Korean Job Discussion Forums

[fustiancorduroy]

...

[Starla]

I think fluent just means you can communicate without thinking hard about it. It should come naturally to you. Everybody learns languages at a different pace. Some can't learn a foreign language for their life while others are multilingual and fluent in several languages. I have relatives who speak 3+ languages fluently. Me, only 2. But fluency can be achieved through hard study and lots of conversational practice, the latter more important than the former since you don't necessarily need to know how to write the language to speak it well. Here's a definition for you:


fluent from the Mirriam-Webster dictionary


Main Entry: flu�ent
Pronunciation: \ˈfl�-ənt\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin fluent-, fluens, present participle of fluere � more at fluid
Date: 1585
1 a: capable of flowing : fluid b: capable of moving with ease and grace <the fluent body of a dancer>
2 a: capable of using a language easily and accurately <fluent in Spanish> <a fluent writer> b: effortlessly smooth and flowing : polished <a fluent performance> <spoke in fluent English> c: having or showing mastery of a subject or skill <fluent in mathematics>
� flu�ent�ly adverb

[Adventurer]

If someone can write reasonably well in a language (without major errors) and speak it well, too, then I would say they're fluent. If you can hold your own in a converation in Spanish or French, I'd say you're fluent if you can also write it reasonably well. If you can't write it well, but speak it very well, I suppose you could be a fluent speaker of the language. That is possible.

[Scotticus]

[fustiancorduroy]

[hamlet712]

So a newbie asks if you are fluent when they hear you speak Korean near them and you think they misuse the word?

UM, okay????????

Now, i dont know about you, but when I hear someone speak another language that question would pop into my head too.

Also, 90 percent of all english speakers are barely fluent in the language if you adhered to the strictest defintion. I myself have an english degree and I forget half of the bullshit grammar rules we have.

[aka Dave]

Well, it really depends on the language. I would consider myself fluent in French. I studied it for 12 years, including my B .A. and 5 years of grad. school. I worked in Brussels, and lived two years in France, did my senior year as an exchange student to the Univ. of Grenoble.

I don't have the precise pronounciation of a native speakers, but otherwise would consider myself "fluent", and for many years was called "fluent" by native French speakers.

We don't use fluent to describe native speakers. It's obviously assumed that all native speakers are fluent, if you're using it to describe them it's redundant.

However, I would agree that acheiving fluency in Korean would be almost inconceivable. I study it every day pretty much and I imagine it would take at least 5 plus years. French is fairly similar to English, and has tons and tons of cognates. Korean is utterly different in every way (though there are loan words).

I imagine if you married into a Korean family and were totally immersed in the language it's possible. There are probably some Koreanologists out there that are fluent. But having studied Spanish, Italian, and French, all of which are fairly easy for Americans to learn, fluency in Korean for a Westerner is a truly remarkable acheivement.

An example of fluency would be someone like Henry Kissenger, btw. He has a heavy accent, but is an excellent writer (don't get my wrong I hate the guy) and he speaks fluently, without hesitation.

The word fluency doesn't mean "expert" in grammar. In fact quite to the contrary it's used to describe people who speak freely and intuitively without worrying about grammar.

[jackson7]

I use the word "conversational" when referring to my French and Korean skills. I am able to have a conversation with a stranger regarding most adult issues (debating the teletubbies' last episode is not in my vocabulary range) in both languages, and I often get compliments from native speakers of both that my pronunciation is great. Now that all that ego-stroking is out of the way, I'm still half-lost when I watch Korean news. In my opinion, fluency is the ability to understand everything (or 99%, jargon excluded) and to be understood when expressing anything. Therefore, I'm not fluent.

[Privateer]

I take most people's claims to be fluent in another language with a pinch of salt until I've actually heard them speak. On the plus side, it's good to be confident and not afraid of making errors, but, on the minus side, I think a lot of people seriously underestimate what it takes to be truly fluent.

I've noticed there's also a double-standard with regard to other nationalities being judged 'fluent' in English. I'm talking about at home rather than here, where we tend to be happy to find anyone we can communicate with and judge them generously. At home, non-natives tend to be judged harshly on the negative aspects of their language rather than the positive.

Basically, non-natives make a couple of errors, and English speakers' estimation of their ability goes down drastically; whereas when an English speaker can ask for directions they're highly impressed with themselves.