Dodaj do ulubionych

Be fluent in english

IP: *.zgora.cvx.ppp.tpnet.pl 18.09.02, 17:50
So is there anybody who would like to start conversation about:

Is this possible to be fluent in english, and can not pass any gramatical
exams, with the minimum score?
Obserwuj wątek
    • Gość: Wojtek Re: Be fluent in english IP: *.abo.wanadoo.fr 18.09.02, 19:22
      Gość portalu: hub napisał(a):

      > So is there anybody who would like to start conversation about:
      >
      > Is this possible to be fluent in english, and can not pass any gramatical
      > exams, with the minimum
      score?

      Should your question read: 'Is it possible to be fluent in English and yet
      unable to pass an exam or hardly pass it?' - my unswer would be: possible
      (anything is) but rather unlikely. Of course, it depends on your definition
      of"fluency". Regards, Wojtek
      PS. Is my English rendering of your question more or less correct?
    • Gość: together Re: Be fluent in english IP: *.nyc.rr.com 20.09.02, 04:48
      I know the guy who speaks English well with a minimal foreign accent, yet he
      barely reads and is unable to write. He is fairly inteligent and well mannered,
      able to hold a pleasant conversation. Is he fluent?

      Hi erwas. You're OK now. But look at Wojtek. What do you think?
      Is he or isn't he an ............?

      Wojtek, Happy renditions. That was good, man.

      Well, we all make mistakes or should I say err.
    • maggie7 Re: Be fluent in english 22.09.02, 20:05
      well, going back to the original question... :o)

      > Is this possible to be fluent in english, and can not pass any gramatical
      > exams, with the minimum score?


      what do you mean by "any gramatical exams"? some are easier, some are harder...

      but listen to this:

      I asked my American friend a few grammar questions. For example how he would
      explain the present perfect tense; or present progressive vs. present simple;
      or what modal verbs are; or auxiliary verbs... not difficult questions, right?
      But guess what, he didn't know the answers! He had no idea what all the
      technical terms meant. He didn't even know such things as present perfect or
      present progressive tenses existed!
      So he failed the test I gave him. Yet,he speaks beautiful, fluent English...

      :o) take care



      • Gość: hub Re: Be fluent in english IP: *.zgora.cvx.ppp.tpnet.pl 27.09.02, 23:14
        maggie7 napisała:

        > well, going back to the original question... :o)
        >
        > > Is this possible to be fluent in english, and can not pass any gramatical
        > > exams, with the minimum score?
        >
        >
        > what do you mean by "any gramatical exams"? some are easier, some are
        harder...
        >
        > but listen to this:
        >
        > I asked my American friend a few grammar questions. For example how he would
        > explain the present perfect tense; or present progressive vs. present simple;
        > or what modal verbs are; or auxiliary verbs... not difficult questions,
        right?
        > But guess what, he didn't know the answers! He had no idea what all the
        > technical terms meant. He didn't even know such things as present perfect or
        > present progressive tenses existed!
        > So he failed the test I gave him. Yet,he speaks beautiful, fluent English...
        >
        > :o) take care
        >

        That is extremely right!!!!!!!!!!, my roommate form students hostel, when I've
        asked him how to spell "Awesome" because he had been using it all the time, he
        couldn’t answer he was thinking all night and next day he almost figure out!!!
        I have more examples like this, so what should I say are they dumb? No I think
        we overestimate the grammatical issue

        stay warm (or something like that)

        hub
    • Gość: gelson Re: Be fluent in english IP: *.ne.client2.attbi.com 25.09.02, 01:47
      Hello !

      It is possible to speak english fluently,but it is more important to speak with
      no mistakes (at least do not get discoraged if made one).The best way to learn
      it is to speak it ,everybody knows that.Is it possible to get rid of your
      polish accent ??? NO IT IS NOT !!! But,why bother ? As long as you speak good
      english nobody cares about your accent.

      Take care !
    • Gość: Rena Re: Be fluent in english IP: *.ucdavis.edu 25.09.02, 08:32
      I know this English guy,who speaks really fluent Polish (and I mean fluent
      with idiomatic expressions and stuff like that), but he doesn't know any
      grammar whatsoever and makes all kinds of funny mistakes. He's been living in
      Poland for years and uses the language every day with a great confidence. I
      bet my life the guy would't pass any Polish language exam. Does this mean he's
      not fluent? Of course not, he simply doesn't have any knowledge about grammar
      and, frankly, he doesn't need it to make himself understandable or to
      understand others.
        • Gość: Rena Re: Be fluent in english IP: *.abo.wanadoo.fr 25.09.02, 09:32
          Valid point, Rena, but in a slightly different context... Hub's question
          was... Well, what was the question? Right! "Can you fail an exam, while being
          fluent in a subject...?" And the subject is English! I answered (and I still
          do) - you can but it's unlikely. While we could go on bragging about
          differences in Polish and English grammar, the exams' expectations and so on,
          let's say simply that if you fail an exam, you aren't fluent in a subject. A
          certificate justifies that adjective. After all, it is possible that Hub's
          English (sorry,Hub) is considered brilliant by some. What do you say?
          • Gość: Rena Re: Be fluent in english IP: *.ucdavis.edu 26.09.02, 08:43
            > Valid point, Rena, but in a slightly different context... Hub's question
            > was... Well, what was the question? Right! "Can you fail an exam, while
            being
            > fluent in a subject...?" And the subject is English!

            What's a difference? Learning a foreign language's learning a foreign language
            to me.

            I answered (and I still
            > do) - you can but it's unlikely. While we could go on bragging about
            > differences in Polish and English grammar, the exams' expectations and so
            on,
            > let's say simply that if you fail an exam, you aren't fluent in a subject. A
            > certificate justifies that adjective. After all, it is possible that Hub's
            > English (sorry,Hub) is considered brilliant by some. What do you say?

            I guess it depends on your definition of being fluent. Language is a means of
            communication and as long as you can use it effectively as such in every
            situation you should be considered fluent. Your grammar (and that's the
            language component exams are focused on)is not THE most important part of the
            whole thing. It helps a lot, hard to disagree with that,but it's not what
            learning a language is all about.
            Language schools often run specific courses for those, who want to take an
            exam. Why do you think they do that, if being fluent alone is enough to pass
            the exam? (do I understand your theory correctly?)
            Regards,
            Rena
      • Gość: Mixon Re: Be fluent in english IP: *.sympatico.ca 26.09.02, 12:47
        Gość portalu: anita napisał(a):

        > I think thats possible. I havent passed any english gramatic exam and so
        what,
        > well I havent even tried, but I think speaking fluently is much more
        important
        > then a grammar. Even english people sometimes failed at
        grammar..............so
        >
        > dont worry!!

        Greetings,
        It is a shame to make mistakes in writing or speaking. Believe me. I don't
        think that mistakes made by natural speakers are good explanation of making
        grammar mistakes not being one. I fill really bad doing that. Why don't we
        show them how flowery their own language can be? I - my self like to be
        corrected by somebody who knows English better than me a lot! Besides that -
        how can you speak fluently not knowing grammar rules. That sounds more
        like "Kali language" than!!!

        ps
        I think that you should worry!!!
        • Gość: Prezes Re: Be fluent in english IP: *.ces.clemson.edu 26.09.02, 19:24
          Gość portalu: Mixon napisał(a):

          > Gość portalu: anita napisał(a):
          >
          > > I think thats possible. I havent passed any english gramatic exam and so
          > what,
          > > well I havent even tried, but I think speaking fluently is much more
          > important
          > > then a grammar. Even english people sometimes failed at
          > grammar..............so
          > >
          > > dont worry!!
          >
          > Greetings,
          > It is a shame to make mistakes in writing or speaking. Believe me. I don't
          > think that mistakes made by natural speakers are good explanation of making
          > grammar mistakes not being one. I fill really bad doing that. Why don't we
          > show them how flowery their own language can be? I - my self like to be
          > corrected by somebody who knows English better than me a lot!

          Well, if you like it that much (I am not claiming I know English better than you :-) :

          1. feel not fill
          2. myself not my self

          The third sentence does not make sense to me.
          I think it should read like this (I am sure there are better ways to put it):

          * I do not think that mistakes made by native speakers are valid excuses
          for grammar mistakes made by foreigners.*


          >Besides that -
          > how can you speak fluently not knowing grammar rules. That sounds more
          > like "Kali language" than!!!
          >
          > ps
          > I think that you should worry!!!

          I agree with your point.
          You cannot be consider fluent in any language if you cannot express
          yourself in a grammatically correct way (with some allowance for common mistakes
          often encountered in everyday speach).

      • Gość: hub Re: Be fluent in english IP: *.zgora.cvx.ppp.tpnet.pl 26.09.02, 15:50
        Gość portalu: anita napisał(a):

        > I think thats possible. I havent passed any english gramatic exam and so
        what,
        > well I havent even tried, but I think speaking fluently is much more
        important
        > then a grammar. Even english people sometimes failed at
        grammar..............so
        >
        > dont worry!!




        That is right!!
    • Gość: hu LET me SAY IP: *.zgora.cvx.ppp.tpnet.pl 27.09.02, 22:19
      The answer is deeply hidden. Cognitive psychology treats about it, first there
      are people who are dyslectics, there are few various dyslexics, there are many
      styles of learning, there are few disabilities responsible for language and
      literacy skills. So maybe there is the answer, why there are some that can
      converse efficiently, but have problems with grammatical questions very often
      create far from any context or real life situations. Also there are thousand
      ways of saying the same thing in English, at least I do thing so, and making
      test questions like this is irrelevant:

      (Put into right form)

      Pam ...........(rather, can, not, say) become a model because she……….(be, able,
      ring) ten years ago, and since that………..(go, free) nowhere any time.


      Do not pay attention to the text above but, you know what I mean - I had many
      times problem to figure out what the author wanted to say, many times that kind
      or another kinds of questions made me confused.

      Let me say now my essential statement: I am against tests in English!!!
      English should be assessed by speaking.
      • Gość: Prezes Re: LET me SAY IP: *.ces.clemson.edu 27.09.02, 22:32
        Gość portalu: hu napisał(a):

        > The answer is deeply hidden. Cognitive psychology
        treats about it, first there
        > are people who are dyslectics, there are few various
        dyslexics, there are many
        > styles of learning, there are few disabilities
        responsible for language and
        > literacy skills. So maybe there is the answer, why
        there are some that can
        > converse efficiently, but have problems with
        grammatical questions very often
        > create far from any context or real life situations.
        Also there are thousand
        > ways of saying the same thing in English, at least I do
        thing so, and making
        > test questions like this is irrelevant:
        >
        > (Put into right form)
        >
        > Pam ...........(rather, can, not, say) become a model
        because she??
        > ?.(be, able,
        > ring) ten years ago, and since that???..(go, free)
        nowhere an
        > y time.
        >
        >
        > Do not pay attention to the text above but, you know
        what I mean - I had many
        > times problem to figure out what the author wanted to
        say, many times that kind
        >
        > or another kinds of questions made me confused.
        >
        > Let me say now my essential statement: I am against
        tests in English!!!
        > English should be assessed by speaking.

        That is still a test.

        Of course speaking in any foreign language is
        much more difficult and challenging task
        than writing or reading (with some exceptions).
        You did not invent the wheel.

    • Gość: Bert Re: Be fluent in english IP: *.214.98.93.Dial1.Boston1.Level3.net 27.09.02, 23:12
      Gość portalu: hub napisał(a):

      > So is there anybody who would like to start
      conversation about:
      >
      > Is this possible to be fluent in english, and can not
      pass any gramatical
      > exams, with the minimum score?

      Let me poke my formal nose into the fluent business.
      There are a few sides to a language and English is no
      exception. "Fluency" refers to only one of them - the
      skill of utterance, or sound articulation. "Fluency" and
      its derivatives stem from Latin (remember your high
      school Latin?) and they all relate to flow or flowing
      characteristics that we use to describe the readiness of
      having words at command and of saying them. Mind you, the
      choice of words may leave much to be desired.

      Some people say "fluent writer" or "fluent reader". In
      reality, fluent writing or reading would imply the
      smooth, flowing, uninterrupted biomechanical processes
      involved rather than the underlying know-how. Even
      "fluent speaker" is suspect because much more than
      utterance is usually expected of him. Calling a native
      speaker "fluent" might be considered outright offensive.
      Maggie7 mentioned a friend of hers who spoke fluent,
      beautiful English. Take note of the beautiful part.
      "Being fluent in a subject or discipline" is an ironic
      twist and suggests the opposite. Would you call a famous
      physicist a "fluent physicist"? I wouldn?t dare, unless
      he is a fluent physicist.

      • Gość: hub Re: Be fluent in english IP: *.zgora.cvx.ppp.tpnet.pl 27.09.02, 23:24
        Gość portalu: Bert napisał(a):

        > Gość portalu: hub napisał(a):
        >
        > > So is there anybody who would like to start
        > conversation about:
        > >
        > > Is this possible to be fluent in english, and can not
        > pass any gramatical
        > > exams, with the minimum score?
        >
        > Let me poke my formal nose into the fluent business.
        > There are a few sides to a language and English is no
        > exception. "Fluency" refers to only one of them - the
        > skill of utterance, or sound articulation. "Fluency" and
        > its derivatives stem from Latin (remember your high
        > school Latin?) and they all relate to flow or flowing
        > characteristics that we use to describe the readiness of
        > having words at command and of saying them. Mind you, the
        > choice of words may leave much to be desired.
        >
        > Some people say "fluent writer" or "fluent reader". In
        > reality, fluent writing or reading would imply the
        > smooth, flowing, uninterrupted biomechanical processes
        > involved rather than the underlying know-how. Even
        > "fluent speaker" is suspect because much more than
        > utterance is usually expected of him. Calling a native
        > speaker "fluent" might be considered outright offensive.
        > Maggie7 mentioned a friend of hers who spoke fluent,
        > beautiful English. Take note of the beautiful part.
        > "Being fluent in a subject or discipline" is an ironic
        > twist and suggests the opposite. Would you call a famous
        > physicist a "fluent physicist"? I wouldn?t dare, unless
        > he is a fluent physicist.
        >

        such a profound explanation
        I presume you're english, aren't you?
      • Gość: nat Re: Be fluent in english IP: *.in-addr.btopenworld.com 29.09.02, 21:24
        What a silly pile of rubbish! It really isn't necessary to have a grasp of
        Latin, Greek and ancient Egyptian to understand what 'normal' people mean by
        fluency in a language. I see it as a degree of ability which enables one to
        communicate freely and correctly with the native speakers, making one's
        thoughts clear, be it in written or oral form. It requires good knowledge of
        grammar and a decent range of the vocabulary. Basic intelligence is a must. How
        about that!

Popularne wątki

Nie pamiętasz hasła

lub ?

 

Nie masz jeszcze konta? Zarejestruj się

Nakarm Pajacyka