Why do non-native speakers overrate their English so much?

beavol   Wed Jun 24, 2009 9:32 pm GMT
"English and German share only very common words normally used in the spoken language, and almost no 'advanced' or technical vocabulary."

Hello.
I've often heard this, and I have to say, it's simply not true, if I understand what you mean. I know some German, and about 85 - 90% of it has some not to distant cognate in English. I'll try to show this by rattling off as many words as I can in as little time possible. It is true, though, that most of the technical vocabulary is different. I'm just saying, they don't share only "very" common words.
beavol   Wed Jun 24, 2009 9:39 pm GMT
Okay, here. This will kind of show what I mean.

gehen - go
unter - under
in - in
Glas - glass
wandern - wander
Weg - way
scheinen -shine
fuer -for
gut -good
Land - land
Hand - hand
Arm - arm
Finger - finger
lang - long
Wind -wind
Winter -winter
Sommer -summer
Haus - house
Maus - mouse

Doesn't that say something? Look at the time the last post was posted and look at when this post was posted.
Amateur   Sun Jun 28, 2009 11:55 am GMT
as to the Germans, they usually overrate their English because German and English are very similar hence they learn English almost without effort and know much more than representatives of other nations who spare the same time and efforts.

Once I met a guy from Germany who complained that 'they' cannot even write visibility correctly. ~Is it difficult to remember that in visibility all i's - no they write visability~
Why?   Sun Jun 28, 2009 10:08 pm GMT
Why does Robin Michael overrate his English so much?
troublesum   Sat Jul 04, 2009 4:06 pm GMT
why do non-native speakers overrate their English so much?

1. there are a lot of native english speakers, i think especially in the usa, who
are a) not sticklers when it comes to grammar, etc. b) not very interested
in correcting others when they make mistakes. so i think sometimes non-native speakers just don't really get corrected, and also their native speaking templates tend to be somewhat loose in their speech (and writing) enough of the time so that there is a "slide" between the more correct and less correct uses by the native speaker, and the non-native speaker figures the less correct usage is good enough.
2. internally english is pretty diverse, and so native speakers get used to hearing lots of versions, including non-native versions, and so "globish" et alia become sort of like dialects, and again no one gets corrected
3. there is no official language police board for english like the academie francaise
4. proper english pronunciation (either standard or relaxed) is quite difficult, but in general people tend to downplay the importance of native-like pronunciation in favor of grammar and lexicon. some sounds in english are exceedingly rare in, at least, many european languages.
5. people tend to think of americans as stupid and as buffoonish. therefore they think that the language that these stupid people speak, english, must be easy, since hey, even these stupid americans can learn it.

why do native speakers overrate their English so much?

1. i personally know many native speakers with a phd in the usa who, when pressed, cannot explain the specifics of the english subjunctive when this mood is employed without auxiliaries. they cannot spell for the life of them, etc., etc. the point is that native speakers often do not realize the complexities of the language, because they know enough so that most people see them as "educated" or at least not as "dumb."
2. native speakers tend to underrate the dialectical variety of english, and therefore think that, because they can speak one dialect, this makes them masters of the language. in my opinion, true mastery can only be claimed when one can move easily between at least 3 or 4 registers/dialects of a language. a good example of this is the underappreciation of the depth, complexity, and sophistication of AAVE, when it comes to lexicon, phonology, and grammar. i look at people who are not fluent in AAVE as severely limited in their english mastery.
3. native speakers in general overrate their mastery.
dormlog   Sat Jul 04, 2009 10:50 pm GMT
<<
1. i personally know many native speakers with a phd in the usa who, when pressed, cannot explain the specifics of the english subjunctive when this mood is employed without auxiliaries. they cannot spell for the life of them, etc., etc. the point is that native speakers often do not realize the complexities of the language, because they know enough so that most people see them as "educated" or at least not as "dumb."
2. native speakers tend to underrate the dialectical variety of english, and therefore think that, because they can speak one dialect, this makes them masters of the language. in my opinion, true mastery can only be claimed when one can move easily between at least 3 or 4 registers/dialects of a language. a good example of this is the underappreciation of the depth, complexity, and sophistication of AAVE, when it comes to lexicon, phonology, and grammar. i look at people who are not fluent in AAVE as severely limited in their english mastery.
3. native speakers in general overrate their mastery. >>


I really doubt native English speakers are worst at their native language than speakers of other languages. Even if they are, it's probably only superficial, because grammar is not taught at school. So while other people may know the nomenclature, that's pretty much all they really know. It would take only a few days to bring a native English speaker's grammatical knowledge up to the same level.
As for moving between dialects, you mean understanding and not speaking , yes? When someone speaks with a dialect that is not their own it sounds pretentious and fake.
troublesum   Sun Jul 05, 2009 4:50 am GMT
<<As for moving between dialects, you mean understanding and not speaking , yes? When someone speaks with a dialect that is not their own it sounds pretentious and fake. >>
...i mean that many native speakers of english cannot understand and cannot speak more than one dialect of english. i personally would not call someone a master of english unless they could both understand and speak a bare minimum of 2 dialects
of english, and i believe that AAVE (african american vernacular english) is a paradigm
case of a second dialect of english. now, i think i understand what you are getting at,
namely that some people think that one can just "fake" a dialect without really knowing
the grammar, etc., and i agree with you. but the reason why they sound fake is that
they have not taken the time to study the dialect. i do not believe in "ownership" of
language or dialect: i studied the dialect of AAVE for many years, and so i consider it
one of my "own" ways of speaking, and i also know that i sound perfect when i choose to employ it...

post scriptum: this doesn't apply only to english: most of the french i studied for a couple of years was very formal, and i remember one time i spoke with a french friend who hung out with less formal speaking people, and he greeted me with "quoid neuf?"
and i didn't know what the hell he was talking about...
Travis   Sun Jul 05, 2009 7:18 am GMT
>><<As for moving between dialects, you mean understanding and not speaking , yes? When someone speaks with a dialect that is not their own it sounds pretentious and fake. >>
...i mean that many native speakers of english cannot understand and cannot speak more than one dialect of english. i personally would not call someone a master of english unless they could both understand and speak a bare minimum of 2 dialects
of english, and i believe that AAVE (african american vernacular english) is a paradigm
case of a second dialect of english. now, i think i understand what you are getting at,
namely that some people think that one can just "fake" a dialect without really knowing
the grammar, etc., and i agree with you. but the reason why they sound fake is that
they have not taken the time to study the dialect. i do not believe in "ownership" of
language or dialect: i studied the dialect of AAVE for many years, and so i consider it
one of my "own" ways of speaking, and i also know that i sound perfect when i choose to employ it...<<

Note, though, that a lot of dialects are not sufficiently documented for *anyone* to learn them other than to have grown up in an environment where they were actively spoken. That definitely applies to the dialect spoken here at least, which is practically undocumented in reality, while at the time differing sufficiently from General American that one cannot easily sum up the differences in any quick-to-learn fashion.
A respectful human being   Sat Jul 18, 2009 1:26 am GMT
I am really sorry for you! I hope you get better in time. You are fucking stupid! Why You should seek therapy. Stop being a hater and maybe learn another language.
Goozoo   Sat Jul 18, 2009 1:28 am GMT
and to beavol. dude you took 7 minutes to write a few words. That means you probably referred to every common word that they have in common!
K. T.   Sat Jul 18, 2009 1:49 am GMT
"That definitely applies to the dialect spoken here at least, which is practically undocumented in reality, while at the time differing sufficiently from General American that one cannot easily sum up the differences in any quick-to-learn fashion."

Perhaps you could be the one to document it?
manic   Sat Jul 18, 2009 1:49 am GMT
Why would someone wish to learn a substandard dialect like Ebonics?
K. T.   Sat Jul 18, 2009 2:38 am GMT
Without using "substandard" I would say that some musicians, and actors as well as people who just curious about it may study it or learn.
People who work in an area where it is spoken may want to learn it as well.
Travis   Sat Jul 18, 2009 8:48 am GMT
>>"That definitely applies to the dialect spoken here at least, which is practically undocumented in reality, while at the time differing sufficiently from General American that one cannot easily sum up the differences in any quick-to-learn fashion."

Perhaps you could be the one to document it?<<

I could, but I am not a professional linguist, so that itself would probably put a damper on such to a degree (both due to such affecting the ability to get published and due to such not being my "day job" giving me less time to actually document things properly).

>>Without using "substandard" I would say that some musicians, and actors as well as people who just curious about it may study it or learn.
People who work in an area where it is spoken may want to learn it as well.<<

At least with respect to the dialect here, from my standpoint is more a matter of linguistic documentation than anything else. Somehow, though, I honestly do not really see many people aside from people from elsewhere who have settled down here having much interest in actually learning the dialect here per se (outside of pure linguistic interest).
???   Sat Jul 18, 2009 4:40 pm GMT
>>also their native speaking templates tend to be somewhat loose in their speech (and writing) enough of the time so that there is a "slide" between the more correct and less correct uses by the native speaker, and the non-native speaker figures the less correct usage is good enough.<<

True, I have seen lots of instances on languages sites where a non-native speaker writes something in English (although often in these cases admitting that they don't think their English is good), and a native speaker replies that their English is perfect, when what they have written doesn't sound native at all.