And I thought a 'closet critter' might be something with 6 legs that they call a 'palmetto bug' in parts of the South. (aka roach.)

I love how people use the word 'interesting' here in NC. You'll hear it more in the rural areas, and from the older folks. It doesn't always mean what you think it means. As in, "My, what an interesting outfit you have on today." They won't say to your face that it looks horrible, but that "interesting" that that old lady just used on you? Yeah, she was just telling you that you have no business wearing that outfit, she just doesn't want to say it's ugly as sin straight up to your face.

I *like* all of the various regional US accents. I hope they survive, because they give this country that one last thing that keeps it from becoming one giant homogenized mall food court. I can't stand the encroaching blandness.

I like sports. It is interesting.


What connotation would that have in New York?

Not sure, since there's nothing that "It" could obviously refer to.

~J

rich_f Wrote:I *like* all of the various regional US accents. I hope they survive, because they give this country that one last thing that keeps it from becoming one giant homogenized mall food court. I can't stand the encroaching blandness.

"One giant homogenized mall food court"

You are genius.

I love variety in English, but I don't think there is enough.
I'm Canadian. All we really get is a few words over the Americans, and we spell like the British but I would like a unique way of speaking. Not that I'm jealous of people with southern drawls, but it's boring sounding all generic all the time.

This is slightly off topic, but often I am surprised to find out that a lot of native English speakers here are native English speakers. Tobberoth and some of the other members that live outside of North America, the UK, Australia, etc. have a lot more natural sounding English to me. It is a little strange to see them surpass native English speakers in terms of flow and writing style.

There is another factor that I don't think people have considered and I personally think that it's bigger than any of the others mentioned so far.

The collection of sounds that northern Europeans are capable of producing and correctly identifying is very similar to the collection of sounds needed in English. The number of sounds used in English is far greater than the number in Japanese. I would imagine that Japanese is unique in only having about 50 sounds. Japanese people also suffer from the lack of the "schwa" (ə). This is the most common phonetic in the English language and I am told that it is the weakest sound produced in human speech. Does Italian have it?

English has strong roots in northern European countries from when the Vikings invaded from Scandinavia. These Anglo-saxon roots of English can be found in shorter words such as "eye", "cow", "and" and other words that poor people tended to use. More sophisticated words like "information" and "correspondence" were introduced when the Normans invaded from France in 1066. These words have Latin roots and were introduced to the English from the Norman nobility. At this period of time, it was considered sophisticated to sprinkle your speech with French and lords and ladies frequently did so. This would reflect their elevated social status above the common people.

Despite these influences from France, the English took the French words and applied the Anglo saxon pronunciation to them. Perhaps in much the same way that the Japanese took Chinese pronunciations of kanji and converted them to on-yomi.

Therefore, from a pronunciation point of view, English is closer to its northern European brethren. In terms of vocabulary, a lot has been borrowed from Latin languages but the grammar and the pronunciation are quite different. The similarity with the Japanese borrowing kanji and vocabulary from the Chinese is striking.

bodhisamaya Wrote:The English in Snatch was intentionally meant to be uncomprehendible.

What I don't understand is why people back in my home state of Arkansas can't speak English so outsiders can understand it. When an ex-girlfriend of mine from New York talked to my mother on the phone, she asked me to translate. :/

Believe it or not, with the exception of Brad Pitt's dodgy Irish accent, British people can understand it all. The same goes for Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, which I thought was much better...

If you think the Arkansas accent is difficult, try getting in a taxi in Glasgow. Then travel a few hundred miles south to Newcastle - completely different. Travel 100 miles west to Liverpool - completely different. Travel down to a cockney area of London - completely different. Then down to Cornwall - "I'm sorry, what?" The variety of accents in such a small amount of space is crazy.

Smackle Wrote:This is slightly off topic, but often I am surprised to find out that a lot of native English speakers here are native English speakers. Tobberoth and some of the other members that live outside of North America, the UK, Australia, etc. have a lot more natural sounding English to me. It is a little strange to see them surpass native English speakers in terms of flow and writing style.

I've noticed this as well. It makes me self conscious enough to rewrite my posts several times over.

I will read my own posts and see grammar or spelling mistakes that I didn't catch often. Because there are so many non-native users here I have ask myself, "Do I edit it or not?"

wrightak Wrote:Believe it or not, with the exception of Brad Pitt's dodgy Irish accent, British people can understand it all. The same goes for Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, which I thought was much better...

Much. Great film. And the first English film I've seen that has English subtitles (for the rhyming slang!).

If all those English accents are standard English (ie not dialects), is there a standard English accent that ESL learners study? If it's that 'received pronunciation' wouldn't it sound a bit stuffy?

This is about Japanese, not English, but I noticed when I was a student that the Swedish and German students were always far better then the rest of us. I wondered then what the secret was. I was going to say cold, dark winters, but I live in Canada!

Maybe it is the cold dark winters. Canadians seem to speak with a fairly easily understood standard English. Outside of Quebec anyways.

wrightak Wrote:There is another factor that I don't think people have considered and I personally think that it's bigger than any of the others mentioned so far.

......

Therefore, from a pronunciation point of view, English is closer to its northern European brethren. In terms of vocabulary, a lot has been borrowed from Latin languages but the grammar and the pronunciation are quite different. The similarity with the Japanese borrowing kanji and vocabulary from the Chinese is striking.

I can definitely see the similarities.
I also speak Swedish so it is easy for me to compare. Swedish, Norwegian and Danish are all pretty close to each other and they all are pretty close to English when you start looking for similarities. Pronunciation is different, but the similarities in vocabulary and grammar are obvious.

However, I don't believe this to be such a determining factor.
As I said earlier, as an agglutinative Finno-Ugric language, Finnish couldn’t be any more different from English or Swedish. Even our phonetic pool (Or what ever you’re supposed to call it..) is completely different and, like in Japanese, quite small compared to English. It is pretty similar to Japanese too! Because in Finnish we read the words just like they are written, for a Finn, it’s only a matter of picking up a Romanized text, and he’ll pronounce about 80% of it right!

What I’m trying to say is that if the similarity of the languages was such an important factor, the English proficiency in Sweden should be FAR superior to ours, but as it is, it seems to be at about the same level..

One other interesting piece of information! In formal schooling they try to teach us the British English but everyone still ends up speaking American English!


The initial advantages or disadvantages don’t seem to matter much when the level of exposure is high enough.
Nice to hear considering our endeavor to master the Japanese language. Isn’t it!

Thora Wrote:This is about Japanese, not English, but I noticed when I was a student that the Swedish and German students were always far better then the rest of us. I wondered then what the secret was. I was going to say cold, dark winters, but I live in Canada!

I’m just guessing here but:
Experience gained from studying a second language to fluency..?

I.e. if they were studying their third language and you were doing your second.

They say that the third language is easier to learn than the second.

When it comes to dialects Italy is pretty hardcore. With all the fragmented history we had, basically every town has a different version of Italian. In some areas you'll find neighbouring towns (distance scales of a few km) with dialects so different that it's hard for them to communicate.

wrightak,
the language similarity thing was brought up, but I think it only accounts to a small part of the explanation. What I was concerned about was the fluency rather than just the pronunciation. In any case, Italian has pronunciation problems, too (as you may well know). The vowels are practically identical to the Japanese ones, by the way.

rich_f Wrote:Going back to what someone said in an earlier post, even though I need to get my German back up to speed, the one thing that's really bugging the hell out of me is that when it comes right down to it, there's nothing in German that I actually want to go out, buy, and then read. So frustrating.

Meanwhile, I've got a box full of Japanese light novels I'm happily tearing through whenever I get the chance. Sure, they're all trash, but they're enjoyable trash. I've noticed that my Japanese has gotten a lot better of late because I'm reading so much now, meanwhile I have no motivation to study German, even though I have a hard deadline looming. Ugh.

OT

There's actually plenty of media in German. The Germans aren't quite as good as the Japanese in producing it; they are however prolific translators who dub everything and translate every known book on the planet, including stuff you can't even get in English. So, what I've done is to pick books/films I've always wanted to read/see and buy them in German (ATM I'm a third of the way through reading 'Der kleine Hobbit').

alantin Wrote:

Thora Wrote:This is about Japanese, not English, but I noticed when I was a student that the Swedish and German students were always far better then the rest of us. I wondered then what the secret was.

I’m just guessing here but:
Experience gained from studying a second language to fluency..?
I.e. if they were studying their third language and you were doing your second.
They say that the third language is easier to learn than the second.

Yes, I think our brains learn how to learn. In this case, it was my third and there were students from other countries with multiple languages. Perhaps their Japanese programs just cover more than programs in other countries, or the students don't have as much fun..

Interesting point about American accents. I forgot about the influence of media. And I suppose ESL teachers aren't necessarily all speaking with British accents either.

alantin Wrote:Even our phonetic pool (Or what ever you’re supposed to call it..) is completely different and, like in Japanese, quite small compared to English. It is pretty similar to Japanese too! Because in Finnish we read the words just like they are written, for a Finn, it’s only a matter of picking up a Romanized text, and he’ll pronounce about 80% of it right!

Are you sure that the phonetics in Finnish are completely different? I'm especially interested in the vowel sounds. According to this article:
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/finnish.p...ation.html
Finnish has plenty of diphthongs (combinations of vowel sounds), which leads me to believe that Finnish contains many sounds that are present in English.

I speak French fairly well and I can tell you that the main difficulty for French people trying to speak English is the vowel sounds. Italian is the same:

nac_est Wrote:What I was concerned about was the fluency rather than just the pronunciation. In any case, Italian has pronunciation problems, too (as you may well know). The vowels are practically identical to the Japanese ones, by the way.

Pronunciation is very important for fluency. If you can pronounce the necessary sounds and identify them when you hear them, it's much easier to be fluent. If the vowels are practically identical to the Japanese then it's no surprise that Italians find English more difficult than northern Europeans.

I spent an hour trying to get a Japanese person to learn the difference between "but" and "bat". He couldn't HEAR the difference, let alone say it. I spent ages trying to pronounce the "oo" sound in French, and getting laughed at by my French friends.

I am completely convinced that the reason that some speakers tend to find English easier is because their phonetics are closer to English phonetics. This explains why lots of English films, movies, books etc. are accepted in their culture. Plentiful English media is a result and not a cause of English fluency. (Although there's obviously a positive feedback loop - chicken and the egg)

the Netherlands - terrible experience regarding english skills:

"The office of xxxx is sertainly a nice possibilitiy. I am in contact with xxxx for the university visit zo with al little luck we kan visit both.
My adres:"


:-0

wrightak Wrote:

alantin Wrote:Even our phonetic pool (Or what ever you’re supposed to call it..) is completely different and, like in Japanese, quite small compared to English. It is pretty similar to Japanese too! Because in Finnish we read the words just like they are written, for a Finn, it’s only a matter of picking up a Romanized text, and he’ll pronounce about 80% of it right!

Are you sure that the phonetics in Finnish are completely different? I'm especially interested in the vowel sounds. According to this article:
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/finnish.p...ation.html
Finnish has plenty of diphthongs (combinations of vowel sounds), which leads me to believe that Finnish contains many sounds that are present in English.

I speak French fairly well and I can tell you that the main difficulty for French people trying to speak English is the vowel sounds. Italian is the same:

nac_est Wrote:What I was concerned about was the fluency rather than just the pronunciation. In any case, Italian has pronunciation problems, too (as you may well know). The vowels are practically identical to the Japanese ones, by the way.

Pronunciation is very important for fluency. If you can pronounce the necessary sounds and identify them when you hear them, it's much easier to be fluent. If the vowels are practically identical to the Japanese then it's no surprise that Italians find English more difficult than northern Europeans.

I spent an hour trying to get a Japanese person to learn the difference between "but" and "bat". He couldn't HEAR the difference, let alone say it. I spent ages trying to pronounce the "oo" sound in French, and getting laughed at by my French friends.

I am completely convinced that the reason that some speakers tend to find English easier is because their phonetics are closer to English phonetics. This explains why lots of English films, movies, books etc. are accepted in their culture. Plentiful English media is a result and not a cause of English fluency. (Although there's obviously a positive feedback loop - chicken and the egg)

"Chicken and the egg" exactly!

many of the sounds are present in English which is a pretty rich language sound-wise.

http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/finnish.p...ation.html Wrote:Finnish pronunciation is rather regular as compared with many other languages

The same can hardly be said of English which has a myriad of sounds that Finnish doesn’t have. These are usually the sounds that Finnish school kids struggle with and there are people who never care fine tune their pronunciation.
Finnish uses a lot of vowel sounds so they are no problem.

The word “car” serves as a good example. The vowel sound is in Finnish but either of the consonants is not and the “r” here actually seems to be pretty hard for some people to pronounce. They tend to make it too harsh! On the other hand the Finnish “r”seems to be very hard for an English speaker to learn!

Another example could be “that”. Again the consonants are very troublesome and it takes time to learn to pronounce them correctly.

Anyway. English is a hard language for a Finn to learn!

I don’t believe that a good pronunciation is a requirement for good listening comprehension and I think that the ability to discriminate between sounds is an ability somewhat different from the ability to produce them.
I myself speak English on daily basis and have taken the time to correct my pronunciation, but I remember a time when I knew how a word was supposed to be pronounced, I could hear it correctly in my head but when I tried to say it out loud, my mouth just could not form the sounds.

Many people here have the mentality that they don’t want to say anything unless they are 100% sure, it’s perfect and grammatically correct. This results in them hardly ever speaking English, which leads to not much practice and not so fluent sounding speech with a very distinct accent when they do. Still you could give them a lesson in English about “Dark Matter Dynamics in Galaxies” and the language wouldn’t pose a problem! (I have these people sitting with me in some classes conducted in English at my university!)
Finnish does have a larger “sound-pool” than Japanese and it has more vowel sounds but Still we hear native speakers use the language in the media all the time and our language teachers do a very good job in their pronunciation. In Japan they are used to the katakana-English and don’t listen to native English in the media all the time. This explains the "but" and "bat" or “play” and “pray” errors.
No Finn who has studied the obligatory English in school would mix those up!


If you're interested, I found an interview of Mika Häkkkinen in the YouTube!
His English is pretty good but you can hear how many English sounds are hard for him to pronounce. Pay attention to how he pronounces the word, "that"!
Finnish is also a pretty "flat" language so not so many people develope the intonation natural to English.

You might notice that we do have a pretty high definition for fluency!
Someone said that a Finn doesn’t call himself fluent until he surpasses a native!

Any native? That's a remarkably low bar.

~J

I think that besides which your background is, how long you studied it, or the amount of similarities that your language shows on the one you're learning, the crucial matter is about developing the new language in its fullness. You must study the structure (syntax, grammar, vocabulary... etc.) and learn to write to a level that possibly match your mother tongue or as close to that as you can get. You have to listen to the language as long as you can, to get accustomed to the pronunciation, intonation, spoken terms etc. and then try to speak to natives as much as you're able to. There's no way around. If you're lacking in any of those, you're likely having troubles somewhere, stonewalling and stalling any advancement.
I don’t know Nec_est class, but I’m '77, born and raised in the North of Italy. I started study English at third grade all the way to graduation, which accounts for 11 years of teachings but I could speak just the basics and I couldn’t understand the conversations. Though my grammar was all right and I could make my way around technical readings (merely subjects I had strong knowledge of). So why is it?
At school you don't seriuosly train your mind to speak or to listen the language, moreover the writing of it, it's pretty neglected too. No wonder that at any rate the overall skill is still poor.
When I moved to NYC for 5 years I really understood where I needed to work on to improve. This should come as no surprise. Among English speakers you're exposed to the language in those components you've missed in your country. You are actively involved in conversation 24/7. That's what makes the difference: brings up you grammar, consolidating and expanding it faster because you have the right examples all the time. Those examples are right simply because you're living in the middle of them.
The natural approach would begin with the recognition of the language: reading and listening. It's the studying phase where you gather information for yourself, trying to memorize them. What comes next is the production of the language: writing and speaking. In simple words you need to have a solid platform to be able to walk on. The writing enhance you're skill in the reading and gets you deeper in the meanings of the language, while the speaking grabs all you've learnt in the listening and duplicates it. A while after become a mutual exchange between recognizing the language and producing it. By this time you don't use your native language anymore.
What should be clear is that you can't implement your writing and speaking first, but you need to have done the reading-listening part of it earlier.
I've moved to Japan. On the Japanese language those arguments still stand true, I believe. Anyway I wouldn't be so sure that in the Northern Europe the English language is taught better. I think that in practice depends on how large the country is and how much the political and economical weight of the nation are. The first example that comes to mind is Denmark. It's a great country and I loved Danish people, but they're just five million, so it's pretty comprehensible that they will averagely speak more English than, let’s say, Italians that are sixty million. It is a simplification to say that the schools sometimes have nothing to do with the issue. 気をつけて。

frlmarty Wrote:the Netherlands - terrible experience regarding english skills:

"The office of xxxx is sertainly a nice possibilitiy. I am in contact with xxxx for the university visit zo with al little luck we kan visit both.
My adres:"


:-0

While I cringe to read that, I fully understand what it says. I wonder if the same kind of torture can be done to the Japanese language and still have it be understood?

frlmarty Wrote:the Netherlands - terrible experience regarding english skills:

"The office of xxxx is sertainly a nice possibilitiy. I am in contact with xxxx for the university visit zo with al little luck we kan visit both.
My adres:"


:-0

While I cringe to read that, I fully understand what it says. I wonder if the same kind of torture can be done to the Japanese language and still have it be understood?

rich_f Wrote:And I thought a 'closet critter' might be something with 6 legs that they call a 'palmetto bug' in parts of the South. (aka roach.)

I could be misinterpreting the nuance, but I believe "palmetto bug" is more than just an ordinary roach... I've always understood it to mean GIANT FLYING COCKROACH.