RECENT TOPICS » View all
kazelee wrote:
Speaking of Anal, if I see "Anyways" one more time I might just blow! LOL.
My pet peeve as well. Ugh. Anyways is NOT a word!
musigny wrote:
You are fluent when you can hold the same conversations you can now in your native language in Japanese readily and effortlessly. Your Japanese will flow effortlessly and be polished.
By this definition, my level of fluent Japanese could be (and is very likely) different from yours.
To illustrate: I am the only member of my immediate family to go to college. I have always been an avid reader of fiction and nonfiction alike, something that already gave me a linguistic edge over my family members. And it doesn't stop there - I continued my studies on through graduate school, learned a foreign language, expatriated, traveled extensively, etc. In other words, I have had many experiences they have not, and as a result, I repeatedly have conversations with my family nowadays where I am stopped midway through a sentence so that they can complain - "ya'know, I really don't unnerstan' what yur sayin.'"
I mean, nothing against my family - they aren't stupid. Just honest, salt-of-the-earth kind of people where education can be somewhat....limited, at times.
So, basically, the conversations I can have now in English exceed the ones my own family can have. Does that mean I need to work harder than they to become fluent in Japanese (since they have a lower benchmark to achieve)?
I think I can see what you're trying to say, but I also think your definition needs a little polishing before becoming categorical.
Anyways is a recognized colloquialism.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anyways
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define. … ;dict=CALD
Last edited by Ben_Nielson (2009 February 15, 6:28 am)
Ben_Nielson wrote:
kazelee wrote:
Speaking of Anal, if I see "Anyways" one more time I might just blow! LOL.
I have a real bad habit of overusing that word. In written and spoken English. And Japanese for that matter...
Sorry to irritate.nest0r wrote:
Irregardless
'Anyways,' 'irregardless,' 'ain't,'....
Language is a malleable, evolving entity. Think about it. Most of the words we use nowadays were probably considered 'incorrect' at some point in time. Ignore convention and it'll get used enough so that it becomes correct.
Don't get your panties in such a wad.
tokyostyle wrote:
You must have misunderstood the sentence then. There's one comma missing, but otherwise it is correct as-is. (Which is a separate issue from the lack of quality.)
Incorrect. Run it by your High School English teacher. If you don't like what he says, use some intelligent quip like telling him it's "crap". At any rate, it's food for thought. Certainly one can be fluent but not native; but the reverse is evidently true as well.
musigny wrote:
tokyostyle wrote:
You must have misunderstood the sentence then. There's one comma missing, but otherwise it is correct as-is. (Which is a separate issue from the lack of quality.)
Incorrect. Run it by your High School English teacher. If you don't like what he says, use some intelligent quip like telling him it's "crap". At any rate, it's food for thought. Certainly one can be fluent but not native; but the reverse is evidently true as well.
How ironic, you've used a semicolon and a coordinating conjunction to connect your final two clauses! Tsk tsk, ho hum.
Musigny, it would have been be quicker and maybe nicer to just tell us the mistakes in the sentence. The main thing I see is that Tokyostyle has used "they" as a pronoun for the subject "Someone." He (or she) also used both "has" and "have." This is a common problem, and ironically, I think it may be more common with education. English is limited by its lack of a gender-neutral singular pronoun, so people have started to use "they" as a substitute for "he," which was formerly used in generic situations. "People" would have been safer than "Someone," but a mistake like this hardly disqualifies Tokyostyle as fluent. The language itself is changing.
Last edited by KristinHolly (2009 February 15, 7:20 am)
Ben_Nielson wrote:
Anyways is a recognized colloquialism.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anyways
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define. … ;dict=CALD
So is ain't - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ain%27t
They may be recognized, that doesn't I have to like it. To me it sounds unpolished and unprofessional to use anyways or ain't, but that's just my opinion. It ranks up there with when incorrect usage of your/you're. Wow. This thread has so many tangents I'm losing track. Shouldn't we be studying? ![]()
EnjukuBlack wrote:
Language is a malleable, evolving entity. Think about it. Most of the words we use nowadays were probably considered 'incorrect' at some point in time. Ignore convention and it'll get used enough so that it becomes correct.
Don't get your panties in such a wad.
I can't wait until "ur" is an accepted spelling of your/you're.
EnjukuBlack wrote:
'Anyways,' 'irregardless,' 'ain't,'....
Language is a malleable, evolving entity. Think about it. Most of the words we use nowadays were probably considered 'incorrect' at some point in time. Ignore convention and it'll get used enough so that it becomes correct.
Don't get your panties in such a wad.
What's that you see coming at you in you're periphial vision. Supposably it's my keyboard that I tried to intentionally throw; at your head while you was righting that post. I ain't saying that can't dodge it. Juss, irregardless of what you do, that thing is gone hit. It's Mark, anyways I'm not suprise if you turn out to be a user of "anyways" urself, as you defanitly seems to be deffending him even tho you trying to ack like hes the one who was you babby momma afta all. I think its wierd personoly. I can hear bad grammer and not care but reading it is hell. Their I sed it.
Pleez use this occassion to reflect on you're previous statement.
nest0r wrote:
How ironic, you've used a semicolon and a coordinating conjunction to connect your final two clauses! Tsk tsk, ho hum.
Thanks for catching the typo on the semicolon. I'm not going come back and tell you it's correct. I'm not going to tell you your statement is "crap" like that's normal language either.
musigny wrote:
nest0r wrote:
How ironic, you've used a semicolon and a coordinating conjunction to connect your final two clauses! Tsk tsk, ho hum.
Thanks for catching the typo on the semicolon. I'm not going come back and tell you it's correct. I'm not going to tell you your statement is "crap" like that's normal language either.
I think he was being sarcastic. LOL
musigny wrote:
nest0r wrote:
How ironic, you've used a semicolon and a coordinating conjunction to connect your final two clauses! Tsk tsk, ho hum.
Thanks for catching the typo on the semicolon. I'm not going come back and tell you it's correct. I'm not going to tell you your statement is "crap" like that's normal language either.
That was a bit crude, I agree. I try to ignore such comments, as I'd find the lingering distaste of having my thoughts discounted as 'crap' would outweigh the benefits of acknowledging the equal or inferior thoughts contained in the rest of such a comment.
musigny wrote:
Thanks for catching the typo on the semicolon.
A typo is a misspelling caused by two adjacent characters being typed in reversed order or by a character being replaced by another character adjacent to it on the keyboard, not an incorrectly-inserted word or generalized error through inattention.
~J, who can't resist
tokyostyle wrote:
kazelee wrote:
Your writing style is making it very difficult to figure out what you are trying to say here.
Sweet! Let's try it post nomikai then.
You lost me...
tokyostyle wrote:
A test or a researcher or someone in academia might come up with a definition of fluent that is based upon the idea that a level of knowledge in speaking the language allows you to attain fluency. That was the basis of musigny's definition. If you can have the "same conversations" you have in your native language then you are fluent.
That sort of definition means the more educated you are in L1 then you must become roughly that educated in L2 in order to become fluent.
His definition also does not take into account the perception of native speakers of L2. Japanese people do not consider you fluent in Japanese when you break social norms. Thus to pass for a native speaker in Japan, and probably any culture, you have to speak the target language in a way that conforms to accepted speech patterns. (A good example in Japanese is that you cannot presume to know what someone else is thinking. Although you can make a sentence that is technically grammatical it's not acceptable to do so.)
Fair enough.... though... it would have probably been better to present this information, instead of just calling that post crap.
[url/] http://www.language.ca/display_page.asp?page_id=439[url]The top item in each column (reading, writing, speaking, listening) will open a pdf of descriptors for ESL proficiency. (Yeah I know it's not Japanese)
Any discussion of vague terms like "fluency" without concrete descriptors like this is just a waste of breath, IMO.
Let me share with you a knew definition of "fluency" that I just pull out of my... head...
Fluency in a foreign language is using that language in a way that satisfies your needs and makes you feel comfortable with your command of the language.
So, actually there are few ways to not reach "total" fluency, like:
1.- Stop learning
2.- Raise your own expectations constantly in such a way that you can never feel satisfaction from your achievements
3.- Complain about your lack of "fluency", in your own language
Wich is exactly what some people seem to be doing while writing at threads like this one.
Anyways (TM), thanks for helping me with my English learning at the expenses of your Japanese learning (i.e. stop arguing and go learn some Japanese right now!)
Corollary: Whenever you can have this very same discussion and write as much and as fast as you're doing here, in Japanese, you'll be fluent.
/me goes to read or do something in Japanese before someone else comes and rebukes me - in English
after 840 hours of class, excl. kanji, according to the european language portfolio (ELP) in any language (Russian, English, German, Finnish)
you have mastered this level:
"I can present a clear, smoothly-flowing description or argument in a style appropriate to the context and with an effective logical structure which helps the recipient to notice and remember significant points."
http://europass.cedefop.europa.eu/Langu … entGrid/en
why not master japanese in 840 hours + xxxx hours for all the kanjis you like and need to know?
kazelee wrote:
EnjukuBlack wrote:
'Anyways,' 'irregardless,' 'ain't,'....
Language is a malleable, evolving entity. Think about it. Most of the words we use nowadays were probably considered 'incorrect' at some point in time. Ignore convention and it'll get used enough so that it becomes correct.
Don't get your panties in such a wad.What's that you see coming at you in you're periphial vision. Supposably it's my keyboard that I tried to intentionally throw; at your head while you was righting that post. I ain't saying that can't dodge it. Juss, irregardless of what you do, that thing is gone hit. It's Mark, anyways I'm not suprise if you turn out to be a user of "anyways" urself, as you defanitly seems to be deffending him even tho you trying to ack like hes the one who was you babby momma afta all. I think its wierd personoly. I can hear bad grammer and not care but reading it is hell. Their I sed it.
Pleez use this occassion to reflect on you're previous statement.
Does no one else see the irony in this?
Trying to make sense of this post was hell.
Welcome to the joke, EnjukuBlack, I'm glad you could join us ![]()
~J
Last edited by woodwojr (2009 February 15, 5:23 pm)
From my piano instructor, in ancient times:
"damn brat, you gotta remember the song before forgetting and inventing it on your own"
Fluency doesn't have much to do with your own language... why would it? As a benchmark, I sort of see what's being said, but languages can be completely separated from each other so let's do that.
How long does it take? I have no idea. Each person is different. A kid thrown into elementary school or JHS will be pretty much fluent in a few years. By necessity, lack of his own language, etc. An adult studying at school in said country has an advantage and will likely be pretty confident in a few years, but fluent? I dunno.
I reckon fluency is a point in which you understand the people around you (TV, people near you, etc) and can reproduce something you've heard using the exact same language without thinking about it. Things you think can be said with ease, using similar language a native would use to say the same thing. For nearly any common topic.
Personally, I am no where near this level. I've been in Japan almost 3 years. I'm conversational and I can say what I want to say, but I wouldn't use the language a native uses. And if I'm repeating what someone said, often times I'm forced to dumb it down to my level. I understood what they said but in reproducing it, it comes out in my own language. If I'm watching TV, I mostly get what's going on, but not enough to enjoy owarai, for example. And, I (fingers crossed) passed 2kyu this year.
Am I satisfied? No. Am I studying every day? No. I'm comfortable now. I hope to achieve a higher level but for now it's just through living here and speaking every day. I'll hit the books again, but that's not the only way to learn.
Sometimes you just need to get the muscles in your face to get used to speaking a language.
Last edited by Jawful (2009 February 15, 6:23 pm)
woodwojr wrote:
Welcome to the joke, EnjukuBlack, I'm glad you could join us
~J
Sh!t, half of kazelee's posts are garbled nonsense. It's next to impossible to determine if he's joking or just an idiot.
However, re-reading his post now, I see what he's saying. And I agree that 'proper' English is easier to read and comprehend. The difference between the meaning of your and you're is big enough to cause confusion when misused in a written sentence.
But my original comment was meant to suggest people don't get so worked up over the use of common colloquialisms like ain't, anyways, irregardless. In fact, it's the slow creep of these types of colloquialisms into standard speech that accounts for the gradual evolution of a language.
In no way was I suggesting we drop the gloves and start typing like full-blown retards.
EnjukuBlack wrote:
Sh!t, half of kazelee's posts are garbled nonsense. It's next to impossible to determine if he's joking or just an idiot.
I believe I read in another thread he was sleep-deprived, has a glass in his hand at noon(assuming an exquisite alcoholic drink), and was typing with his hands and feet at the same time.
If so, we have nothing to worry about...or do we? ![]()
Edit: I also realized that kazelee is a 6'2" guy so I couldn't stop lauging when I imagined a guy that tall sitting down at a computer typing with one hand and two feet while drinking a glass of champagne with the other hand.
Props to Kazelee for making my day ![]()
Last edited by theasianpleaser (2009 February 15, 8:34 pm)
theasianpleaser wrote:
EnjukuBlack wrote:
Sh!t, half of kazelee's posts are garbled nonsense. It's next to impossible to determine if he's joking or just an idiot.
I believe I read in another thread he was sleep-deprived, has a glass in his hand at noon(assuming an exquisite alcoholic drink), and was typing with his hands and feet at the same time.
If so, we have nothing to worry about...or do we?
Edit: I also realized that kazelee is a 6'2" guy so I couldn't stop lauging when I imagined a guy that tall sitting down at a computer typing with one hand and two feet while drinking a glass of champagne with the other hand.
Props to Kazelee for making my day
As for me, I still can't figure out whether I love him or hate him. ![]()

