I am just wondering if anyone has read about or experienced the necessity of the conversation partner to be fluent vs non fluent when attempting to improve conversation skills. That is to say, the goal is to improve conversation ability - does it really matter if the partner is good or not?

Are there any studies that can conclude either way?

I have heard that being corrected has a neutral or even non-beneficial effect on improvement. This is a guess, but children likely talk to each other a greater percentage of the time compared to fluent adults, yet they become fluent (though it takes a long time)

If we can assume that a moderate level of correct, understandable input is received (outside of conversation), does it really matter who you talk to? Furthermore, if each conversation member uses a different L2 to converse, will both become fluent in speech?

Is there anyone that has become fluent in L2 conversation having little or no fluent partners?

[Zgarbas]

I still pronounce some words in English wrongly because the kids I grew up with pronounced them wrongly(mostly words that I don't encounter often enough in spoken media to actually hear them). Basically, you kind of end up picking up their mistakes along with the benefits. Then again, pronunciation is not as big of a problem in Japanese as it is in English...

I think people don't really learn very much from conversations. Instead they start to activate and gain usability of what they have already acquired. You are forced to express yourself with whatever you currently have at your disposal. Sure you could have your partner teach you some phrases of patterns or do drills etc, but then it's not really conversation practice as such, it's really no different than learning such things from some other source in your own time. The only difference is that you get to rehearse the material a little and pretend you've acquired it (you haven't because you're just remembering what you've just been taught) but the volume of new material is likely to be lower and you have to waste time travelling to meet your partner. If your level is very low, then communication is almost impossible, unless your partner truly understands your level (like a teacher) and is able to adjust the manner in which they speak. But even if they can, this kind of practice is less useful than you might think, because it's mostly just verifying that you can understand what you already know, rather than teaching you anything new or accustoming you to natural speech. I guess I don't see why people feel the need to be taught 'conversation'. Just speak when you have the chance/need and you'll improve at it accordingly but generally constrained by your so called passive knowledge.

Conversation with partners is important as a source of systematization. You can't say something is acquired until it's used, which is likely to happen in conversation. It's also important because you try to use new/composite structures, which is how you get the feel for the language: since it's a riskfree situation (communication wise), you create more. It's a well known fact in cognitive sciences that acquiring a language is recreating it (Humbolt was the first to say it I think). Also with conversation partners, you can just chat at the end, and that's where you acquire communicative skills, ie confidence, pronounciation... Plus you get a certain feedback you don't have in real life. It's not all negative.

I've heard that non-fluent partners can help just as much as fluent ones. And I've heard people learn almost entirely from conversation.

Now, even assuming that both of the above are exaggerated, everything you do to practice your new language helps. You are making memories, and that's what learning is. The more you reinforce it, the better you are.

However, there is 1 caveat to using non-fluent partners: You have to have fluent partners as well. Otherwise, your mistakes will not be caught, and you will be mis-learning.

sikieiki Wrote:I am just wondering if anyone has read about or experienced the necessity of the conversation partner to be fluent vs non fluent when attempting to improve conversation skills. That is to say, the goal is to improve conversation ability - does it really matter if the partner is good or not?

Are there any studies that can conclude either way?

I have heard that being corrected has a neutral or even non-beneficial effect on improvement. This is a guess, but children likely talk to each other a greater percentage of the time compared to fluent adults, yet they become fluent (though it takes a long time)

If we can assume that a moderate level of correct, understandable input is received (outside of conversation), does it really matter who you talk to? Furthermore, if each conversation member uses a different L2 to converse, will both become fluent in speech?

Is there anyone that has become fluent in L2 conversation having little or no fluent partners?

If you are considering talking to a partner who isn't fluent and if you are trying to convince yourself that corrections are useless, then you don't need a partner at all -- you need self-talk (http://how-to-learn-any-language.com/for...alk#325750).

While self-talk is great to improve fluency and makes you aware of your communication shortcomings, it cannot be considered a substitute for real conversation with a native speaker. In fact, to suggest otherwise is to complete miss an essential point -- the native speaker is an irreplaceable source of information. After all, you are trying to acquire his knowledge and skills, and anything he says is a potential learning opportunity.

As for corrections, I've always encouraged my partners to correct me and it's helped me tremendously. If I make perfect sentences (at least some of the time ), it's because I was corrected and changed my bad habits. I push the limits of what I can express, I try different ways of expressing things and I get instant feedback and suggestions as to the best ways to communicate what I'm trying to say. How could anyone claim that they would get the same benefits from a partner who isn't even fluent?

Again, some people are referencing mistakes that will not be corrected - there are reasons to believe this is not necessary and sometimes unhelpful. Are there any reasons to believe that speaking to a native speaker has any benefit vs a non fluent speaker?

Case : A child who grows up only talking to other children.
Alt : A person who learns english well speaking only to other english learners

I am asking because it is not obvious how speaking ability is acquired and am curious as to what develops it. I, for one, have never spoken Japanese for several years, and am in line or exceeding other learners at that level. It may not be necessary at all. I am curious to find out.

I don't think it is necessary at all. And if you have no need to speak, don't know Japanese people or use it for work, I really see no need to go out and find conversation partners except as a form of entertainment. It is absolutely not required for language acquisition, as long as you have other sources of listening practice. So if you have no access to and or/hate tv/movies/internet etc then conversation partners may be necessary. I think it's always worth getting your input from the sources that interest you and that you would eventually want to sound like. So if all your input is coming from conversation partners, then you'd probably want them to be fluent or at least sound native, otherwise you might end up quite fluent but still sound very foreign. An example of this would be indian English. A speaker may be perfectly fluent (pretty sure it's an official language in India), but can be very hard to understand to non-Indians and is often full of idiosyncrasies because it is learnt by Indians in India and is used in India. If your goal is to be able to communicate with Japanese people and understand Japanese media, then you need exposure to the real thing. If you just want to be the best speaker in your Japanese class then it doesn't really matter but I wouldn't really see any point in having that goal. You can speak to those people in your native language. Do you intend to use Japanese as a lingua franca to speak with other foreigners? or do you intend to understand Japanese media which is overwhelmingly produced in Japan and communicate with Japanese people? If it's the latter, then make sure you're getting your exposure to native speech.

The question seems to be misunderstood by everyone. It is a little abstract, so forgive me. It seems there is no use trying to explain further. I would delete the thread if I knew how.

I think I've understood and answered your question. You asked does your conversation partner have to be fluent to improve your level? The answer is no. You can learn from any input (including non-fluent speakers) but if your goal is to understand native Japanese and speak like a Japanese person then you should be getting most of your input from fluent speakers of Japanese, and not just your classmates. Regarding correction, I view it as mostly unnecessary, and useless but also completely harmless unless constant and demotivating or incorrect (such as from other learners or a clueless teacher).

Well, to be fair the question was:

Quote:Are there any studies that can conclude either way?

... and no, I'm not aware of any of such studies.

sikieiki Wrote:Again, some people are referencing mistakes that will not be corrected - there are reasons to believe this is not necessary and sometimes unhelpful.

I can't find research for you either, but I can try to answer your question from my own experience. It's just my experience, of course, but as far as languages go, it's still pretty extensive.

Yes, some mistakes may not be worth correcting, and obviously, too many corrections can be a problem, but most of the time, most people will correct what they see as reasonable within the context and will usually present corrections gradually. This is VERY helpful.

Even if you didn't care about small mistakes and instructed your partner not to correct them (though I can't see why you'd want to do that), only a native speaker can tell you accurately whether you can be understood or not. A second language partner can't do that -- except perhaps if they had reached near-native level.

sikieiki Wrote:Are there any reasons to believe that speaking to a native speaker has any benefit vs a non fluent speaker?

A native speaker presents you with an accurate model of the language. Every sentence he outputs is a perfect model of the language you are trying to produce. Every answer he gives you is potentially a corrected version of the mistakes you made, every question he asks you is a perfect model on which to base your answer -- even if no corrections were made, all the necessary information for you to learn to structure perfect language is in the native speaker's output.

If I asked you if I should practice painting with a good painter or with a beginner, the answer would be obvious. There are so many more things you could learn from watching the seasoned painter! It's also generally accepted that you will progress faster if you are surrounded by people who are more accomplished than you -- no matter what the discipline. I'm not sure why you question this when it comes to language. It leads me to thing that there are other issues you are not mentioning.

Interesting thread and just what I was looking for. Don't mind me.

Japanese has a very strict well-formed grammar structure.
There are few exceptions.

So if your problem is that your grammar is off,
it's better fixed through self-study.

For speaking I recommend:
A Dictionary of Basic Japanese Sentence Patterns by Naoko Chino
Japanese Speaking Patterns for Effective Communication by Taeko Kamiya

In order to speak like natives, you need to listen to natives speaking.

There are tons of Japanese anime and TV dramas(many with Japanese
subtitles) online. Dramas are great because the subtitles are word-for-word
transcriptions of what the actors are saying. And since it's all written down, you
can take your time in learning the vocabulary.

If you've finished RTK, you're good to go.