Thread: Fluent in 11 languages.

Originally Posted by Throbert McGee

whereas most Russian children over the age of five or six would answer Это воробей ("It's a sparrow").

Russian sparrows look a little different
More like this one
But you are correct

Still I think pronunciation is much more important for comfort communication than vocabulary

Originally Posted by Throbert McGee

True... for example, I would bet money that if you showed him a photograph of a bird from the genus Passer ...



...and asked him Что это такое?, he would answer Это маленькая птица ("It's a small bird") or something close to that, whereas most Russian children over the age of five or six would answer Это воробей ("It's a sparrow").

Or, if you asked him how to say "Those people are very wealthy" in Russian, he might be able to provide a direct literal translation like Эти люди очень богатые, but it would never occur to him to say У них всё есть, кроме птичьего молока, ("They've got everything but bird milk") because he was too busy learning Hebrew, Catalan, Afrikaans, etc., to study Russian in more depth and learn some common proverbs and figures of speech.

Which is to say that "fluency" can be defined in different ways, and the BBC video shows that he has an impressive ability to master different accents and perhaps also an excellent memory for rehearsed phrases, but he's not actually demonstrating an ability to converse fluently in all those different languages. (Maybe he can, but the video doesn't prove this.)

I think you're defining "fluent" so narrowly you're in danger of rendering it meaningless. If you can talk confidently and readily on a range of subjects without getting stuck then you're fluent, in my view. I'd actually argue that peppering his speech with idiom and proverbs would be a far greater demonstration of "an excellent memory for rehearsed phrases" than talking freely, albeit in more simple language. I tend to avoid using proverbs in Russian even when I know them and can use them correctly because what commonly happens when I do drop one into conversation is that the listener interrupts me to smile and congratulate me on my correct usage of Russian idiom, and the conversation is immediately derailed. I'm also conscious that as an English speaker I always find something amusing and even absurd when I hear foreigners using English idiom, even when they're using it absolutely correctly and their English is otherwise perfect.

As for the воробей, I would answer "it's a small bird" in English, because I don't know one wild bird from another. Does that mean I'm not fluent in English?

deleted

Originally Posted by zedeeyen

I'd actually argue that peppering his speech with idiom and proverbs would be a far greater demonstration of "an excellent memory for rehearsed phrases" than talking freely, albeit in more simple language.

Well, yes, if you're talking about a recorded <i>monologue</i>, as we saw in the video. On the other hand, being able to recall and use appropriate native proverbs/idioms in an unscripted, spontaneous, multi-topic conversation with a native speaker would demonstrate a higher level of fluency in the target language.

As for the воробей, I would answer "it's a small bird" in English, because I don't know one wild bird from another. Does that mean I'm not fluent in English?

True, the sparrow probably wasn't a very good example -- I doubt any ESL teacher would include "sparrow" on a vocabulary list for students below the advanced level. (Whereas words like "chicken", "pigeon", and "parrot" might be introduced even in a beginning class, although after the generic term "bird".)

Originally Posted by Man About Town

It's nothing but a show-off. Anyone can learn a few phrases, put some effort into practicing a proper accent and you are good to go!

I wanna see you trying practicing the proper accent

Originally Posted by Man About Town

It's nothing but a show-off. Anyone can learn a few phrases, put some effort into practicing a proper accent and you are good to go! There are thousands of polyglots like him on the net flaunting their prodigious flare for languages while in fact, I can bet my bottom dollar on it, they didn't even try to study any of those. Well, maybe they did, but didn't get any further than picking up some basics just sufficient to put on a chip show.

I agree.
The guy obviously has some linguistic talent and loves languages, but I highly doubt he's actually fluent in more than 2-4 of them (in 10-15 years - maybe, but not now). He probably can be considered an intermediate or even an advanced student in some of them, but it's a far cry from being fluent. For example he's made a few serious grammar mistakes in his Russian phrases, and I wonder how many mistakes he would have made in an unscripted or more complex text. On the other hand his pronunciation is very good, the accent is very slight and I'm sure he'll get even better with practice.

It's still inspiring to see a young man who puts his mind to work, and it's something to be proud about. But using false and boastful labels cheapen his achievements a little.

сел is [s'el] съел [sjel], so no any break but an entire consonant [j] (like "y" in yes), ' signifies palatalization. Ш is close to voiceless English R, Щ is pronounced with the middle of the toungue raised.
These are all questions of Russian graphics. It is like [ke] is spelt que in Spanish while [ka] is spelt ca.
As far as I can see such things cause unbelievable difficulties among learners of Russian, I don't know why.
Ш and Щ are as distinct as man and men are in English (Russians don't usually hear the difference).

You can't hear the difference between "man" and "men" in English?

I keep thinking that if uneducated labourers from Uzbekistan can learn to speak Russian in a few years, then I should b-y well be able to manage to!

I do GET the difference between Ш and Щ - it's just that I don't really think of them as different sounds.

My stepmother who is Japanese has the same problem with R and L when she speaks English - she doesn't think there is any real difference and has to really focus to pronounce them clearly. Even though to all of us there is a massive difference.

Originally Posted by Hanna

You can't hear the difference between "man" and "men" in English?

I often can't. If they are said one after another, or with an exaggerated articulation, then I can hear the difference. If it's an isolated word in a real phrase, it usually flies over my head. Same with "ship-sheep", etc. It does not cause any problems with comprehension, because the context always helps, but it probably adds to my accent. Not that I'm able to notice that.

Originally Posted by gRomoZeka

I often can't. If they are said one after another, or with an exaggerated articulation, then I can hear the difference. If it's an isolated word in a real phrase, it usually flies over my head. Same with "ship-sheep", etc. It does not cause any problems with comprehension, because the context always helps, but it probably adds to my accent. Not that I'm able to notice that.

Ship-sheep is always clear from context, but you should probably avoid talking about "sheets" until you've got the hang of it

Originally Posted by zedeeyen

but you should probably avoid talking about "sheets" until you've got the hang of it

I'm trying to avoid using this word as hard as I can when I speak
I can probably pronounce it correctly when I focus on it but if talk fast enough - it could become really embarrassing

I've noticed that Russians tend to use ship sound much more often than sheep. I guess that sound is much closer to Russian и

Originally Posted by Doomer

I've noticed that Russians tend to use ship sound much more often than sheep. I guess that sound is much closer to Russian и

Really?

Originally Posted by Hanna

You can't hear the difference between "man" and "men" in English?

Note that they could both be represented as мэн in Cyrillic -- there's really no way of representing the vowel difference in the standard Russian alphabet. (Just as the English version of the Latin alphabet has no satisfactory way to represent the sound of ы.)

And I remember from my first year Russian class that a LOT of English speakers had huge difficulty (at first) hearing and pronouncing the difference between ы and the diphthong ой. (So a lot of people pronounced мы, ты, вы... like мой, той, вой...)

Originally Posted by Throbert McGee

and the diphthong ой.

Not a lot of Irish people I guess

Originally Posted by Throbert McGee

Note that they could both be represented as мэн in Cyrillic -- there's really no way of representing the vowel difference in the standard Russian alphabet. (Just as the English version of the Latin alphabet has no satisfactory way to represent the sound of ы.)

I'd write man as мэн and men as мен.

You can't hear the difference between "man" and "men" in English?

Now I can but not always, sometimes man sounds like ман then the difference is obvious, but not always.
I'm not sure I pronounce them differently.
At the beginning it was very difficult. A lot of time had passed before I understood that Russian x and English h are two different sounds.

Workers from Uzbekistan often learnt Russian at school.

yeah I guess they do, plus my comment sounded rather stupid now that I read it again. There is nothing that says a person from Uzbekistan who works in a blue collar job should be any less capable of learning Russian than me, really. Apologies if anyone read that and took offense.

We can't judje one's abilities by a video, only pronunciation can be checked like that. Throbert was wrong when he tried to define fluency.

Hey
what happened with my post #29?
the quote went backwards!!!