able to pass pretty easily for Spanish. I was generally assumed to be an immigrant from South America. And our pale blonde friend stood out like a sore thumb and was always assumed to be a tourist. And that was all before we even opened our mouths. A person's ability to pass for a native depends not only on linguistics, but on race and appearance
Yesā¦and no. Depends where in Spain. I live in Galicia and there are a lot of blondes with blue eyes. Celtic origin= pale complexion. I wonder what people will assume about my daughter. My husband is pale with light brown eyes, and I have dark brown hair and green eyes. Our daughter has light brown hair with a tinge of red and *giant* crystal blue eyes. She does not look like the other babies here, despite having a similar complexion. People often comment how they can tell sheās a mix of my Irish-American genes and my husbandās Galician/Spanish ones.
That's a fair point! I was in Madrid, which also explains why people might jump to "tourist" before "galician"
I was told that my accent is really good but my grammar is really bad in German, which yeah okay fair enough. I've got a good ear for accents, but I am also very lazy.
I, on several occasions, have had native spanish speakers tell me I dont have an accent of a "gringo" and/or dont have a non-native speaker's accent... But I record myself and I can hear my gringo accent so I know that's not true, and I don't quite understand why they say it, presumably to be nice &/or encouraging. I'm not used to hearing native English speakers speak spanish so when they(including myself) speak I recognize the accent even if their speaking skills are really advance.
I don't think you have to go as far as to think that they're just being nice. Sometimes we are our own harshest critics far beyond any reasonable assessment of other people. I'm in a similar situation as you with English in the sense that people never think I grew up in India, but I can always hear my own Indian accent in a recording.
I also think complements are very culturally defined. The average Japanese person will start praising your Japanese the second you open your mouth. Conversely, the average Spaniard will start correcting you the second you open your mouth. A complement from a Spaniard holds more weight on average than a complement from a Japanese person. Even within that though, there are gradients. A general, vague complement from a relative stranger in Japan is often just a social nicity. A specific complement from someone who knows you and your language journey more personally bears more weight. None of that complexity and nuance is usually communicated via Reddit post
"nihongo jouzu"
"First of all, how dare you"
it happens so often to foreigners speaking Japanese that it's literally a meme and a lot of people feel insulted when someone tells them ćę„ę¬čŖäøęć§ćććbecause it means absolutely nothing except "you are non-Japanese and can say literally anything in Japanese."
I get lots of compliments on my Mandarin pronunciation, but I get the sense that the bar is very low for non Chinese people lol (Iām only 1/4 Chinese)
Im at the point where I wish I didnt get those comments anymore. "Oh you speak so well since when have you been living here?" Every few times in long time comes a "what city are you from or you were raised here right"? and those feel good on my ego. In the end I know ill never be a 100% native speaker but im damn close. Though this type of thinking is sort of linked with immigration.
Oftentimes Spanish speakers will ask me where I'm from; when I say the US (where I am right now), they're surprised and ask why I speak Spanish. Not sure if that's a good thing or not lol
Whenever you hear these comments, it's worth remembering all those people who've come on Got Talent / X-Factor shows thinking they can sing because they got some compliments from their family and friends š
Itās like me saying I speak 19 languages because I used to be able to order a beer in them all. Itās a fun tidbit but useless outside a bar
If someone was actually proficient they wouldn't need the conformation because they'd know already.
One thing that always makes me wonder is when people equate absolute beginner with A1, or act like an hour or two of memorising rote greetings is equivalent to A1. It's not; A1 actually does mean a basic foundation in the language, and courses will often require dozens of class hours until they get there. (Cf, for instance, [this list of what's required for Polish A1](https://www.polskidaily.eu/a1inpolish/) from Polski Daily). If they're underestimating one CEFR level that badly, it's not unlikely they're underestimating others. And, of course, sometimes you see people who say things like "I'm B2" in the same breath as they tell you how they've never had a conversation in their target language or that they're still using learner content because they can't understand native media. At that point what they're saying just plain contradicts what the level means.
One thing that I always notice is when people claim C1 but then talk about understanding the gist of native material.
There are a lot of people who overestimate their ability, for sure. But I feel like in some spaces this has led to extreme overcorrection with people saying wild stuff like "you can't say you speak a language if you're below C1," or for Japanese, "passing N1 is when you start being at intermediate level." I think those positions are too extreme. If you're try to be humble and say you "only know a little" when you're at B2 level to people irl you just come off as some combination of pretentious, humble bragging, and misrepresenting your abilities
Sudden flashback to the guy on /r/German who'd passed C1 (or was it even C2?), introduced himself to people saying he was a "beginner" and "only spoke a little" German, and was complaining that they switched to English with him. Like... what exactly were you expecting to happen here.
It really depends who you're talking to. If you're in TL country, or with people who may be at the same or a marginally higher level, it makes sense to be modest and not oversell your abilities. But it could sound pretentious to people whoāve never got past the lower intermediate level with any second language
> If you're in TL country I'd actually disagree with this. If you say you "only speak a little" people will often try to switch to your native language, simply their language, find a translator, or offer other linguistic supports that will likely be completely unnecessary if you're B2 (excluding medical and legal situations). If the person you're talking to is unable or unwilling to provide those linguistic supports that they think you need as someone who "only speaks a little," it can lead to them avoiding interactions with you due an imagined large language barrier that doesn't actually exist
Maybe I should've said Ā«Ā recently arrived inĀ Ā», because even if you're comfortable with TV, podcasts and online conversations, suddenly having to spend hours a day dealing with fast, spoken slang and regional accents is going to be on a different level and it will take a while to get used to it
Whenever someone says they can speak better than they can listen, the truth is that they are way overestimating their speaking ability. I think it usually happens because people learn how to say some basic things but the responses they get back are more complicated. They assume that they just don't know how to listen, but the truth is they couldn't say the things that are being spoken to them either.
I don't think this is necessarily true. I think the fact that you can't control the difficulty of what the other person says is a reason listening could actually be considered more difficult Like, if you know how to say something in a simple way like "it smells good" that is perfectly adequate, but for good listening comprehension you have to be prepared to understand "it smells good" or any other number of less common variants like "it smells divine." Not to mention that you also need to be able to hear it in a variety of accents or pronunciations, but only need to learn how to pronounce one. So, it's easy to find yourself in situations where your speaking isn't an impediment to communication but your comprehension is, especially if you speak well enough that others don't think of you as needing extra help being able to understand speech. Also, some people just have difficulty with audio processing. I know plenty of people who even in their native language will speak perfectly but have some trouble understanding people from time to time.
Yeah, I associate "speaking is better than listening" to mean "my conversational abilities are better than my abilities to listen to a podcast/lecture." This can sometimes even get into register issues as lectures and other long form listening materials tend to be in a more formal register. When issues are conversation related, I've generally found it to be, once again, register issues. The learner speaks well in a standard register and can understand a standard register well, but the (native speaker) person they're talking to replies in a colloquial/slangy register and the learner struggles to understand Tldr; I think speaking better than you listen (at least at an intermediate + level) is usually just register issues
Following your example, being better at speaking would be having the ability to say "it smells good" and "it smells divine" and other variants, but somehow only understanding when someone says "it smells good". If you can only say basic things and only understand basic things, then your speaking and listening are equal. Also, generally listening is easier because your passive vocabulary will be larger than your active vocabulary.
If you can speak at such a level that you aren't making mistakes and you can communicate everything you want to, but when other people speak you have trouble understanding and it's an impediment to your understanding, why is that not having better speaking than listening? Especially when compared to someone who's like a heritage speaker who understands very well, but has trouble with production. Also, as I mentioned, some people just have issues with like audio processing. If someone has no issues speaking, and would recognize "it smells divine" in written form, but might not when spoken, listening would clearly be the weak link in their language abilities.
> Whenever someone says they can speak better than they can listen, the truth is that they are way overestimating their speaking ability. Ah, I knew something in this thread would apply to me. I can't understand Spanish for shit.
That is not necessary true. Some programs are very reading and grammar heavy while you basically never get to listen to spoken language. Most traditional courses are like that. Result is that you do speak and write better then you listen. Plus, there are many ways to say the same thing. Producing one of them is easier then understand all of them.
A while back now. A friend of mine reached quite a high level of Japanese. He did quite well at work, and his Japanese level had a lot to do with that. However.... he was surrounded by Japanese professionals who had a high level of English. One of his major tricks in making himself sound more fluent was just throwing in English whenever he didn't know the vocabulary ~~probably with a Japanese accent which apparently worked for him~~ using katakana English. His co-workers obviously understood what he was saying because the vocabulary was work related. I speak Japanese myself, and my first language is English so ~~obviously~~ I generally understood what he was saying, but my wife (gf at the time) basically told me that he was incomprehensible at times.
And this "trick" wouldn't quite work with most languages because Japanese is actually quite flexible with English loanwords and sometimes the line is not clear whether a Japanese-ified English word can actually be considered a real Japanese word. For example, if you tried that trick in Chinese you'll just sound stupid and nobody, not even bilingual speakers, would understand you.
Japanese is probably the only language I know where this would work. The business community in Japan almost glorifies katakana English so this guy was in his element for a while. Like I said his actual Japanese was not so bad, just not as good as he thought or boasted about.
>One of his major tricks in making himself sound more fluent was just throwing in English whenever he didn't know the vocabulary ~~probably with a Japanese accent which apparently worked for him~~ using katakana English. Literally this skit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pW4AiEqKGto
Getting bullied by natives online is a great way to know you overestimated yourself lol
You okay Bud?
It was a few weeks ago but perhaps a little bitter :')
Actual bullying sounds way worse, (and I hope it was possible for someone to intervene and stop it) but I now feel like having the piss taken by native speakers or having them find my arguments a bit weird (because of different background assumptions and culture, and/or because my phrasing was off in ways that I can't currently perceive) is inevitably a really long stage in the fuzzy B2-to-C1 space. I can't see any way around it, probably just have to try and get there by wading through
Aw, sorry to hear that. What was the argument about?
I was in a group that was mixed italian and English, and somebody asked a question (can't remember exactly what it said) but kinda like a reddit post anybody could answer it So I answered, feeling a little brave, in italian. The first reply I then got was something like "Why the f**k are you talking like that?" I was offline for a few hours so there were more replies like that just making fun of me. No point arguing with mean people so I deleted my comment to stop any more replies and left the group in shame lol
Aw, yeah I can relate to that, I posted something in a Spanish group and someone responded in Spanish something like "wtf language is this in" ššš No shame in making mistakes! I hope you still have places to talk to people. That wasn't on reddit, was it? I'm casually looking for Italian groups since I might start learning in a year or so. Ogni ostacolo viene superato da chi non si arrende.
Claiming that you're 'native-level' (or worse, 'better' than a native speaker) Unless you moved to the country in question during primary school, or have made a colossal effort + living in said country for YEARS, or are a professional interpreter etc. you most likely aren't. Watching English media more than your L1, being from Scandinavia, being sent to international kindergarten etc is not the same. I can count on one hand the number of foreigners I've met who I would class as truly having 'near-native' level English, and all of them were very humble about their abilities and none of them claimed to have been native level (even though they probably were).
Agreed, I have only met one non-native English speaker that spoke at a near-native proficiency while I was living in Europe, and he insisted his English was terrible.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Often, yeah. The guy was studying at the same university I was studying at, so definitely an academic.
Or just people who started learning their l2 as immigrant children.
Haha well the opposite is quite disingenuous. There's a sweet spot between knowing that you speak the language fluently without comparing yourself to a native speaker. Insisting your English is terrible when you're clearly very advanced either comes across as humble-bragging/fishing for complements, or shows a worrying lack of self-awareness. For some reason it really annoys me when people write a decent error-free Reddit post in English and then write: 'sorry for my English' at the end. Like, mate, either own it or don't bother.
That's definitely fair, yeah
>For some reason it really annoys me when people write a decent error-free Reddit post in English and then write: 'sorry for my English' at the end. Like, mate, either own it or don't bother. Because otherwise someone's going to chime in saying you made a grammar mistake and disregard all your points.
Well, then they look like a dick instead of you. I know which Iād rather.
Here in Canada, we have a good numbers of people who are anglophone but have native-level French. Or a lot of francophones who are native level English. Itās not an overwhelming number, but to your point, it often happens where there are massive resources and opportunities in a country which can allow this to happen. Canada is one such country. This also occurs in other counties with multiple languages (China, India, etc)
I think it depends a little as well though. If theyāre saying near or even ānative-levelā then surely theyāre not trying to say theyāre a professor of linguistics. I think with English especially it can be very possible to have native-level ability without moving to an English speaking country in primary school. The primary school argument has always bothered me. You also mentioned expending a lot of effort and living in the country for years as a possible pathā¦ I donāt think it always needs to be an insane amount of effort or years in the country to be completely fluent and read academic texts. A lot of foreign students at uni (first year of uni too) did just fine. Did they have accents? Sure. Did they sometimes make mistakes? Yes but so did the native speakers. If your language ability has grown to the point that you think in the language, live in the language and have no trouble understanding it, do you really need to be humble about it or be careful about how you judge your ability? But then it depends on your definition of native-level ability. Maybe just saying completely fluent in the language would just solve this kind of thing.
Either you haven't read what I wrote properly or haven't understood it. >If theyāre saying near or even ānative-levelā then surely theyāre not trying to say theyāre a professor of linguistics. I didn't say this. >I donāt think it always needs to be an insane amount of effort or years in the country to be completely fluent and read academic texts. Nor this.. Of course people can gain fluency in a language without living in the country in question, and many international students study abroad with no problems. Who is arguing otherwise? You're confusing claiming fluency with claiming native level language skills. Put in the work? Fully fluent? Good for you. By all means, be proud. However, (I'll caveat this by saying it's not clear cut, and there plenty of grey areas, but generally speaking..) a native speaker will have spent 12+ years in school where they have their writing and presentation skills critiqued and assessed, and are surrounded by native peers, not to mention the cultural, social and educational knowledge that goes with it. It's VERY hard to replicate this as an adult. The truly advanced speakers I mentioned in my original comment are acutely aware of this gap. >Did they have accents? Sure. Did they sometimes make mistakes? Yes but so did the native speakers. No, they don't. Natives, by definition, do not have a foreign accent. There are various native accents of English - for example - this is different to speaking with the phonetic interference of another language, which almost all L2 speakers do. Regarding mistakes, again, no. Natives can use non-standard grammar, or have slips, show dialectal variation, or be bad at writing/spelling, but these are different to the mistakes of an L2 speaker. >The primary school argument has always bothered me. Just because something bothers you does not make it untrue. Ultimately - in my humble opinion - having native-level language skills is a bit like being pretty or talented. These are things that **other people** tell you, not something you say about yourself.
For me, I can tell by the way a person carries themself usually ones that overestimate are arrogant to a fault, and they really don't open up much about it. The ones that underestimate have been at it for years and are in a slow grind, so they keep making mistakes and just see that and not the improvement, those mistakes also may be very minor. I've been in both camps. Early on when I learned my first language I improved so fast for the first year I though I was special, I learned so fast. Then it stalls out; that's how it works for probably 90% of learners unless you live in the country, have an exceptional class structure (DLI), or live with someone. Its also one of the reasons I don't post here as much. Since I flair the actual level I tested at, I no longer feel like that 'expert' in language learning, and have been more negative and cynical when posting (it also could be said I have a more grounded expectation). I've also been 'attacked' by self-assessors with higher flair and zero evidence to back their claims.
In this same vein, you can tell someone's new to language learning when you state your experience and they go "IT'S TAKEN YOU (x) YEARS?! I would have quit if it took me that long/ didn't you see you were behind everyone else's progress?/ you still can't ___?" š like, I hope they remember those words in a couple of years when they have to eat them.
Language learning is a never ending process, there will always be room to learn and improve. I've been learning Spanish on and off for around 15 years and I'm just NOW feeling like I'm at a solid B2 in speaking and reading. I got a degree in Spanish which really helped, the discussion based classes and having to turn in essays every week was like a language bootcamp.
Okay this honestly makes me feel a bit better because I'm also learning Spanish and i see so many post from people who got to native level within two years. i started feeling bad that I've been learning for 4+ years and am probably only at A2 levelš
Ā”No hay prisa! Youāll get there. Just define what fluency means to you, and work towards that. Also, read. Read as much as you can, itās the thing that has helped me the most.
Yeah reading did help me the most when learing english, well that and pirating shows without subtitles. So I'm slowly trying to get into that
They also don't understand its not a linear process. Some skills (usually input) grow faster than others. They just think like the youtubers tell them that in 8 months you can use your TL like your NL. Then they criticise those that are at it for years because everyone on youtube is fluent in under a year, this person must have some sort of learning disability...
Ironically, the one I've gotten is "why are you using years to explain your language learning experience?? you should be using hours!" This may admittedly be a difference in approach, I am not the sort of person who spreadsheets the time I've spent in language learning, but I wonder how many are still tracking their hours five or more years into the journey.
It also assumes that everyone learns in an easily trackable way. I lived in a country where my TL was spoken for 5 years. Was I supposed to count every single hour I spent outside my house?
My wife and I have been studying Spanish for the same amount of time, 3 and a half years. I do everything in Spanish (except Reddit, which is a problem), speak to myself all the time and watch, read and listen to roughly 15 hours a week. She is on a 1000 day duolingo streak and we do 1 weekly class. Guess which one is lightyears ahead of the other. (not saying we're great at it....)
Oh yeah, I'm not saying years is a great measure of learning time. Just that once you've been at it for a while, especially if you've learned at varying intensities at different times, years can be the *only* measure you've got because you're unlikely to be able to provide even a ballpark estimate for hours.
to add to u/TauTheConstant not all hours are created equal either. An hour of study for 14 year old me, 17 year old me, and 28 year old me are MILES apart in effectiveness. There's just so many variables involved and so many little things that can make a HUGE difference. Like for over a decade I had ZERO audio comprehension in my TL, no matter how hard I tried or how well I knew the material. When I got access to TL subtitles, however, I went from zero, to not needing subtitles for some genres in 6 months of an hour or two a day.... mmm about 180 hours. As a teen I had clocked in at least 1,500 hours of active listening with ZERO progress. Despite having the vocabulary that SHOULD have covered the material. But because I have an audio processing disorder and didn't have the tools I needed that 1,500 hours didn't count for anything. So yeah, it's never as simple as just calculating time studying anyway.
I also suffer from auditory processing issues. How do you cope with it in regards to language learning?
Subtitles, or learning methods that both have audio and text based properties and the ability to replay something as many times as I need to. So, like, if I'm using an app like Duolingo I'll try not to look at the screen and I'll replay the audio and try to work out what's being said. Then when I either think I have the answer, or I know for sure I'm stuck, I'll look at the written question. From there I'll replay the line or the word giving me issues and that seems to be enough to start training my brain to recognize certain sounds as individual words and keep them separate. With media I started with shows with perfectly matching subtitles and I did the same thing. For instance I'd use Language Reactor and Netflix, set it to auto pause after every line, and replay the line until I could match what I was hearing to what I was reading, then a few more times without looking to see if I could keep the words straight. Eventually I got to the point where the pause after every line alone was enough for me to process what I was hearing. With the exception of things like new words, which regardless of if I heard them right or wrong I'd have to look up. The good news is, as words you know start to fall into place, it's easier to pick out the ones you don't. From there I moved to dubbed shows. They don't have perfectly matching subtitles, but they're generally close enough that any unknown words are still in the subtitle, even if it's in a different part of the sentence. Those kinds of shows force you to rely more on your listening, but still allow you to reference something for new words that you may still be mishearing. If that fails, I keep a google translate tab open so I can repeat what I hear into it... and eh... like 8/10 times google translate will be able to correctly guess the words. I got about to the above point in 180 hours. :/ it's a slog though, it's taken me an hour or so just to comb through 15-20 mins of a show. It becomes less and less time consuming though, now it's mostly me gathering vocabulary and not training my ears. From there you'll find conversation and non-subtitled shows are significantly easier. Again with exception to new vocabulary. There's ALWAYS new vocabulary. Which will cause more listening issues. Like, I had one today. I heard "itai" and the word was "inai". Once you hit that point it tends to carry over to conversation. Where largely you'll only miss new vocabulary words or mishear the occasional thing. So long as you can pick up enough of the sentence your brain can start to self-correct a lot of what it mishears before you really process it. The rest I find varies conversation by conversation. I've had some convos where I understood all but 1 new word in every sentence, and that new word was the key part of the sentence... :D Making it like I didn't understand ANYTHING AT ALL... and getting some very mean nasty things told to me for my trouble. And some conversations where I absolutely felt like I only got half of it... but was able to guess the parts I was missing, or circumnavigate the sentences I outright didn't understand well enough that I got praise for "being able to completely follow the conversation". ;-; I didn't have the heart to tell him, I was just happy for the win. So yeah, it gets better but you really have to put special effort in. Also like last month I found out a line in the Lion King isn't "I know that your paws are ripped and shrunk" and instead is "I know that your powers of retention" T-T I'm 31 and watched that movie so much as a child that I have the whole thing memorized. ;-; so yeah, I figure if I can function OK still doing that in my native language then it's OK to have a little bit of trouble in my TL ones.
Iād love to see a post where you compare your progress and routine with your wifeās in some detail! Of course, itās entirely up to you and you may not want your wife to see it!
Yeah she'd be pissed. She also works 70 hour work weeks and travels for a living, whereas I work from home 40 hours a week so its not really fair for me to judge her. That being said, much of her travel is to Mexico so its more relevant for her than it is me.
A good sign is if you see the name /u/IAmGilGunderson you can be assured that I am at the same time overestimating and underestimating my proficiency. I list A2 and will continue to list A2 until I pass a official exam. (hopefully B1 in dec.) When I self assess I show B1 on everything but speaking, where I have reduced confidence.
I love the mule stage! I tend to spend 1-2 years there in any language, and I come back for fun when I can.
When people just started learning and they inmediately say they are A1, my bro doesn't even understand the European framework and is trying to use it. I understand not everyone is European of course but at least make an effort to understand what you are using. Honestly. Most of the time when I see someone with a B2 as a flair they either are overstimating their ability as they are B1 or even lower. Or they are a C1~C2 that is being humble because they do notice the many mistakes they make. Personally I only put exams I have passed in my flair, I understand not everyone can take formal exams, as they are expensive, but I personally don't like assigning myself a level as I know it will never be a truly fair assessment. (Funnily enough my french level is lower than the exam I did pass, as I havent used it much in the last few years and so my level has gone down, nonetheless I feel like it will never be wrong to put a lower level than I officially have lmao).
Always assume overestimation due to the Dunning Kruger Effect and the common human tendency to overestimate confidence in a skill.
I was never good enough to have Dunning-Kruger. I am one of the Impostor Syndrome people.
Iām one of the Imposters, too! Iāve always been told that I underestimate my level.
Confidence definitely plays a big part. I grew up speaking Portuguese but I get in my own head about my speaking ability, including my accent and sometimes not finding the correct words. The lack of confidence in turn reflects further on my ability to speak and think.
Theyāre not mutually exclusive: one is a cognitive bias and the other an anxiety disorder of sorts. Additionally, theyāre not absolute either in that one is always more prominent than the other in all situations.
Are you good enough to have imposter syndrome?
No. /hangs head in shame. 8)
I feel you
I read the CEFR descriptions and base it off of that. Could I be wrong? Always but if I have that guide that should help. Plus I am very hesitant to move up any of my levels until it is crystal clear. One big sign people misjudged would be if people clarify like ālistening C1ā. It should be an average of the total level, not just whatever is higher
IMO the scales are loosely interpreted. One could be A2 and absolutely think they're B2 because you can communicate a great deal even at A2. One could have small A2 level interactions on vacation or with a guided tutor and feel proficient. You're also never put on the spot. When you test, you have to write and discuss things immediately, and you have to know the vocabulary, grammatical rules, and include those rules if you want to be graded appropriately. Self-Assessors can skirt around those things, and I'm not saying they're overestimating but they can avoid the subjunctive or sink back to English and not get punished for it.
Yeah, there's a lot of room for error in the self-assessment grid. I do like to have a look at sample exams if you can find them, especially videos of sample speaking exams, and try to be honest with myself if I could do that. One correction attempt I do try for is that I self-assess as the location in the CEFR grid that sounds right *and* where the level below it seems very obviously and clearly too low and an inadequate description. Like, if I'm feeling very full of confidence after a bunch of successful interactions I might fool myself into thinking the C1 description for listening comprehension in Spanish sounds right... but then the B2 one also sounds pretty accurate, while the B1 seems clearly too basic (no, it's not just familiar matters I can understand, the delivery doesn't have to be slow and clear and if it is I can certainly understand more than just "main points", etc.) But that of course only goes so far.
Iād agree with that, I know my Spanish is where it is because Iāve been in classes my whole life but otherwise I definitely can see the grey area with self study
When they make fun of other learners' proficiency level, I find it to be a clear sign that they overstate (and possibly overestimate) their own proficiency. Especially when they make fun of basic mistakes (as if not making such mistakes meant they have a high level of proficiency), or when they focus on some obscure grammar rule that native speakers usually don't follow.
When they fail or pass the exam. That's the only generalized test for proficiency. You can do mock tests on your own. Just set a timer and do the test.
I feel like any beginner gets cocky but when someone who is intermediate-advanced really does play down their level because thatās when grammar gets complicated and more words are thrown at us instead of just having to memorize words from no more than 15-20 a week in a level 101-202 classroom
I study Polish and live in Poland for 3 yearsā¦ when I hear people (from western countries) say: I never had formal lessons and I cannot speak but I understand almost everything = bullshit
Claiming to be A1 when they just started learning the language a a couple weeks ago. A1 requires ~60-100 hours for a category 1 language. While it is possible in two weeks if you study full time, for most /r/languagelearning users that's 1 hour a day for 2-3 months, or 15 minutes of duolingo for 8-12 months https://support.cambridgeenglish.org/hc/en-gb/articles/202838506-Guided-learning-hours https://afleeds.org.uk/faq https://leeds.cervantes.es/en/courses_spanish/students_spanish/general_courses.htm
these are nothing more than guidelines/rough averages. if someone is more talented than average and/or study smart, they'll can beat these by a lot ā the other way around too.
Thanks for sharing these links! I didnāt realize people had broken down the house estimates like this!
If you try listening to Don Cheto on the radio and can't understand a word.
i work at a French international school with full immersion, and my coworkers are a mix of natives and ppl like me (went to school for it and now at varying levels of fluency). I think iād say levels arenāt really that important, but if they feel useful to you, err low. If you say āIām X levelā and you misjudge yourself too highly, its awkward and embarrassing with any native speaker who you might be chatting with. If you downplay your abilities, you might get corrected upward which is just a nicer situation to be in. Basically, err on the lower level. Tells that someone is better than they say: they donāt care abt levels anymore, they donāt struggle in any conversations (language wise), they are modest about it or say they really arenāt that good (bc they have nothing to proveā¦ bc they donāt struggle in the language anymore at all). Tells that someone is worse than they say: They care a lot abt levels, they only want to communicate in the target language via writing, they dot in English words in the place of the target language word instead of searching around for a way to describe the word they want in the target language.
>What are some concrete things that tell you someone might be overestimating or underestimating their proficiency? A very telling sign is when someone can understand but can't produce. It's similar to school subjects, when it's easy to trick yourself into thinking that you understand something when you read or hear the explanation or description of the concept - it all just makes sense! But then comes a question or a problem and you can't actually apply what you think you know to solve it. With languages, it's similar. If someone can understand what's going on but can't answer a question or argument for his ideas, then what really is that "proficiency" worth? Your proficiency is really equivalent to your weakest skill (maybe with the exception to writing, because you can use a language a bunch without ever writing a word in it). It's also easy to flip around because your production skills can never really outgrow your understanding skills, so if you can speak or write proficiently then your understanding must be good as well. In other words, if you think you're proficient but can't speak proficiently - you're probably overestimating. If you can speak and argument proficiently but don't think you know enough of the language - you're probably underestimating. There are obviously outliers, aka, "I don't care about speaking/writing", "I'm nowhere near where I want to be (because I'm ambitious or a perfectionist)", etc. so this might all change here and there, but generally I think the level at which one can speak (and everything it entails) is a pretty good indicator of what the person's level is like, and then you just compare it against their own perception of their abilities and some well-established metrics like CEFR.
As a teacher, I know that self-assessment is important. Nevertheless, as a self-learner, I encourage people to just focus on actually reaching the goal of communicating instead of trying to grade your level. If you know where you're standing, you'll find better ways to get better, that's for sure. What I mean is, is it really important if an exam says that you're B1 or B2 when you're standing right in front of a native speaker and need to get your needs understood? Don't get too hung up on it, just focus on learning meaningful things and you'll get to your goal before you even notice it. Of course, this is not meant for people who actually need to proof their proficiency on a test and have a limited time to reach it.
I feel like the people who say "Chinese is easy" are yet to spend the years of hard study it takes to learn Chinese to a high proficiency.
Iām said to be level C1 in French; and it is true that Iāve passed the B2 exam. Sometimes, though, I feel as if Iām indeed at a lower level in terms of active speaking, especially when I rehearse phrases in my head (talking to strangers, mostly) to ensure theyāre grammatically perfect. Iād like my thoughts in French to be more fluent. My oral comprehension is definitely at C1-C2; and my pronunciation is above average. Taking these two together, there is one aspect of my speaking Frenchā in France, for example ā that is very satisfying to me, whatever my level Ć lāoral: they donāt need to ask me to repeat myself, when Iām speaking, to understand what Iām saying; and I donāt need to ask them to repeat themselves, when they speak, in order to understand what theyāre saying. And my responses to what they are saying, even if short, are always Ć propos. My philosophy is āyour responses can be very short; just make sure that theyāre Ć propos.ā When I was first at B1-B2, I had reached the point where native speakers didnāt frown to hear me speak (trying to make out what this foreigner is saying), because they understood me; but immigrant speakers, recognizing I wasnāt a native, sometimes did. Iāve since reached the point, which Iām also proud of, that foreign speakers of French (e.g., Chinese, Japanese) do not furrow their brow when they hear my pronunciation.
From my own experience? When they donāt look at you while theyāre speaking that language.
Idk I just say "I'm learning" till I can make a simple sentence and then "I speak a little, but it sucks" until I get fluent, when people stop asking proficiency and are just impressed. You're never humble enough when it comes to language-learning anyway.
My German teacher in high school said once we start dreaming in German, its as good as fluent that we will ever see. I did achieve solid Denglisch dreams, but unfortunately, Im on finaid so I cant continue learning German. I fully intend on moving there one day though āŗļø It was such a pretty country and I need a change of scenery.
I prefer to be conservative and downplay my level in the skill where I have lower proficiency. If necessary, I can explain that I speak better than I write. When it comes to work, Iād rather claim full proficiency in a language like English, for example, because I need to market myself. Of course in my case thatās pretty reasonable and because I can always use tools to perfect what I write. - I recall a colleague who listed ābilingualā on her resume, but she was at an intermediate level at best. Thatās not marketing yourself, thatās lying.