# Behold! The native speaker has, erm, spoken...



## danielfranco

I've noticed in the General Vocabulary forum that when there's a discussion about the most appropriate interpretation and translation of a term, everybody seems to salaam a bit when a "native speaker" weighs in with his opinion.
Now, I understand it is important to get a "field" perspective of the term's usage by a person who has it as part of his mother tongue, and sometimes very minute and subtle details come to light not through any dictionary search but through the contributions of people that use the term in every-day life.
Fine.
Well done, I say.

But it bothers my skeptic soul a little bit (poor black thing it is) that a native seems to get all kinds of "cred" just for being a native. I have seen many many many many instances when the foreigners of a language are correct and the native is mistaken or just doesn't know, and still everyone in the thread will carry on assuming that the native's opinion is the gold standard.

[and finally, the question:]

I'm sure this also happens in the other languages' forums, but are you guys more critical or skeptical about the imperturbability of a "native's" seemingly correct opinion? Or are you as accepting of his "correctitude" as we are a lot of times down in General Vocabulary?
And how does that relate to culture? I mean, do you think that this attitude of trusting something about someone because of where he was born has to do with upbringing or social expectations?
Thank you for your time and consideration.


----------



## Etcetera

In the Slavic Languages Forum, if someone asks even the simplest quesion about some word or sentence in Russian, there's usually a pretty long discussion. There are several native speakers of Russian here (including myself), and very often we have different opinions. Or, if there's a translation request, we can simply come up with our own versions. They will be rather different, of course. When I happen to be the first to answer to a translation request, I usually advise the starter of the thread "to wait for other natives ' maybe they'll suggest something better".
I really like it. This way we can give more full and detailed answer. And besides, we also learn something about our own native language. 
And I've noticed that sometimes, when we natives may experience difficulties with answering something, there is some student of Russian who comes and explains the thing.


----------



## Brioche

I respect the opinion of *native speakers* who are *educated* and *linguistically aware.* 

But I want all three characteristics.


----------



## Little_Little

Hi!
Well, I have to say that I normally trust more native speakers... For me it's quite obvious why though. Sometimes it can also happen that the native is mistaken, for example with very specific terms, but in normal usage of language this doesn't happen...

Let me explain myself. My mother tongue is Catalan, and I am also considered as a native speaker of Spanish. And I really have a perfect Spanish, normally I don't make some grammatical mistakes that most Spanish speakers make. But on the other hand, I have a small lack of agility and sometimes vocabulary (that I know, but I never use), and it's so small that even other Spanish speakers can't notice, but I can... 

That's why I always tend to trust more "native native speakers"...!


----------



## Bonjules

Daniel,
It seems similar to the somewhat magical trust
we have in s. o. who's 'been there' ("Don't tell me. I've been to Zwaziland") or 'know' somebody( "I knew JFK. He would never have done that").
I think it makes us very comfortable if we can justify
relying in someone else's judgement.
saludos


----------



## clipper

Surely its fairly clear if a native speaker knows what their talking about. If the question is specifically about grammar, then we are (generally) talking about right/wrong answers which can be checked.

When asking about usage or interpretation of words, surely the natives will be more corect than not, simply through experience. 

I consider myself to have a fair grasp on my own language, but still I have tried to correct people in the use of words, only to be ignored, or overruled by non-natives. So be it, this is a public forum.

One thing that leads to problems is the lack of information in the original consultation, for example most questions about the English language do not mention the target audience (UK, USA, Australia etc) which also can invalidate native speakers' comments.


----------



## danielfranco

Etcetera said:


> In the Slavic Languages Forum...
> [...]
> This way we can give more full and detailed answer. And besides, we also learn something about our own native language. And I've noticed that sometimes, when we natives may experience difficulties with answering something, there is some student of Russian who comes and explains the thing.



Alright, Etcetera! Maybe I'll start posting that corollary in every single post I, erm, post... "Wait for further opinions." Das' cool, ya hear?



Brioche said:


> I respect the opinion of *native speakers* who are *educated* and *linguistically aware.*
> 
> But I want all three characteristics.



Bueno, Mr. Brioche, if I steal an idea from Etc., I'll steal one from you, too, and advise anyone to look for those three qualities in natives' replies.



Little_Little said:


> That's why I always tend to trust more "native native speakers"...!



And I'm not asking anyone to NOT trust a native. What I mean is that even a native's opinion must be taken with a grain of salt, but often isn't. And I'll give you a personal example why: I've resided in the USA longer than I ever lived in my country of origin, México (lindo y querido). So by now I'm more proficient in my adopted language than in my mother tongue. Should you trust my Spanish just because I was born in Mexico?
(Heck, yes, of course!)  [just kidding...]


----------



## danielfranco

Bonjules said:


> I think it makes us very comfortable if we can justify
> relying in someone else's judgement.



Ah, pretty good clue about the motivations of this kind of attitude.



clipper said:


> One thing that leads to problems is the lack of information in the original consultation, for example most questions about the English language do not mention the target audience (UK, USA, Australia etc) which also can invalidate native speakers' comments.



That's a very important point, clipper: hopefully this current "English Only Forum's Crusade Against Context-less Threads" will be so successful that will be implemented across the board. That will (probably) make people ask the important part of the question: 
"When you are in England, how do you say in English...?" So that if an English native from England tells you something different than what the ESL guy who lives in a different continent altogether says, then you can choose the more _opportune_ answer with virtually a 100% probability of being correct.


----------



## lsp

I've seen natives make some terrible mistakes in grammar and spelling. I've seen non-natives ask questions because of something they read or saw (in a a movie, often) which turned out to be a native using an expression or word incorrectly. That said, the benefit of hanging around a forum is that you get the chance to evaluate even members after a while. I've also found that if another native will come along if one native's answer is questionable.


----------



## Paulfromitaly

Brioche said:


> I respect *(and hold in great consideration)* the opinion of *native speakers* who are *educated* and *linguistically aware.*



I agree with Brioche's attitude.



lsp said:


> the benefit of hanging around a forum is that you get the chance to evaluate even members after a while.



This is another thing I usually do.

I like to have a very respectful yet rational approach to what natives say, especially when it's a matter of grammar or regional use of words, whereas when it's about proof reading a text or see whether it sounds natural or not I just stick to what natives suggest.


----------



## cuchuflete

danielfranco said:


> Ah, pretty good clue about the motivations of this kind of attitude.
> 
> 
> 
> That's a very important point, clipper: hopefully this current "English Only Forum's Crusade Against Context-less Threads" will be so successful that will be implemented across the board. That will (probably) make people ask the important part of the question:
> "When you are in England, how do you say in English...?" So that if an English native from England tells you something different than what the ESL guy who lives in a different continent altogether says, then you can choose the more _opportune_ answer with virtually a 100% probability of being correct.



Thanks for raising this series of interrelated questions, Daniel.  Reading a thread in a language forum is, to my way of thinking, like the good/bad old days, when one could go into the stacks of a library, and pick books off the shelves, scan them, and then take notes from the most appropriate ones.
The first book might have a viewpoint that was just half the truth, or it might have been written by a well-intentioned amateur, and published by a vanity press.  Discretion on the part of the reader or researcher is a key ingredient in finding a useful solution.

Consider the seemingly endless debates about castellano and español as the name for a language.  If we have this much earnest, honest disagreement about the name of a language, clearly there is room for more than a single viewpoint about the meaning of other words and phrases.

I chuckle every time some native posts in English Only, telling me and others that a word is a rarity in my language, or that it is recent slang, in use since 1998.  I often notice that such statements are made by foreros under the age of twenty, who haven't come across a word common for my generation, or one that was very popular in the 1970s, fell out of use for a while, and was "rediscovered" by another crop of budding English speakers. Context and background, as you point out, include the attributes of the person giving an answer.

We had a recent EO thread in which some U.K. natives differed about the frequency of use of certain prepositions—different _from_, different to, and different _than_.  AE usage is different from BE usage, which in turn has varying regional patterns.  

What should the language learner do with this variety of sincere correct, partially correct, and sometimes incorrect answers?  First, beware of dogmatic replies.  When a forero adamantly declares "how it is" using terms such as 'always' and 'never', it is wise to wait a little.  Other people are apt to come along and point out exceptions and regional differences.  

Take Brioche's advice to heart.  Having done that, consider that some of the more knowledeable contributors make mistakes now and then.  

To your other question—What does acceptance of "native speaker" status as the sole requirement for credibility tell us about the person asking a question? We could, and perhaps should, spend many threads on that one.  

We have a spectrum of attitudes among students.  Some come here to seek confirmation that their textbook or teacher is wrong.  Others hold up an antiquated or badly written grammar book as the ultimate authority, in the face of consistent opposition from native speakers from many countries.  Still others get flustered by distinctions between correct grammar, and idiomatic use of language.  



Behold! The native speaker has, erm, spoken... —Daniel Franco

For every difficult problem there’s a solution that’s simple, neat and

 wrong.  —H.L. Mencken


----------



## badgrammar

Now this is a good subject.  My two bits:  Language, although it has rules, is not a science - the rules my dear old English teacher Maggie taught me, are not the same rules other teachers taught their students.  

Although words have standard definitions, they are not always understood or used in the same way by all native speakers.  Native speakers make lots and lots and lots of mistakes - or atleast they say things that other native speakers consider incorrect.  And when folks start lookin for proof of who is right, well, proof is often very hard to come by and just as often, contradictory.  We all know for sure that 2=2=4, and can prove it.  But I can't, for the life of me, prove my conviction about the correct use of "among" vs. "amongst".  And is that "use" or "usage"? 

So, in response to dear Daniel's question, as a native speaker of English with (aren't I presumptuous?) all the qualities spelled out by Brioche, I can guarantee that I am quite often quite wrong.  But that does not mean I want to do away with my authority, and so will continue to ask you all to throw down your swords when I sweep into a thread.


----------



## Etcetera

lsp said:


> I've seen natives make some terrible mistakes in grammar and spelling.


Yes, it happens. 
To say the truth, there aren't too many Russians who speak perfect Russian. I'm not referring to any of my fellow forer@s, but in "real life", so to say, I hear people speaking such awful Russian that it's truly hard to believe that they're natives of the language.


----------



## justjukka

I don't know about credibility.  Often times the native speaker will say, "Don't use formal language; you just get weird looks."  Well, I always use formal language in English, I still get funny looks, but this is part of my upbringing.


----------



## ireney

That does bring to mind the request seen a few times for "only native speakers" to reply even when the question is such that anyone with a good knowledge of English could answer to (I almost never reply to questions about slang anyway by the way).

It seems that in Greek at least the situation is the same. Native speaker replies - answer is consider right even if sometimes (and I am not talking about this forum only) the native speaker is clearly one who, as a student of mine in former days, would barely pass the Language course.

The funny thing is that sometimes the best answer comes from non native speakers that knows  X language well (or at least the specific aspect of the language the question is about) since they see it from the perspective of someone learning the language and all its little quirks.


----------



## danielfranco

lsp said:


> [...] That said, the benefit of hanging around a forum is that you get the chance to evaluate even members after a while. I've also found that if another native will come along if one native's answer is questionable.


 
I hadn't meditated upon this aspect of the topic: mostly, when there are situations when people gush "oh, he's a native, surely he's right!" those are forer@s who haven't been long with us, and have no way to gauge how well (or, as in my case, how badly) we speak our own language.



Paulfromitaly said:


> [...] I like to have a very respectful yet rational approach to what natives say, especially when it's a matter of grammar or regional use of words, whereas when it's about proof reading a text or see whether it sounds natural or not I just stick to what natives suggest.


 
Good idea, but I guess we must keep in mind that a native from even as little as a few dozen miles away from us will probably have some different ideas as to what actually is "natural-sounding"! A quick example: people in East Texas have some different ways of expressing the same concepts as people from North Texas, and what sounds natural to East Texans might sound antiquated or forced to North Texans, and they're all in the same state in the USA!



cuchuflete said:


> [...]First, beware of dogmatic replies. When a forero adamantly declares "how it is" using terms such as 'always' and 'never', it is wise to wait a little. Other people are apt to come along and point out exceptions and regional differences.
> ...
> We have a spectrum of attitudes among students. Some come here to seek confirmation that their textbook or teacher is wrong. Others hold up an antiquated or badly written grammar book as the ultimate authority, in the face of consistent opposition from native speakers from many countries. Still others get flustered by distinctions between correct grammar, and idiomatic use of language.


 
That's another great clue as to the motivations of people holding native's opinion paramount.



badgrammar said:


> [...]
> ... as a native speaker of English with (aren't I presumptuous?) all the qualities spelled out by Brioche, I can guarantee that I am quite often quite wrong. But that does not mean I want to do away with my authority, and so will continue to ask you all to throw down your swords when I sweep into a thread.


 
When you majestically sweep in our midst, of course we all drop anything we are up to just to see you glide by. 



Rozax said:


> I don't know about credibility. Often times the native speaker will say, "Don't use formal language; you just get weird looks." Well, I always use formal language in English, I still get funny looks, but this is part of my upbringing.


 
And also makes you wonder if whoever says that doesn't need to get out more often, eh?



ireney said:


> [...] The funny thing is that sometimes the best answer comes from non native speakers that knows X language well (or at least the specific aspect of the language the question is about) since they see it from the perspective of someone learning the language and all its little quirks.


 
Exactly: sometimes the people who are learning the language's nuts and bolts, from the inside out, and in vivid detail are NOT the natives. The natives just kinda speak it, sometimes, _ja?_


----------



## caballoschica

The non-natives may actually know the exact rule better...because they learn it in rules, whereas the native learns it by speech and phrases they hear which may not be grammatically correct.  

Though I think a native has more of a feel for the 'fluidity' of the language in question.  They'll know what 'sounds right'.  The non-native may know the mechanics really well, but they may not be able to write poetry, so to speak, in the language.  I also like reading banter between natives when they disagree.  I know for me, it gets me to analyse English in ways I hadn't done before.  I'm sure it's the way with other natives.  

I guess I like natives' intuition and non-natives' precision (as long as they have learned that particular rule or language well). Some natives are also quite knowledgeable of their own grammar and mechanics.


----------



## danielfranco

caballoschica said:


> [...] I guess I like natives' intuition and non-natives' precision (as long as they have learned that particular rule or language well). *Even *some natives are also quite knowledgeable of their own grammar and mechanics.


 
Oooooo... Coolness.
I just added the word "even", just because I'm cheeky. But that was a pretty awsome statement. Congrats.


----------



## sabinutza

In terms of the original question, I think it has a great deal to do with culture, especially when natives deal with other natives, and less so when the interaction takes place between natives and not so's. As a native of Romanian, I will judge and evaluate the other native's proficiency first and foremost based on my  own cultural and regional bias regarding his/her provenience, even without meaning to do so. That's probably the case because Romanians make a great gigantic deal about regional heritage, the linguistic, cultural and historical traditions and stereotypes of the various areas. In English this regional divide and inherent skepticism doesn't dominate probably because those cultural rifts exist much less often than in my culture, at least. As a foreigner, Americans tend to be very careful about expressing their ideas in such a way that they won't be stepping on anybody's toes. At least, they appear so when compared to my fellow Romanians and myself.


----------



## gaer

There is very little to add.

I have often been surprised by how wrong answers given by "natives" in the English forum have been.

Occasionally I have been astounded to find out that an answer that I have given has been either partially or completely wrong. Most of the time, when I am wrong, other natives catch my mistakes and "set me right".

Natives generally give answers that reflect some sort of common usage within their own area. That doesn't mean that the usage is correct.

Sometimes non-natives try to use rules to justify anything that they write, and this doesn't always work. In some cases, the rules are too inflexible. They don't reflect the richness of the language they are learning. It is often very frustrating for natives when when they see non-natives following a rule that is _usually_ correct result in language that sounds very odd. Explaining why something that "should be right" sounds wrong is very difficult.

Non-natives are also taught rules that are wrong, and explaining why they are wrong sometimes takes a long time.

On the other hand, non-natives also quote rules that are not only correct but also thought-provoking to natives.

In general, I am interested in the thoughts and answers of people who are as ready to learn something as to teach something.

What is most important? I think that certain members prove, over time, that their answers are consistent, thoughtful, and well researched (when necessary). Those are the people I listen to closely.

Gaer


----------



## danielfranco

sabinutza said:


> In terms of the original question, I think it has a great deal to do with culture, especially when natives deal with other natives, and less so when the interaction takes place between natives and not so's.
> [...]


 


gaer said:


> In general, I am interested in the thoughts and answers of people who are as ready to learn something as to teach something.
> What is most important? I think that certain members prove, over time, that their answers are consistent, thoughtful, and well researched (when necessary). Those are the people I listen to closely.
> [...]


 

I'm only quoting the sentences that made me go, "hmmm... yes." But all contributions so far have been very thoughtful and full of insight and sage advice. I recommend reading again through most of them.

[Just skip the annoying Texan's comments, if you would.]


----------



## jefrir

I would expect a native to generally know vocabulary or informal language better, though this is not always the case; on other forums I have had my English "corrected" simply because I used BE spellings rather than AE, and some people are just bad at using their own language.
For grammar, it is far more evenly balanced; I'm pretty sure I could teach French more easily than I could English, because I have learnt it as a foreign language and have therefore learnt the rules. In English I can say if a sentence sounds right or not, but I can't always say _why._ I have trouble helping my foriegn friends with their English because I don't know the rules for things like the various present tenses; I can use them, I know when somethings wrong, but I couldn't explain systematically what the usage is.


----------



## Etcetera

jefrir said:


> I would expect a native to generally know vocabulary or informal language better, though this is not always the case; on other forums I have had my English "corrected" simply because I used BE spellings rather than AE, and some people are just bad at using their own language.


I am a native of Russian, but I don't know spoken Russian, and especially slang, that well. 
It's indeed easier for me to teach English than explain things about Russian. I've never needed any rules for Russian, because I've always spoken and written this language very well. But I had to learn quite a lot of rules for English. And I still remember some of them.


----------



## Paulfromitaly

jefrir said:


> I'm pretty sure I could teach French more easily than I could English, because I have learnt it as a foreign language and have therefore learnt the rules. In English I can say if a sentence sounds right or not, but I can't always say _why._ I have trouble helping my foriegn friends with their English because I don't know the rules for things like the various present tenses; I can use them, I know when somethings wrong, but I couldn't explain systematically what the usage is.



Very true: some foreros who can speak Italian very well and have studied Italian grammar can often explain it much clearer and better than I do.


----------



## papillon

danielfranco said:


> ...are you guys more critical or skeptical about the imperturbability of a "native's" seemingly correct opinion? Or are you as accepting of his "correctitude" as we are a lot of times down in General Vocabulary?



Thank Daniel for raising this question.
The reverence that certain forer@s display for the opinion of native speakers has been a source of constant amuzement for me, as has been an occasional mistrust of a perfectly valid opinion, just because it came from a non-native. 

And what's with dispensing advice (right or wrong) as if theirs was the ultimate word, just because their native language matches the one in the title of a particular form? I often play a mental game: when reading posts, I ignore the native language of a poster, and evaluate each post on its merits. I have found that in many cases, the most substantive posts are from non-natives.

What bothers me the most about the I-am-a-native-I-say-say-so-period attitude is that it aims to stifle (unsuccessfully  ) the pluralism of opinions. Personally, when I ask a question, I want to get as many opinions as I can. In the same vein, if I am the first responder to a post, I don't want to be the last.

As a native of Russian, I remember a long argument between another native forero and me about the pronunciation of one of the letters. This is despite the Russian language being highly uniform and despite the fact that we were raised within a mile of each other. So much for "native as the _last word_".


----------



## AuPhinger

caballoschica said:


> The non-natives may actually know the exact rule better...because they learn it in rules, whereas the native learns it by speech and phrases they hear which may not be grammatically correct.
> 
> Though I think a native has more of a feel for the 'fluidity' of the language in question.  They'll know what 'sounds right'.  The non-native may know the mechanics really well, but they may not be able to write poetry, so to speak, in the language.  I also like reading banter between natives when they disagree.  I know for me, it gets me to analyse English in ways I hadn't done before.  I'm sure it's the way with other natives.
> 
> I guess I like natives' intuition and non-natives' precision (as long as they have learned that particular rule or language well). Some natives are also quite knowledgeable of their own grammar and mechanics.



I must say "WOW", the young lady has taken the words right of my mouth, saving me the need of writing them!!  In many, many cases, the well-educated non-native speaker has a far better knowledge of formal grammar than many of us (USA, anyway) native English speakers do.  However, it does take years and years (sob) to truly learn the true "feel" of a language--for most of us, anyway.


----------



## panjabigator

It only makes more sense that rules are better known to non natives than natives.  Why on earth would a native care half the time?  Example:  Who and Whom.  I confuse myself a bunch on its correct usage and when I asked my roommates, they had no idea.  But they could explain to me why we used the subjunctive in Spanish better than my friends mom (cuban) could


----------



## karuna

I think that there is some confusion between knowing a language and knowing the subject. Let's say, you shouldn't expect that a native speaker without any previous experience or training is able to write a better sales letters or advertisements than a non-native speaker who has been selling stuff for 20 years. However, a native speaker would be better suited to evaluate such texts for readability and can indicate any potential linguistic pitfalls that could cause problems to targeted readers. 

The same goes for teaching languages. If you are a native speaker but without education how to teach, you won't be able to teach better than a non-native speaker who has extensive experience in pedagogics. However, if you are learning language in informal setting, for example, from a fellow worker or a close friend, then a native speaker has advantages.


----------



## gaer

When the American Heritage Dictionary first appeared, I remembered being fascinated with the whole idea of a Usage Panel:

link

The whole point, I think, was that usage was put to a vote, and it was considered both from the perspectives of informal and formal usage.

Instead of saying that "X" is right, "Y" is wrong, results were in percentages, and the consensus was often *for* a usage informally but *against* it formally.

This idea did not solve all problems, but it was an interesting approach, and I believe the panel still works in the same way.

To me the important thing is that even when 70% of people on the panel object to a usage, that means that the 30% who are for it can hardly be dimissed as unqualified to state an opinion. 

When our WR forums work well, we are able to form our own opinions by examing the thoughts of countless individuals in much the same way. I would say that a long thread on almost any grammatical point often reflects the same points that are mentioned in countless grammars and style sheets. If I ask a question, I may not get the best possible answer immediately, but I believe the answers are superior to those I find anywhere else if I am patient enough to wait and to examine all links offered.

Some of our members simply say, "This feels right to me". However, when other people suspect that the "feeling" is non-standard or misleading in any way, other people disagree. Sometimes disagreements are based on "counter-feelings", other times they are based on rules. 

Rather than comparing answers from natives and non-natives in a competitive way, I feel that all answers have the potential to shed light on a problem in a new and thought-provoking way.

Gaer


----------



## Countless_Individuals

gaer said:


> When our WR forums work well, we are able to form our own opinions by examing the thoughts of *countless individuals *in much the same way. I would say that a long thread on almost any grammatical point often reflects the same points that are mentioned in countless grammars and style sheets.



I fully agree that the statements of countless individuals represents reality.


----------



## danielfranco

Countless_Individuals said:


> I fully agree that the statements of countless individuals represents reality.


 
Ha! So what came first: the chicken or the egg?
I mean, did you actually register under this name for this joke specifically, or was it just serendipity that got you here? 
Anyway, the natives might object to the conjugation of "represents"... 

I'm glad to have opened this thread. The opinions, advice, and anecdotes are very entertaining and illuminating. I think sometimes we all need to vent a little and express our thoughts about seemingly unimportant topics here in the forums that still might be upsetting or annoying for some of us members. 
But most importantly, I think we need to see that, for the most part, we are almost all on the same page, no matter where we are from.
Now, if only we could get some "newbies" to take a look at this thread and similar ones....

[At least we have a brand new member already contributing to our Cultural forum. Welcome, Countless_Individuals!]


----------



## KateNicole

Daniel, my good friend!  So we meet again.  I just wanted to show you a link to a very similar thread that I had started a few months back.  Here it is.


----------



## danielfranco

Miss Kate, thank you for stopping by to visit with old friends, and also for the link which also has other links to other related threads. I see that even though AGES have passed since that time (four months - virtually an eternity here in the WRF's) we are still having some of the same issues.

You and I are of the same opinion, but you said it so much better back then....


----------



## gaer

KateNicole said:


> Daniel, my good friend! So we meet again. I just wanted to show you a link to a very similar thread that I had started a few months back. Here it is.


You made some wonderful points, so let me link back to your original post in that thread:


KateNicole said:


> I have many friends from Mexico who came to the US when they were in middle school. They're in their mid-thirties now and speak unaccented (if such a thing exists!) English, understand slang, play-on-words, sarcasm, American humor, etc. and never, ever make awkward mistakes that would be atypical of an American. Anyone who didn't know their history would never guess that they weren't born here based on the way they speak English. Considering this, couldn't they say they are native speakers, even if English was the second language they learned? Or what about children of immigrants that didn't learn English until kindergartden but are raised in English-speakign society and are actually more educated and fluent in that language than their parents? They would be native speakers, right?


In fact, I wish we could eliminate the terms "native" and "non-native" entirely. There are people who speak what I consider to be extremely fluent and idiomatically correct English with an accent. This accent shows that they have learned English later in life (or moved to a country in which English is the first language rather late), since the ability of people to mimic sounds is greatly decreased by the changes that take place in the brain during puberty.

Some of these people who have "slight foreign accents" are absolutely impossible to tell from "natives" when they write. In addition, some of them master English so completely that they put almost all other people to shame, even well educated "natives".

Gaer


----------



## ireney

Just a note: When I was referring to non-native speakers giving the best answers I wasn't referring to "ruels" per se. What I really had in mind was the "Ah, I now what you find confusing here because I've been there too" perspective which is something a native speaker does not possess. 

I recently for example had to explain something to a person whose Greek put many of my ex-students to shame; this particular thing that I explained however all my ex-students would understand intuitively and I had never had to explain before (for anyone who knows modern Greek and is interested it was the fact that in the expression "Τι μου κάνεις;" "μου" is not the object of the verb as it appears to be)


----------



## JazzByChas

Hmmm....judging from how I hear most young native speakers use English these days, I would say that they 1) either badly misuse their native language, or American English has degenerated into a "pidgen" language that I no longer recognize.

I will say that as a native speaker, I learned grammar very well, and English grammar is something I know well...but I also have learned other languages, and grammar is the same applying of rules there as well...so non-native speakers of my language could very well know the rules of grammar and definition better than I do. But I think that even among natives there is disagreement on meanings of words and phrases...which is why I like this forum...sort of opens up your language to discussion...not only by native speakers, but the world...and you get to see your language (and others) through an international context, and not just your own. 

Also, since most words in a language typically came from another, I think that the international viewpoint makes the most sense.

Just my $0.02 USD


----------



## danielfranco

Mr. Chas:
That's exactly what I wish many guys here would realize: there is no such thing as "the natives are always right, no matter what". When I started this thread there were two situations that had me vexed...

[Okay, nevermind that, tell the truth and shame the devil: many things vex me, I'm antsy... but just these two for this thread:]

Neither is the opinion of a "native" the final authority on usage (but maybe on grammar), nor is the "non-native's" (foreigner?) useless in a thread in these forums.



["... puedo ser como un metal que resuena, o un platillo que hace ruido y nada más", pareciera decir Pablo]


----------



## natasha2000

My dear Daniel,

I NEVER trust to someone ONLY because he is a native speaker, since I know very well many Serbian native speakers who don't have a clue what is right or wrong in their own mother tongue. Hell, even I myself am not always sure that I am speaking a 100% correctly.
So, if this can happen to Serbian native speakers, why then this couldn't happen to English or Spanish native speakers?

I know both languages well enough to be able to use my brains and to decide if I will believe to a "native" or not. I am very cautious and I always wait for more answers if the first "native speaker"'s answer doesn't satisfy me a 100%. I think that at this level, I have almost acquired some "sixth sense" for more or less correct answers given by native speakers. A couple of times it happened to me that I didn't believe to a native speaker and I asked for more explanation, and sometimes, I ceased only after some dozen of them were claiming the same (I am a little stubborn donkey, sometimes )... Although I am aware that sometimes I cen get on their nerves with my distrust and constant questions, I prefer being suspicuous and wait, than to trust to the first one that comes, since it also happend to me many times that I had corrected a native speaker, both Spanish and English ones.

And I agree completely with Brioche. Sometimes it is impossible to know, but being a member of a forum like WR, it takes just a few months to get to know foreros that participate. After more than one year of my presence in WR, I have foreros, both Spanish and English native speakers whose word I take for granted, and also those whose opinion is not so important for me.


----------



## danielfranco

natasha2000 said:


> [...] and also those whose opinion is not so important for me.



Yeah, we all know how you feel about me....

  

Just kidding. I guess since part of my personal religion (New Stoicism) requires me to be skeptical, I expect people will be, also. But they ain't lotsa times, and so it kinda rubs me the wrong way, ya know?

But I think it is important, when learning anything, including a language (even if it's your mother tongue), to be a bit skeptical in order to get confirmation. Now, the problem is finding a balance and learning to finally relax on the skepticism thingy when you actually have a good answer to your question. Like one of the member's sig says: "Learn to stop arguing once you've won already, dammit!"

[Sorry, got carried away... It don't say "dammit"]

[And, please be noted, many words in this post are not Standard English]


----------



## gaer

natasha2000 said:


> After more than one year of my presence in WR, I have foreros, both Spanish and English native speakers whose word I take for granted, and also those whose opinion is not so important for me.


I think this it the most important point that you made. There are people in the English and German forums (or Forums) who have given me consistently excellent advice for about two years now.

This does not mean that these people will always be right. No one is always right. But if they are wrong, if anyone else gives them any evidence that their advice is not 100% correct, they are very quick to listen.

I would say that a good "track record", humility, and a good sense of humor are what I look for. Then, if several of the people I most trust agree, usually I am in "pretty safe hands". 

Gaer


----------



## Genecks

Brioche said:


> I respect the opinion of *native speakers* who are *educated* and *linguistically aware.*
> 
> But I want all three characteristics.



Agreed. I only offer English advice because I'm somewhat aware of its linguistic parts. I know about prescriptive language vs. descriptive language and other terminology. I'm also "educated" and from America.



caballoschica said:


> The non-native may know the mechanics really well, but they may not be able to write poetry, so to speak, in the language.



Also known as "rhetoric." However, grammar is also part of a language's trivium.


----------



## mally pense

Hmmm, the only native speaker's opinion I trust is my own, and that's only because I endeavour to qualify my suggestions at every turn (not always succeeding), so I know exactly how skeptical I need to be with my own advice, and the limitations of my own knowledge in respect to English as it is spoken outside my native Cheshire.

Sometimes I cringe at things I see written by native speakers which I am certain are incorrect (or at least as certain as I can be), or which blindly assume one interpretation or context when in fact several possibilities exist in the (typically vague and wooly) question.

Also, I see a great difficulty, for myself as much as anyone else, in visualising exactly what is REALLY said in various situations, rather than what you initially imagine is said. Quite often, in real life, you imagine you say one thing when in practice you say another. (This is perhaps why some scriptwriters spend so much time observing real life interactions and end up with convincing dialogue as a result). An example from my own experience: if you were to ask me what I would say to the checkout person in a shop on completing my purchases, without having been there and deliberately observed it (as much as you can observe yourself), I might have come up with something like "thanks, bye". In fact, typically the exchange involves me saying to the shopkeeper "seeya" and them saying "seeya" back, something I probably wouldn't have predicted or imagined.

But it's not just this colloquialism which causes the difficulty here. It's quite simply that it is so difficult adopt the scriptwriter's skills and visualise realistically what the actual dialogue might be. Some of the suggestions I see, excellent though they may be in terms of grammar and vocabulary, would result in the tearing up of the script if proffered as a dramatic work. Obviously this only applies to the proportion of queries which are aimed at conversational English, but it's surprising how often even this important distinction (spoken vs written) isn't given in the initial query.

Anyway, one of the things that's so fascinating with these forums is to marvel at the unexpected as well as the more expected replies, and to see the huge spectrum of different perceptions we all have about linguistic topics which are seemingly so simply yet inevitably draw far more complex analyses and possibilities than at first seem apparent. And of course that applies to native speakers as well as non-native!

One final point, every native speaker is only a native speaker of their own particular limited subset of, and regional and cultural variation of, their nominal language. I'm an non-native speaker of American English for example (as is clear by the number of times issues arise with this in my own offerings to the forum).

So yes, be wary of the native speaker as much as you are wary of everyone else.


----------

