Be fluent in english

[Gość: hub]

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?

[Gość: Wojtek]

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: erwas]

Gość portalu: Wojtek napisał(a):


> 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
> PS. Is my English rendering of your question more or less correct?

you're missing a "to be" verb-like thing or two. (to be unable and to hardly
pass it)

[dziwne]

Oh dear oh dera oh dear - the old song says...

: Be fluent in english

[dziwne]

Oh dear oh dear oh dear - the old song says...

[magbak]

It depends how you define fluency ...

[Gość: Wojtek]

Are you trying me on...?

[Gość: h]

you mean any? i doubt it. if one knows just a little of English,then passing
FCE should be a piece of cake for him...

[Gość: ulka]

Hej, what if somebody doesn't know how to write (problems with spelling are
quite common)? on the other hand spoken and written English are not quite the
same.

[Gość: together]

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.

[Gość: Wojtek]

I'd say that the guy speaks English fluently (or is fluent in spoken English)
but to "be fluent in English" suggests slightly more than just that, wouldn't
you agree?

[tomasz_84]

sure it does

[Gość: mamosz]

Boys, stop showing off will you? Of course it is possible. Fluency means that
you have no difficulty in communication- so you have rich vocabulary and
instinctively use sufficient grammar forms .That doesn`t mean that given a
sheet of paper titled EXAM and set of crazy sentences you have neve seen or
heard before, you`ll be able to do it. Not to mention the differences between
spoken and written Englishes.The methodology of english teaching uses the
division between fluency and accuracy suggesting focusing rather on the first
one.Fluency is MORE important than accuracy when we speak of everyday use of
the language.

[Gość: together]

Thank you mamosz. You've made my case for me. Wojtek say something, damn it.

[Gość: Wojtek]

Gość portalu: together napisał(a):

> Thank you mamosz. You've made my case for me. Wojtek say something, damn it.

What can I say, 'together'? Poor me, alone, against the two of you with your
Englishes... But 'mamosh' is right when he talks about showing off... I feel.

[Gość: mamosz]

Englishes -meaning American,British,Canadian Australian etc English,....boys !

[Gość: erwas]

Gość portalu: mamosz napisał(a):

Fluency is MORE important than accuracy when we speak of everyday use of
> the language.

so you DO agree with whatshisface's post (accent, accent, accent, accent!!!!!!).

just sound good, never mind the structure, intelligibility or content.

erwas

[mamosz]

Gość portalu: erwas napisał(a):

> Gość portalu: mamosz napisał(a):
>
> Fluency is MORE important than accuracy when we speak of everyday use of
> > the language.
>
> so you DO agree with whatshisface's post (accent, accent, accent,
accent!!!!!!)
> .
>
> just sound good, never mind the structure, intelligibility or content.
>
> erwas
No I don`t. I just said that it is possible to be quite fluent (not being
particulary accurate) and fail the exam.

[maggie7]

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: Wojtek]

maggie7- I've always thought that my English was... well... proficient
but now I doubt it. I, too, have never heard about 'present progressive'...?
Do you mean 'present continuous'?

Regards

[maggie7]

Gość portalu: Wojtek napisał(a):

>
> maggie7- I've always thought that my English was... well... proficient
> but now I doubt it. I, too, have never heard about 'present progressive'...?
> Do you mean 'present continuous'?
>
> Regards

Wojtek, 'present progressive' is the same as 'present continuous'

:o) take care

[Gość: dunno]

maggie7 - you've hit the nail right on the head.

My friend from the US says "y'know, Americans are lazy." It concerns not only
grammar rules, but most parts of a life, except... work itself, LOL. When I
asked him the other day what did he think of potential war with Saddam, his
answer was "my attitude is like <whatever>"

[Gość: Wojtek]

Why do you hang out with ignorant asses?

[Gość: cassius]

what a pity people that you use or rather overuse english vocabulary that much,
but the conclusion for me is pretty simple - you just don;t know
what 'register'is :)

[Gość: Sir Mixalot]

Cassius. You is the man!

[Gość: hub]

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]

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]

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: Guppy]

Right on!

[Gość: Rena]

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: Wojtek]

Sorry, banged it! It's Wojtek, not Rena; The previous one I mean.

hej

[Gość: burak]

woitek bez portek

[Gość: Rena]

> 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: Wojtek]

No, you don.t. And you know it.
Regards

[Gość: anita]

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!!

[Gość: Mixon]

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]

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]

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: Wojtek]

hub, you wicked man, it's no good saying "That is right!!!" when it clearly
isn't. For starters, you could tell us why, having started it, you never
bothered with this thread untill now. And what do you mean by that remark? What
is right?

[Gość: Latka]

I hear quite often that I am fluent in spoken english, even if I doubt it.
Broadly speaking fluency is always go with proper grammar, when you know the
rule it's easy to keep conversation fluently....

[Gość: nat]

What a lot of bull! Your English is far from satisfactory, never mind good.
It's back to school for you dear.

[Gość: Prezes]

Gość portalu: nat napisał(a):

> What a lot of bull! Your English is far from
satisfactory, never mind good.
> It's back to school for you dear.

Sorry Latka, I have to agree with nat.

[Gość: anitka]

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?



How do you think is possible?

[Gość: nat]

You can't be fluent in English if you spell it with a small letter. And exams
are never grammatical - histerical maybe in your case. Plough on - it is
entertaining.

LET me SAY

[Gość: hu]

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]

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: hub]

>
> 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.
>

You just shallowed what I said. read my response again

greet..

[Gość: Wojtek]

hu, are you hub? Really? I need to know!

[Gość: hub]

Gość portalu: Wojtek napisał(a):

> hu, are you hub? Really? I need to know!

yes I am!!!

[Gość: hub]

Gość portalu: Wojtek napisał(a):

> hu, are you hub? Really? I need to know!

yes I am!!!

[Gość: Wojtek]

Gość portalu: hub napisał(a):

> Gość portalu: Wojtek napisał(a):
>
> > hu, are you hub? Really? I need to know!
>
> yes I am!!!

Hub, you wicked creature, what a Prooogreess! Congratulations! How did you do
it?

[Gość: hub]

Gość portalu: Wojtek napisał(a):

> Gość portalu: hub napisał(a):
>
> > Gość portalu: Wojtek napisał(a):
> >
> > > hu, are you hub? Really? I need to know!
> >
> > yes I am!!!
>
> Hub, you wicked creature, what a Prooogreess! Congratulations! How did you
do
> it?


I do not know what you mean, Adalbert (Wojtek)
do we know each other??

[Gość: Wojtek]

Don't think so. I simply meant the progress you've made since you started this

[Gość: Bert]

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: Woytek]

Zzzzzzzzzz... What? Aah, thank you very, very much indeed, Bert.

[Gość: hub]

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: Bert]

I am not allowed to comment on my ID.

[Gość: Wojtek]

Why not? Sensitive stuff? Government job?

[Gość: erwas]

Gość portalu: Bert napisał(a):

> I am not allowed to comment on my ID.

I too would like to join the chorus of applause for your stirring, ripping-
gripping post (especially liked the insightful bits about Maggie 7's friend and
the physicist).

a for your ID...enough has been said in a previous thread.

erwas

[Gość: nat]

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!

[Gość: Wojtek]

Bril

[Gość: Miszcz]

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORIIIIIIIIING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Let's talk about something else,ey?

[Gość: nat]

Splendid notion - how about under-water basket weaving? Might brighten up the
forum no end!