" If so when do you know that your fluent?"

When you can comfortably express yourself, with language, in any way you want and in any situation you want to. Both in spoken and written form.

Or according to the dictionary:

"When you are able to speak or write smoothly, easily, or readily" / "When one is able to express oneself readily and effortlessly." Which amounts to the same thing .

On a side-note: Snispilbor, you seem very intelligent in your posts and your blog Rocks. (Yes, with a capital R.)

It's not Japanese, but I became fluent in German by living in Germany for five years. Most of the time, I don't need to think about the language to express my ideas and understand others. But there are always moments where the language kinda... gets in the way. The more I start thinking about noun genders and adjective endings, the more mistakes I make.

But most of the time I've been able to fool Germans into thinking that I'm a native speaker. Attaining fluency is definitely possible and it's a great feeling. So I'm convinced that if you invest the time and energy in Japanese, you'll be every day one step closer to being fluent.

As far as I know Khatzumoto has never said to have become fluent in a year, he claims he has done so in 18 months. One-and-a-half years. Apart from that, the man is crazily dedicated, I have yet to see any other kind of person able to do the same as he claims to have done in their comfortable home environments.

Haha, I doubt it has to be that bad. You will already come a long way by just immersing yourself with Japanese as much as possible . Just have a little faith!

<edit> And hey, you are already on the fast-track by starting off with Remembering the Kanji. What will take years for others, you will be able to learn in months! Now, if those others can get fluent as well, why can't you? But faster .

Last edited by roderik (2008 May 18, 9:26 am)

I consider myself to be fluent in English... Yet I've never thought of it as 'devoting my life to learning English'. Sure you can argue that Japanese is harder, but I feel like I've already come a long way since starting learning Japanese, almost a year ago.

For English I can't remember how long it took me, and yes English is more readily available in daily life (TV, it's used for commercials a lot, the internet...), but it was several years before I could really use English to say whatever I wanted to say, to understand texts as easily and as natural as it is for Dutch.

Today I'm at the point where I can safely say I'm *more* at ease reading and understanding, and writing, text in English than in Dutch. In speaking, it's still Dutch though, but only because it's harder to create the sounds used in English, for me.

I think it's entirely possible to reach that level with Japanese, without giving up 'everything else' it will take somewhat longer than those 18 months... (Because input and eventually just *using* the language, for whatever purpose, is what makes one fluent) But I'm 100 % sure it's possible...

I think he said somewhere that its gotta be like trading your native language for Japanese.

I think that in a way that's partly true. Maybe it's more like gaining another 'native' language. (Once you reach a certain level.)

At times I feel a bit lost 'between' Dutch and English... I want to say something one way, in English... and can't say it in Dutch while conveying exactly the same meaning/feelings... I'm lucky; my sister understand English very well, and my parents will get what I'm trying to say most of the time...
But already I'm noticing that, on the rare occasion I'll think something in Japanese, or have a Japanese word that conveys the *exact* meaning I'm trying to explain... there just isn't always a real equivalent available in both Dutch and English...

... But this is also very fascinating... (And could start a new discussion ) because I realised that language, whichever language, is in a way a *translation* of our thoughts... And in putting your thoughts into words, you'll look for the best 'translation' of your thoughts. If you know more than one language, at times you'll see you have to skip the best possibility (in language B) because you have to use language A at that moment...

... Sorry, just the tiniest bit off-topic.

Savara

I'm doubtful of the whole "I became fluent in 18 months" thing.  I think people have a tendency to bend the definition of fluency a little.

Going from the definition provided from the dictionary above, I'm not fluent yet, nor would I claim to be.  I've been studying for over six years now, and while I have achieved what some would call "operational fluency" (being able to handle everyday situations), still, that's not true fluency, going by the definition above.

When I can do what I do in Japanese what I can do in English, I'll consider myself fluent.

I think to b fluent you don't have to have a massive vocab. Look at a 5 year old they can speak their native language almost fluently, they have a small vocab but still they can express themselves and be understood. I want to atleast reach the point of a 5 year old XD. Then become like an adult naturally with input input la la la.

mentat_kgs wrote:

So there are many degrees of fluency.

Agreed. This is also why the whole discussion about 'when you are fluent or not' strikes me as rather odd.

ajishiosean wrote:

My previous statement means what it says -- when I can do what I can do in English, I'll consider myself fluent.

I want to be able to do whatever I can do in English, in Japanese.  For example, if I can discuss something in English, I want to be able to discuss it with equal fluency in Japanese.  If I can read Shakespeare in English, I want to be able to pick up a Japanese translation and read that too.

It's a tough goal, but that's what I'm aiming for.

By this definition, were you "fluent" when you were 10 years old? You couldn't do then even close to what you can do now, but wouldn't you still consider a 10 year old or even an 8 year old a fluent native speaker?

Last edited by howdycowdy (2008 May 18, 10:33 pm)

By this definition, were you "fluent" when you were 10 years old? You couldn't do then even close to what you can do now, but wouldn't you still consider a 10 year old or even an 8 year old a fluent native speaker?

I think you might be over thinking it a bit.  Let's try this one more time: When I can do in Japanese what I can do in English, I'll consider myself fluent.

There are no past tense verbs in there.  It just simply means that I want to be able to do in Japanese what I can do in English.  I'm not even applying this to anyone else -- that's MY goal. 

And as Christoph pointed out, yes, a ten year old would be considered fluent.

Its kinda subjective, right?
I mean, you can be fluent in the language, but not in the culture. (For example, what do people in Japan do during Obon and why?).

In the end, your personal definition of fluency should be enough. You wanna read manga? Ok, when you can do that, then your fluent.

You wanna go work at a Bio Tech company in Japan? Ok when you can do that , your fluent.

I mean, that is why there are standerized test, like the JLPT, to try to create a standard.

But I know people that passed JLPT1 after only one year of study, but cant speak well. And I know great speakers who wound never pass JLPT1.

ajishiosean wrote:

I'm doubtful of the whole "I became fluent in 18 months" thing.  I think people have a tendency to bend the definition of fluency a little.

I don't think he ever said he became fluent in 18 months.  He said people couldn't believe he had never lived in Japan and that he'd only been studying for 18 months.  He said that he conducted job interviews in Japanese and landed a job. 

I just went to check, and the only time the word 'fluent' appears on his intro page is where he says he believed he -could- become fluent before he started, not that he was at 18 months.

Personally, I feel that if you can conduct daily life and people don't need to treat you special in the conversations, you're fluent.  I'm not yet fluent in any language but my native one, and I've a long way to go.