# Public profiles [Native language requirement]



## Oldy Nuts

I am bothered by the increasing number of posters whose only data in their public profiles is their native language. Which, on top, is often wrong. As in the case of xxx here:

xxx

who is obviously not a native speaker (or writer! ) of Spanish.

Am I alone?


----------



## TrentinaNE

No, you're not alone.  If you see this creating a problem (such as someone misrepresenting their native fluency in a way that could confuse others), I suggest using Report-a-Post to bring the individual to the moderators' attention, and asking them to PM the person about the importance of providing accurate (and with any luck, more complete) profile information. Some posters might simply not understand the importance of this issue. 

Elisabetta


----------



## Oldy Nuts

Hello Elisabetta,

I don't remember about my own registration, buy I was under the impression that some minimum information is required... In my opinion, location and native language are a great help to know the kind of writer you are addressing.


----------



## Tagarela

Olá,

I agree with Oldy Nuts, sometimes what people have in their profile doesn't seem to agree very much to reality. However, in most of cases, I don't see it as an attempt of deceiving other users, but as a king of "lazyness" to read and fulfill correctly the information. Some write the languages they are learning and so on. 

Até.:


----------



## TrentinaNE

Welll, did you come here just to air your grievance, or to do something about it?  I've offered one suggestion for dealing with the problem. What others do you have? 

Elisabetta


----------



## Oldy Nuts

To make it compulsory to fill some more details when subscribing. To penalize in some way (temporary restrictions for example for posting?) giving false or misleading information. In the case I cited (thank you Jana337 for deleting info pointing to a specific individual), the writer was obviously not a native speaker of Spanish as he claimed.


----------



## No_C_Nada

_Es posible que para algunas personas, el español sí es su lengua nativa, pero que a la edad de tres años, se mudaron a un país en donde se habla otro idioma, por ejemplo, a la China y no hayan regresado a su país natal._

_That could be the case of many whose profile we read that their native language is A, even though they have no proficiency in that particular language. They might be proficient in language B or C, their second or third language._


----------



## TrentinaNE

There is no mechanical enforcement mechanism to make people tell the truth in their profiles, and the moderators don't have time to review every one of them.  So I think the only workable option is, as I suggested above, to bring specific profiles that you think are problematic to the moderators' attention so that they can follow up with the individuals.

Elisabetta


----------



## Giorgio Lontano

Something I've noticed is that such posters generally remain Junior Members forever...

If such a forero's post count increases, do you think it would be a good idea to PM them directly? (Politely, of course)


----------



## belén

Hello Giorgio,

We do PM members directly when we suspect they are not giving us accurate information. But as Trentina very well said, with the number of members this forum handles, we can only take care of the ones we spot or another member points out to us. Then there is a process of investigation, we need to have strong arguments to tell someone we think the language stated is not his/her native tongue, and that of course takes time.

As Trentina suggested, we encourage members to report posts when they believe a member may not be telling the truth, so that we can keep a close eye to that person and take the appropriate steps.


----------



## Oldy Nuts

Elisabetta, I wasn't trying to increase the already very heavy burden on the shoulders of moderators. The first of my two suggestions above is not mod-related; a rule making compulsory some fields of the subscription form would do it. As to the second, it would of course have to rely on users reporting any false or misleading information they detect.

And I see that this discussion is taking us back to the real meaning of expressions such as "native language", "idioma materno" and the like. What _I_ would like to know about a poster is which is the language in which s/he is more fluent, regardless of where he was born or lives. Perhaps the expressions are not fortunate, as they can be easily misinterpreted if one wishes. Would it be more clear to use expressions such as "first language", with a note such as "(the language in which you are more fluent)" in the subscription form?


----------



## Giorgio Lontano

belén said:


> Hello Giorgio,
> 
> We do PM members directly when we suspect they are not giving us accurate information. But as Trentina very well said, with the number of members this forum handles, we can only take care of the ones we spot or another member points out to us. Then there is a process of investigation, we need to have strong arguments to tell someone we think the language stated is not his/her native tongue, and that of course takes time.
> 
> As Trentina suggested, we encourage members to report posts when they believe a member may not be telling the truth, so that we can keep a close eye to that person and take the appropriate steps.


 
I'm sorry Belén. My question should have read: 

_"do you think it would be a good idea for us regular members (i.e. not necessarily mods) to PM them directly? (Politely, of course)"_

Thank you.

Saludos.


----------



## TrentinaNE

Oldy Nuts said:


> a rule making compulsory some fields of the subscription form would do it. As to the second, it would of course have to rely on users reporting any false or misleading information they detect.


I suspect that imposing the first condition (compulsory data) will lead to a higher incidence of the second (bad or inaccurate data)  



> Perhaps the expressions are not fortunate, as they can be easily misinterpreted if one wishes. Would it be more clear to use expressions such as "first language", with a note such as "(the language in which you are more fluent)" in the subscription form?


I think that there are no "fool-proof" instructions. I taught MBA students at a top-notch institution for a number of years, and no matter how clear my instructions regarding assignments and class schedules were (having been modified each year to avoid the previous year's misunderstandings) someone still wouldn't get it!  

Elisabetta


----------



## mkellogg

I would like to create a drop-down menu with a list of languages that people could choose as their native language, but those who claim to be native in five languages would howl in outrage!  Sorry, I have no solution, either.

I see the only required field other than the defaults is Native Language.  The only other one that we might want to require is Gender.


----------



## Cabeza tuna

But Mike anyone have 5 Native lenguage, maybe they speak so well as a native but is like mom's you only can have one, for that reason you put another field called other lenguages right?


----------



## Oldy Nuts

Elisabetta, it is not that you have failed in redacting written instructions. It is a published fact that most people in your country and mine simply don't understand what they read. It has been shown many times that a large majority of people aren't able to follow even the simplest written instructions.

Mike, I don't have a solution either; I was hoping we might get one here through our collaborative effort. Your drop-down menu looks like a step in the right direction, and would force people to understand the real meaning of "native language", "idioma materno" and the like, specially if there is another box for "other languages".


----------



## TrentinaNE

Oldy Nuts said:


> It has been shown many times that a large majority of people aren't able to follow even the simplest written instructions.


Well, that's clearly in evidence here at WR every day.   

Elisabetta


----------



## coquis14

It might be a solution make compulsory the language field with the country flag attached , for instance: Español-Argentina ;Español-Peú ;English-Scotland... and so on.I know it's hard to apply , nevertheless.

Best regards


----------



## Hermocrates

belén said:


> Hello Giorgio,
> 
> We do PM members directly when we suspect they are not giving us accurate information. But as Trentina very well said, with the number of members this forum handles, we can only take care of the ones we spot or another member points out to us. Then there is a process of investigation, we need to have strong arguments to tell someone we think the language stated is not his/her native tongue, and that of course takes time.



I can confirm the effort mods are putting into monitoring the forums. I joined this community only recently and filled in all fields in my profile with the utmost care, but a mod PMed me nonetheless to question the truthfulness of what I had stated.  It felt really awkward (and I hope by now any doubts have been dispelled), but I must say I'm grateful for our mods' zealous commitment to these boards. It makes this place much more constructive, intelligent and informed than many other communities I visited in the past. 


Rye


----------



## Nunty

There is an on-going discussion among the mods about this issue, particularly, how to get across to people what WR means by "native language". It's difficult. Rye, I am bilingual, too, and sometimes make "non-native" mistakes in both my native languages. It's embarrassing, but there's nothing to do but the best I can. 

There is another problem, though, with people either putting as "native language" the language they use most often in daily life, which is not what we mean by the term, or--much worse--lying for one reason or another. All we can do, as belén said in post 10:



> ...with the number of members this forum handles, we can only take care of the ones we spot or another member points out to us. Then there is a process of investigation, we need to have strong arguments to tell someone we think the language stated is not his/her native tongue, and that of course takes time.
> 
> As Trentina suggested, we encourage members to report posts when they believe a member may not be telling the truth, so that we can keep a close eye to that person and take the appropriate steps.



It's a delicate issue. When we do approach someone, we do it as delicately and objectively as we can. It is often a case of misunderstanding what we mean by "native language", though, and that is easily remedied.


----------



## Oldy Nuts

Is my previous suggestion to use "first/primary language (the language in which you are more fluent)" in the subscription form too wierd?


----------



## Grefsen

Oldy Nuts said:


> Is my previous suggestion to use "first/primary language (the language in which you are more fluent)" in the subscription form too wierd?



I have always assumed that the language the foreros give as their "Native Language" is the language in which they are more fluent and that the "Other languages" are the languages they have become proficient in or are in the process of learning.  

Besides "Native Language" and "Other languages," I find that it is usually very helpful to know where someone is located and also what their gender is if for no other reason than to know whether to refer to them as a "he" or a "she."


----------



## Hermocrates

Grefsen said:


> I have always assumed that the language the foreros give as their "Native Language" is the language in which they are more fluent and that the "Other languages" are the languages they have become proficient in or are in the process of learning.



I second this. Native language should be intended as the language that comes more natural to you - the language in which you articulate your intimates thoughts, the language you dream in, the language you process data in your mind... not just a language you are very skilled in. Because no matter how fluent you are in a given language, your thoughts and mental processes will be influenced or at least filtered by your "natural" language, and this reflects in your translations, in your verbal choices, your linguistic sensitivity/perceptions and so on. 

I had a bit of a hard time when I had to decide what to write in my native language field, because I am _truly_ bilingual. (I was actually exposed to a third language in my childhood, but while I understand it too, I do not speak it, and certainly do not think or dream in it so I can't consider it a "mother language"). 
Any other languages I learnt during my life I listed in the "other languages" field. 

In addition, I don't think forer@s should call their mother language a language they were only exposed to for a brief time in their childhood, no matter how early. While one may assume the language your parents used to talk to you when you were a toddler is by default your "mother language", if after those early years you were never exposed to that language again, it can't be regarded as your native language, because you didn't actually develop a linguistic sensitivity towards it and never intimately mastered it. Native language carries connotations that go beyond a "perfect command of grammar and vocabulary" (which can't even be taken for granted with native speakers).

Just my thoughts. 


Rye


----------



## Cabeza tuna

Maybe if you add another field and the profile will be like:
Native Lenguague
Other lenguague than I speak fine
Lenguague I am learning
Or something like that.....
Or change the native word for The lenguague than I better speak....


----------



## Oldy Nuts

My point is that expressions such as "native language", "idioma materno" (in Spanish) and the like _can_ be misunderstood and taken too literally, making it easy to choose a different meaning if one wishes to. Which may be the case of those not so very few persons who give in their profiles a language they can hardly write or read as their "native" one.

As I said before, what is useful for me here is to know the language in which a participant is most fluent. Regardless of where s/he was born or which language his/her mother normally and naturally expressed herself in.


----------



## Cabeza tuna

Oldy that is also my point My BEST lenguague will be more clear than my native lenguage, also other lenguagues than I know well and lenguague than I am learning will be a very good info in the profiles.


----------



## mkellogg

I personally think that you should put the language that you received your education in for native language.  I shudder to think how bad my English would be if I have English class every school day for 12 years.


----------



## ampurdan

In case sombody did not know, giving accurate native language information is already mandatory (rules):



> 18. *Represent yourself honestly.*
> You may register with one user name only.
> Do not pretend to be someone you are not: this includes gender, nationality and native language.
> *You must provide your native language.* Who you are and where you are from is very important to understanding any translations or other language information that you provide.


Let's not forget that you cannot currently registrate in as a user of the forums without filling the "Native language" box. Obviously, the problem is what you write in it.

Coquis14, the description of "Native language" you find when you register or when you go to "Edit your details" is: 



> Native language *and the variety you speak*, such as "English - Ireland" or "Mexican Spanish" or "India - Hindi & English", etc. This field is for your mother tongue. Do not list the languages that you have learned later in life.


We moderators are very concerned about this issue. As Nun-Translator has said, we've been recently discussing it (again). Many people put languages they are studying in the native language box, other people have more obscure reasons to include there languages of which they are not obviously native speakers. We do a lot of PMing with different results. Some people realize it's wrong and change it. Some people do not even bother to answer. And no matter how hard we moderators have tried to be as tactful as possible when addressing anyone about this issue, some people just would not react well. Well, that's the human being after all, and we must allow for all kind of reactions.

In that discussion, someone brought up the idea of changing "Native language" to "First language", OldyNuts, and that's what another one responded:



> I don't like that, because logically speaking you can only have one first language. Besides, the term has multiple definitions:
> 
> *Definition based on origin*: the language(s) one learned first (the language(s) in which one has established the first long-lasting verbal contacts).
> *Definition based on internal identification*: the language(s) one identifies with/as a native speaker of;
> *Definition based on external identification*: the language(s) one is identified with/as a native speaker of, by others.
> *Definition based on competence*: the language(s) one knows best.
> *Definition based on function*: the language(s) one uses most.
> 
> (From Wikipedia)


I do not necessarily agree. What I fear is that changing "Native language" to "First language" might not be a solution. It's not unlikely that people who just don't read and fill it with all the languages they speak/study, will probably do it all the same. Ryenart, as much as I think I agree with you about what is and what is not someone’s native language, I also think that people who think the language they used to speak with some relatives, perhaps in early childhood, is one of their native languages or their native language, even though they do not really speak it as a native speaker, will probably tend to think of that language as a "first" language too.

Somebody mentioned having different boxes for languages learning and languages one speaks fluently, but let's not forget that none of those is mandatory. We may fill them in or not. It's up to every one of us. 

We ended that discussion changing some things (such as former "Languages learning", which is now "Other languages", lest people who speak languages other than their native language fluently, put them in the "Native language" box out of reluctance to label them "languages learning"). I think I’ve seen less people with wrong information ever since, but as you all know, there are still many of them. Any suggestions are welcome (especially those that lessen our amount of work) but since I feel that no matter what we do, there will still be people who do not understand or who just don’t care, please, remember Trentina’s suggestion and use the red triangle icon to call the moderators’ attention.




> the language that you received your education in for native language.


That sounds like a very à propos definition to me.


----------



## coquis14

ampurdan said:


> (rules):
> 
> Let's not forget that you cannot currently registrate in as a user of the forums without filling the "Native language" box. Obviously, the problem is what you write in it.
> 
> Coquis14, the description of "Native language" you find when you register or when you go to "Edit your details" is:
> 
> Quote:
> Native language *and the variety you speak*, such as "English - Ireland" or "Mexican Spanish" or "India - Hindi & English", etc. This field is for your mother tongue. Do not list the languages that you have learned later in life.
> 
> We moderators are very concerned about this issue. As Nun-Translator has said, we've been recently discussed it (again). Many people put languages they are studying in the native language box, other people have more obscure reasons to include there languages of which they are not obviously native speakers. We do a lot of PMing with different results. Some people realize it's wrong and change it. Some people do not even bother to answer. And no matter how hard we moderators have tried to be as tactful as possible when addressing anyone about this issue, some people just would not react well. Well, that's the human being after all, and we must allow for all kind of reactions.
> 
> .


Lo sé , gracias , mi intención no era cuestionar el gran trabajo que hacen pero de alguna manera ese campo , siendo obligatorio , está fallando.Ahora que *Oldy *mencionó ésto he notado la gran cantidad de perfiles que dicen :Spanish o_ English_ a secas .Por esa razón mencioné lo de adjuntar la bandera al idioma , es una forma de comprobar si su idioma nativo, realmente, es ese que indica.Fue solo una sugerencia que se me cruzó y se lo difícil que es a esta altura implementarla.

Saludos cordiales y gracias por la respuesta *Ampurdan*


----------



## Loob

I think "first language" might be a less emotive phrase than "native language"....


----------



## alexacohen

ryenart said:


> Native language should be intended as the language that comes more natural to you - the language in which you articulate your intimates thoughts, the language you dream in, the language you process data in your mind...


Oh, no, that definition wouldn't work.

That language would be English for me. So if that was the definition of "native language" I could very easily indicate "English" in my profile, and not Spanish. And it would be a lie.

We're back to square one: there are people who will always misunderstand, no matter how clearly the rules are written.


----------



## Hermocrates

alexacohen said:


> Oh, no, that definition wouldn't work.
> 
> That language would be English for me. So if that was the definition of "native language" I could very easily indicate "English" in my profile, and not Spanish. And it would be a lie.



I'm confused. Could you articulate please? What do _you_ mean by native language and why do you consider Spanish your native language then?




alexacohen said:


> We're back to square one: there are people who will always misunderstand, no matter how clearly the rules are written.



I agree wholeheartedly. The problem is that no matter how clearly we state the rules, they will always be still somewhat shady to some and we can't prevent that in any way. Unfortunately an expression such as "native language", like most things that are based on people's mind processes and people's intimate experience, is bound to be ambiguous by default because the definition what suits one person and their actual background won't easily suit somebody else.

If we can't aim at absolute clarity, then we should at least strive to leave as little room as possible for ambiguity.


Rye


----------



## alexacohen

ryenart said:


> I'm confused. Could you articulate please? What do _you_ mean by native language and why do you consider Spanish your native language then?


 
Because I understood "native language" to mean this:



> the language that you received your education in


 
I grew up listening to four languages at home: Spanish, English, French, Galician. But I was educated in Spanish, so Spanish is my native language.


----------



## Oldy Nuts

I have taken a quick look at what the dictionaries have to say about "native language". My quick conclusion is that mostly the expresion is associated to the language spoken most commonly in the place one was born and/or lives, and not to the language ones dominates best. I didn't see Alexa's definition, quoted from somewhere, but I only looked at a very small fraction of all the dictionaries.

Partly because of this, I made it clear that what is for me most useful to know about other participants is the language they speak and write most fluently. I even proposed to call it "*first language* (the language in which you are more fluent)".

What we have to decide is not the real meaning of expressions such as "native language" and the such. If we agree in thet we want to know what I called _first language_ of participants, then let's look for a good name for the concept, and start using tht name.

On the other hand, if we want to discuss the real meaning of "native language", I would suggest opening a new thread for it.


----------



## Joannes

mkellogg said:


> I personally think that you should put the language that you received your education in for native language. I shudder to think how bad my English would be if I have English class every school day for 12 years.


Let's all hope then that nobody that never enjoyed any education would join the forums - they don't even have a native language .


----------



## ampurdan

Joannes said:


> Let's all hope then that nobody that never enjoyed any education would join the forums - they don't even have a native language .



I'd say that anybody who can type something which makes sense has had a minimum of school education. In fact, I find it a very practical definition for the purposes of our forums.

And let's not forget that what your parents and elders teach you is also education.


----------



## alexacohen

Joannes said:


> Let's all hope then that nobody that never enjoyed any education would join the forums - they don't even have a native language .


 
There are many people who never enjoyed any education. Those people do have a native language, of course. What they don't have is the ability to read and write, and therefore they will never be able to join the forums.  Unfortunately.


----------



## Giorgio Lontano

In my opinion, what a native language is can be very well defined in the vast majority of cases. Take mine, for example. Any language that I speak other than Spanish, will always be a language I learned, no matter how fluent I can get to be in it. But then let's take the example of a person who was born in Honduras and moved to the US at age 4. Most of his/her education and even his/her contact with literature by age 24 would have been in English, even if the only language he ever heard at home was Spanish. Here the line is really vague. What's the native language of this person? Hard to say. Some would think English, since his/her environment was mainly in that language. Others would say Spanish, because it was what he/she heard at home. We can only hope that people in such situation are really interested in the objectives of the forums, and make the best choice themselves. If this is not the case, our only resource is to report them to the mods, period. Unless language tests are taken prior registration, there's no telling weather someone is lying about their native language, until it reflects in misfortunate posts.

Cheers!


----------



## Oldy Nuts

There is no way to prevent lying in any field. And the meaning of "native language" really deserves a separate thread...


----------



## panjandrum

To put this issue in perspective - my perspective ... 

Every now and then I come across a member whose "Native language" entry seems strange or misleading.  It happens rarely.
I send them a PM explaining my query and asking for comment.
Almost always the matter is resolved very quickly and easily.


----------



## Paulfromitaly

panjandrum said:


> Every now and then I come across a member whose "Native language" entry seems strange or misleading.  It happens rarely.
> I send them a PM explaining my query and asking for comment.
> Almost always the matter is resolved very quickly and easily.



Same for me.
In my experience the 95% of those who enter more than one language in the "native language" field do it by mistake and are more than willing to edit their profile and fix it.
The other 5% are either true bilingual foreros or people who claim to master more than one language as well as only a native speaker can.
They usually end up amending their profile once we have pointed out they make mistakes a native speaker would never make.


----------



## danielfranco

Allow me to offer my point of view, hoping not to come across as brusque or uncouth. I have entered for "native language" (which I can't remember what it used to say in that blank when I registered, about three years ago—or eons, in cyberspace time—because it used to say something completely different, I think, I'm not sure… Hmm [vexed]) "Tenochtitlán, Mex. Sp.", because some of my Mexican collegues insist that we "talk funny". But, if anyone is not up-to-date about the location of ancient Tenochtitlán, why should they care whence my mother tongue comes? Or, why should I care whether I know wherof I speak, in Spanish? It should be enough for them to know that I speak Spanish fluently.

Or, consider the second fact: I have lived and studied in my adopted country, in my adopted language, longer, and to a much deeper level, than in my motherland, in my mother tongue. What should I write in the aforementioned entry?

I don't believe I may be the only example of this situation in the whole WRF's.

Now, the rant is done. I agree to whatever the rules are. Just wanted to share my point of view on this issue…

D


----------



## JeanDeSponde

danielfranco said:


> I have entered for "native language" [...] "Tenochtitlán, Mex. Sp.", because some of my Mexican collegues insist that we "talk funny".


As I'm not a colleague of yours, this "native language" doesn't carry much information to me, I'm afraid...
Any further information (true bilinguism, etc.) can be stated in full profile - we all have a look at the user's full profile when in doubt!


----------



## Paulfromitaly

danielfranco said:


> Or, consider the second fact: I have lived and studied in my adopted country, in my adopted language, longer, and to a much deeper level, than in my motherland, in my mother tongue. What should I write in the aforementioned entry?


I believe you're one of those who can rightly enter

English (USA) - Spanish (Mexico) - Bilingual.


----------



## Oldy Nuts

My reason for opening this thread was my preocupation by the increasing number of participants who give their "native languages" as the *only* piece of information in their profiles. In spite of my repeated suggestions to move a discussion on the _meaning_ of the expression "native language" to a new thread, this is what participants have been discussing for the last few dozens of messages. 

Coming back to topic, and combining it with the ongoing discussion: _if_ participants are to be allowed to give _only_ this single piece of information, I suggest that we make an effort to make the information more useful. As I have said, what helps me in helping others is to know_ the language in which they are more fluent_. It is clear from the ongoing discussion that the expression "native language" is rarely used to express this concept, and is given different meanings by different participants.

If most participants think as I do that they would like to know the language in which each other participant is more fluent, then we would be left with the problem of agreeing on a name that properly and clearly describes the idea.

Incidentally, my impression is that very few people could truthfully say that they are equally fluent in two or more languages. But this is just my impression. And I wonder how many of those who have expressed they had doubts when filling the field "native language" would have doubts if they were asked in which language they are more fluent.


----------



## Joannes

ampurdan said:


> I'd say that anybody who can type something which makes sense has had a minimum of school education. In fact, I find it a very practical definition for the purposes of our forums.


Ok. _I_ think that's a strange idea for a forum that 'promotes an academic atmosphere' because that's not what any academic would understand by 'native language'.



ampurdan said:


> And let's not forget that what your parents and elders teach you is also education.


That's the point exactly. But then we're back to square one (again) because that's not what Mike was saying. Many people are not schooled in their home language, the language they were raised in, but many of them never acquire native proficiency in this language (which for many of them creates a huge frustration).

And let's not say one should _shudder_ to think how _bad_ one's language should be if that was not the instruction language of your school because it is insulting to all people that didn't have the same privileges you had - and it's not very academic, either.

The rules be the rules but _I_ hope my one neighbour would put Arabic and not French, my other neighbour French and not Dutch, and the one from across the street Kikongo and not French as their native language.

(Sorry Oldy Nuts for going off topic again - I hope a moderator could split up the thread so as to help you get your question discussed properly.)


----------



## Oldy Nuts

Joannes said:


> (Sorry Oldy Nuts for going off topic again - I hope a moderator could split up the thread so as to help you get your question discussed properly.)



I have had threads deleted for going off topic, and I see some moderators contributing to the confussion in this one...


----------



## Loob

Oldy Nuts, I think your post 1 (repeated below) had two strands to it, not one - and the strand given more prominence was actually the "misleading native language" one

It's not surprising, then, if people have focused on the second strand rather than the first!



Oldy Nuts said:


> I am bothered by the increasing number of posters whose only data in their public profiles is their native language. Which, on top, is often wrong. As in the case of xxx here:
> 
> xxx
> 
> who is obviously not a native speaker (or writer! ) of Spanish.
> 
> Am I alone?


----------



## Oldy Nuts

Well, that's one way of interpreting my initial message, although I find it difficult to read in it an invitation to discuss the meaning of "native language".

My reference to wrong "native languages" was due to the also increasing number of participants who give languages in which they have difficulties in making themselves understood as their native languages. Obviously, I was unaware then that some people may take the expression literally to mean the language of the country in which they were born, even if they cannot say "hello" in it.

If participants in this thread see it fit to continue discussing the many meanings one can give to the expression "native language", it's their privilege. It only means I will have to open a new thread to discuss my original topic, being more careful in wording it in the light of what has been written here.


----------



## ampurdan

The meaning or the definition we give to "native language" here is material to make people put in the "native language" box what is useful to know for the rest of us. So it's not at all off-topic in this thread.

We could use any of the terms explained here and perhaps even others. They all have advantages and drawbacks _for our purposes_. I simply said that if we used "the language in which you were educated" as the definition you find when you register in the forums, it would be more clear (it's not just the language your relatives spoke, but the language you've been using at home and at school). And for the purposes of this forum it's useful because it seems obvious to me that here won't come any person that has not received any education.

Excuse me if I did not make myself understood.


----------



## Loob

Oldy Nuts said:


> It only means I will have to open a new thread to discuss my original topic, being more careful in wording it in the light of what has been written here.


Well, assuming you want to focus on the question "what is the minimum information posters should put in their profiles?", I think I disagree with your earlier suggestion that "location" is vital as well as "native language".  For many (most?) people, their current location has no bearing on the language variety they speak.


----------



## brian

Oldy Nuts said:


> My reason for opening this thread was my preocupation by the increasing number of participants who give their "native languages" as the *only* piece of information in their profiles. In spite of my repeated suggestions to move a discussion on the _meaning_ of the expression "native language" to a new thread, this is what participants have been discussing for the last few dozens of messages.
> 
> Coming back to topic, and combining it with the ongoing discussion: _if_ participants are to be allowed to give _only_ this single piece of information, I suggest that we make an effort to make the information more useful. *As I have said, what helps me in helping others is to know the language in which they are more fluent. **It is clear from the ongoing discussion that the expression "native language" is rarely used to express this concept*, and is given different meanings by different participants.



What?! Are you saying the a person's "native language" is rarely the language in which that person is most fluent? I would say that it's not only not rare, but it's the norm!

Or are you saying that "native language" is rarely the term used to refer to the language in which a person is most fluent? Even here I would disagree, but as you say, it is a matter of opinion and people do see it differently. See below.



			
				Oldy Nuts said:
			
		

> If most participants think as I do that they would like to know the language in which each other participant is more fluent, then we would be left with the problem of agreeing on a name that properly and clearly describes the idea.



Basically, as it stands, "native language" (including local variety) is the only required profile field. And since there is no intention to change that, at least for now, and as far as I know, then as you said the argument comes down to agreeing on a name. But if we are going to be talking about names--be they "native language," "first language," "most comfortable language," whatever--then we are inevitably going to be talking about the _meanings_ of these names (otherwise how do we get anywhere?). Thus, discussion of the meaning of "native language" is perfectly relevant and normal here. If anything, instead of pushing for a new thread, we should just change the thread title. 

Here's the deal:

1) we have to choose a term
2) we've chosen "native language" and given a short description; it's not perfect, but no term is. Hundreds of books in linguistics have been written on the subject, and linguists still can't agree what's what and how to call it; do you think we will?
3) in the grand scheme of things, there really are not very many problems; but when problems do occur, we deal with them on a case-by-case basis because that's what we have to do. Again, you can help by reporting.

I know your main concern is knowing in what language a person is "mostly fluent/fluent to the most degree"... but what does _that_ even mean? Like I said, it's generally the case that a person's native, home language _is_ the language in which they are most fluent. If not, the truth comes out on the forums, and we deal with it, case-by-case.



Joannes said:


> Many people are not schooled in their home language, the language they were raised in, but many of them never acquire native proficiency in this language (which for many of them creates a huge frustration).



Again, we're dealing with some generalization: it's generally the case that the language a person was schooled in (from early childhood on) is the language in which that person is most fluent/proficient. That's not to say it's 100% always the case! When it comes to these people, it's a sticky (and like you said, frustrating) subject, and we deal with it case-by-case as well as we can. No change in terminology will alleviate this problem.

And I'm not willing to write the WRF treatise on "What is native language."


----------



## Giorgio Lontano

Loob said:


> Well, assuming you want to focus on the question "what is the minimum information posters should put in their profiles?", I think I disagree with your earlier suggestion that "location" is vital as well as "native language". For many (most?) people, their current location has no bearing on the language variety they speak.


 
It could, however, give you a hint on the language variety they are learning.   Obviously, this is not a general rule, which is why I agree that there's no need for this field to be mandatory. Besides Native Language? Knowing the gender would be nice, to avoid saying "thanks girl!" to a guy nicknamed "Gasolina". 
 
Cheers!


----------



## Oldy Nuts

> What?! Are you saying the a person's "native language" is rarely the language in which that person is most fluent?



No. I'm saying that "native language" has many possible interpretations, not all of which coincide with the idea of the "language in which one is more fluent". Just take a look at what has been posted in this thread, and to what the dictionaries say about the matter. It is obvious that there is no general consensus.


----------



## brian

I've read the entire thread and consulted many dictionaries (we mods discussed this very issue for _months_). I perfectly agree with you that "native language" has many interpretations--see (2) in my post above.

My point: no term is perfect. We've picked one that seems to work well most of the time, and when it doesn't, we deal with the cases one-by-one.

Obviously discussion is up for other possible terms--though, like I said, no term will be perfect--but you started refusing to talk about that in this thread. Or have I misunderstood?


----------



## loladamore

mkellogg said:


> I would like to create a drop-down menu with a list of languages that people could choose as their native language, but those who claim to be native in five languages would howl in outrage!


 
I like the drop-down option. Would it be possible to have two menus so that we mere mortals could choose one language and "true" bilinguals (whatever that means) could choose both of their native language varieties? 


Or perhaps we should be forced to choose between true and faux bilingual status...


----------



## Nunty

Could I have my very own "semilingual" check box please?


----------



## Hermocrates

Nun-Translator said:


> Could I have my very own "semilingual" check box please?



*jumps on bandwagon* Could I have my very own "dyslexic" check box? 

Honestly, I'm badly dyslexic and this affects my writing and my reading comprehension more than any native language influences or my current geographical location (which in fact has nothing to do with my actual cultural/linguistic background) possibly can.  

Rye


----------



## alexacohen

ryenart said:


> *jumps on bandwagon* Could I have my very own "dyslexic" check box?
> 
> Honestly, I'm badly dyslexic


 
So am I !

Could we have our own sydlexic box, please?

This discussion will lead us nowhere; people are people, and there will always be people who misunderstand. There's no way to avoid that, the same that there is no way Ryenart and I can avoid being dyslexic.


----------



## Miguel Antonio

ampurdan said:


> We do a lot of PMing with different results. Some people realize it's wrong and change it. Some people do not even bother to answer. And no matter how hard we moderators have tried to be as tactful as possible when addressing anyone about this issue, some people just would not react well. Well, that's the human being after all, and we must allow for all kind of reactions.


I once received a polite PM from a Mod because I had stated my native language to be "Joint & several", and that this was misleading. I immediately changed it to what you may see now in my profile, and in less than a week I received another PM from another Mod asking whether English was my native language or was it a language I am learning. I confess I felt somewhat offended, and my reaction that of a "wounded animal", and I bit back.


----------



## Paulfromitaly

Miguel Antonio said:


> I once received a polite PM from a Mod because I had stated my native language to be "Joint & several", and that this was misleading. I immediately changed it to what you may see now in my profile, and in less than a week I received another PM from another mod asking whether English was my native language or was it a language I am learning. I confess I felt somewhat offended, and my reaction that of a "wounded animal", and I bit back.



You shouldn't be offended 
You just need to enter the correct information:

*Spanish (Spain) - English (UK) - bilingual*

By doing so you make sure people don't assume you're one of those who made a mistake in filling their profile in.
You will agree with me that "Joint & several" is not exactly accurate


----------



## Miguel Antonio

How can I describe myself as being bilingual when I speak four languages on a day-to-day basis? and manage to get by in another two-thirds and a quarter of another two -respectively and respectfully- and feel at ease if I were to have to survive in an environment requiring the use of a further two, non European languages?


----------



## elroy

Miguel Antonio said:


> How can I describe myself as being bilingual when I speak four languages on a day-to-day basis? and manage to get by in another two-thirds and a quarter of another two -respectively and respectfully- and feel at ease if I were to have to survive in an environment requiring the use of a further two, non European languages?


 _Bilingual_, for our purposes, means that one is able to use two languages with native ease, that one has been speaking two languages since early childhood - two languages he/she effortlessly acquired without learning the formal rules of either - and that one therefore has a native intuition in both languages.

This does not necessarily mean that one can speak both languages perfectly.  Interference is inevitable, both between the two languages and between the two languages and other languages the speaker has learned.  Furthermore, one may in fact gain proficiency in a third language and become more fluent in it than one of his native languages, but that doesn't make that third language a native language.  It's not (only) about proficiency.


----------



## Hermocrates

elroy said:


> _Bilingual_, for our purposes, means that one is able to use two languages with native ease, that one has been speaking two languages since early childhood - two languages he/she effortlessly acquired without learning the formal rules of either - and that one therefore has a native intuition in both languages.
> 
> This does not necessarily mean that one can speak both languages perfectly.  Interference is inevitable, both between the two languages and between the two languages and other languages the speaker has learned.  Furthermore, one may in fact gain proficiency in a third language and become more fluent in it than one of his native languages, but that doesn't make that third language a native language.  It's not (only) about proficiency.



This was exactly my point too. (post #23) I agree wholeheartedly.


Rye


----------



## sokol

brian8733 said:


> And I'm not willing to write the WRF treatise on "What is native language."


But _I_ am.
Where, please, can I post my Tractatus Lingua Patria? ("Father-Language" here.  I only wait for Brian to correct my Latin.)

But honestly.

Native language isn't even easy for monolinguals in some cases. What abot, say, a Scot who grew up speaking Scots only as a kid and then has to discover at school that learning a _foreign _language is required of him which is supposed to be his _native _language.
This would lead to discuss the concept of language - what is language now?
(A language is a dialect with an army and navy. )

It is of course much more difficult for people who relocate when they're adult - be it as migrants or as business people living in four cities simultanuously. Many migrants living in Vienna neither are perfect in the native language of their parents (of which, many times, they only know dialect and even there show interference) nor in the German language of the environment surrounding them.
And what about Arnold Schwarzenegger who speaks German with a strong American accent and his English (at least to my ears) still has an Austrian tilt even though he seems to try very hard to sound American.

Now do Arnold Schwarzenegger (more proficient in American English than in Austrian German) and migrants living in Vienna don't have a native language ('anymore')?

To circumvent this in Austria (also in Germany I think) a distinction is made between "first language" and "second language" for migrants: i. e., a Turkish migrant (whose parents were born and raised in Turkey but who grew up in Vienna) would have as "first language" Turkish and as "second language" German.

He might identify more with Turkish or more with German (that differs and depends on personality) but the German courses he attends to at school are called "Deutsch als Zweitsprache - German as second language" and thus avoids to attach identity to language.
(If he were to be more proficient in German than in Turkish he probably would think of German as first and Turkish as second language - but then he wouldn't need a course for German as a 'second' language - thus, no problem either way.)

A possibility could be to enable in the profile a choice for true bilinguals: first and second (and third) language.
Only problem is that some foreros might just make fun of such a feature (and thus create even more work for us moderators).

Further this still would not solve the problem how we moderators should assess if a forero has given his 'native' (two, three etc.) languages correctly.

And when discussing this please don't forget that probably 95% of registered users simply have _one _native 'language' (broadly speaking). What we are discussing here is about the remaining (probably) 5% who are not happy with the current solution.


My overall conclusion, now that I've written these lines, therefore is: why not stick to one field, "native language" - keep it simple and contact foreros carefully if doubts arise.

It is not a perfect solution; but it isn't *that *bad either, is it?


----------



## Giorgio Lontano

sokol said:


> But _I_ am.
> Where, please, can I post my Tractatus Lingua Patria? ("Father-Language" here.  I only wait for Brian to correct my Latin.)
> 
> [...]
> And when discussing this please don't forget that probably 95% of registered users simply have _one _native 'language' (broadly speaking). What we are discussing here is about the remaining (probably) 5% who are not happy with the current solution.
> 
> 
> My overall conclusion, now that I've written these lines, therefore is: why not stick to one field, "native language" - keep it simple and contact foreros carefully if doubts arise.
> 
> It is not a perfect solution; but it isn't *that *bad either, is it?



¡Bravo!


----------



## brian

sokol said:


> But _I_ am.
> Where, please, can I post my Tractatus Lingua Patria? ("Father-Language" here.  I only wait for Brian to correct my Latin.)



I guess I'd say _Tractatus de Lingua Patria/Materna_, and be my guest.  BUT I agree more with your conclusion:



			
				sokol said:
			
		

> My overall conclusion, now that I've written these lines, therefore is: why not stick to one field, "native language" - keep it simple and contact foreros carefully if doubts arise.
> 
> It is not a perfect solution; but it isn't *that *bad either, is it?



Genau.


----------



## vale|46

Hi,

Sorry guys, but I still fail to see the logic in this as a "requirement" when it comes to learning languages.

Are you telling me that your answer to someone's question will be different because of his or her native language? 

Does it ever occur to you that some people actually want to keep this information private? Asking someone's native language is pretty much asking about their nationality.

When you buy a language learning kit, do they ever ask you about your native language? Personally, I've never seen that. When you sign up for language courses, they never ask you about your native language on the registration form, even if they do ask you, it is never a "requirement" to fill it or open to the public.

I joined recently and I put "N/A" as my native language, then shortly after, I received a PM from a Mod kindly asking me to change this information. When I put "N/A", at least I'm not lying, I'm just not telling. Do you guys realize that by forcing people to enter their native language will make those who want to keep this information private lie instead?

No offense to anyone, just stating my opinion.


----------



## ampurdan

The logic of this requirement is the same that lies underneath the fact that you will appreciate to know the native language of someone that gives you a piece of language advice, not to talk about your language teacher.

This is not a free translation service nor a service you've paid for, it's a place for:



> for exchanges about translation, word usage, terminology equivalency and other linguistic topics



So, it's a quid pro quo. You learn and you teach, that's the philosophy of these forums. Every one that signs in is potentially a learner and "a teacher". Just by writing here you are "teaching" something to learners who might mimic your language. They will appreciate to know if you are a native speaker or not.

People who want to keep this information private just don't have to tell us who they are in real life, but they need to provide their real native language. It is relevant and thence it is fair.


----------



## vale|46

ampurdan said:


> The logic of this requirement is the same that lies underneath the fact that you will appreciate to know the native language of someone that gives you a piece of language advice, not to talk about your language teacher.
> 
> This is not a free translation service nor a service you've paid for, it's a place for:
> 
> 
> 
> So, it's a quid pro quo. You learn and you teach, that's the philosophy of these forums. Every one that signs in is potentially a learner and "a teacher". Just by writing here you are "teaching" something to learners who might mimic your language. They will appreciate to know if you are a native speaker or not.
> 
> People who want to keep this information private just don't have to tell us who they are in real life, but they need to provide their real native language. It is relevant and thence it is fair.



So basically what you're saying is people will judge the credibility of an answer based on the native language of the person who answered? This is nonsense to me, because one's native language has nothing to do with how much he or she knows about a language. I've met many people who are much more knowledgeable about a foreign language than someone who is a native speaker. Just because someone is a native speaker, it doesn't automatically make that person an expert.


----------



## ampurdan

vale|46 said:


> So basically what you're saying is people will judge the credibility of an answer based on the native language of the person who answered?


No, I'm saying that it is very relevant to assess their language information.



vale|46 said:


> This is nonsense to me, because one's native language has nothing to do with how much he or she knows about a language.



If you are not willing to admit that it has something to do, I won't probably convince you with anything else I could say.



vale|46 said:


> I've met many people who are much more knowledgeable about a foreign language than someone who is a native speaker.



True, but still, the native usually has a sense of the language that the fluent non-native normally lacks.


----------



## vale|46

ampurdan said:


> No, I'm saying that it is very relevant to assess their language information.
> 
> If you are not willing to admit that it has something to do, I won't probably convince you with anything else I could say.
> 
> True, but still, the native usually has a sense of the language that the fluent non-native normally lacks.



All this still leads to the final problem that I've pointed out in my first post, it will make people who want to keep this information private lie about their native language. It's practically impossible to prove someone is lying about their native language on the Internet. So when you read someone's profile, do you prefer reading faux information or no information? Personally, I prefer the latter.


----------



## brian

1) Most people do not lie because they either agree with the philosophy/rationale or they simply don't care and so follow the rules.
2) Of the minute few who do try to lie, it actually _is_ pretty easy to prove they are lying.

Why is that? As ampurdan already pointed out, even the most fluent person in a non-native language often lacks that certain "instinct" that only a native has. We're not talking about grammar here because you do have a point, e.g. fluent non-natives can often explain minute grammar points, which they've had to consciously learn by the book, much better than natives who simply "know" it. What we're talking about is that native instinct that tells a speaker whether something sounds good/right/valid/whatever or not.

It's one of the big traditional problem in linguistics. What is that "thing," that feeling or instinct, that a native has that non-natives, no matter how long they study the language, will probably never acquire? What is it that even the best machine translators simply don't get and which cannot be programmed into it?

It's native instinct. And it helps and is important to know whether the person giving you help has it or not. So much so, in fact, that we require this bit of information.


----------



## ampurdan

I fail to think of any good reason why someone wouldn't be willing to state which is their native language. So, I also fail to see why this requisite _has to_ lead that person to lie, except out of inconsiderate unruliness.

As Brian has said, most people will tell the truth and most liars will be "caught" (and those who won't, will be so good that they will be really like natives, so who will care if they lie?). So, I think that your dichotomy is not valid, Vale46. That would be the relevant one, in my opinion: do you prefer to have more or less reliable information about native language?


----------



## Cagey

A small point, but it is relevant to English at least: 

Different varieties of English follow different grammatical rules in certain instances, and use different idioms.  If someone says that a certain usage is (or isn't) grammatical or idiomatic, it is helpful to know for which variety this holds true. 

Conversely, a usage that appears "wrong" to a speaker of one dialect may be standard in another dialect.  If we know that we are dealing with different varieties of English, we can avoid endless and unprofitable arguments about whether or not a usage is acceptable.

It seems likely that similar issues arise in other languages.


----------



## vale|46

brian8733 said:


> 1) Most people do not lie because they either agree with the philosophy/rationale or they simply don't care and so follow the rules.
> 2) Of the minute few who do try to lie, it actually _is_ pretty easy to prove they are lying.
> 
> Why is that? As ampurdan already pointed out, even the most fluent person in a non-native language often lacks that certain "instinct" that only a native has. We're not talking about grammar here because you do have a point, e.g. fluent non-natives can often explain minute grammar points, which they've had to consciously learn by the book, much better than natives who simply "know" it. What we're talking about is that native instinct that tells a speaker whether something sounds good/right/valid/whatever or not.
> 
> It's one of the big traditional problem in linguistics. What is that "thing," that feeling or instinct, that a native has that non-natives, no matter how long they study the language, will probably never acquire? What is it that even the best machine translators simply don't get and which cannot be programmed into it?
> 
> It's native instinct. And it helps and is important to know whether the person giving you help has it or not. So much so, in fact, that we require this bit of information.



1) That's only your assumption, assumption is not fact. Unless you have the actual stats about people lied or did not lie in their public profile, you cannot use this as your argument. You understand this is the Internet, right?

2) One would be pretty foolish to lie and put a native language that's far from what they know. There are so many people that immigrated to another country at a very young age, and the new language they've learned becomes pretty much like their native language but it's not their native language. Good luck trying to prove that person is lying.

I don't think you understand what I was trying to say. I'm not here to debate about native vs. non-native or their instinct. ampurdan has stated that this is a place "for exchanges about translation, word usage, terminology equivalency and other linguistic topics", people come here to offer their help, which is purely optional, it's not a requirement. So why is someone's native language a requirement? It should be optional as well, imho.


----------



## vale|46

ampurdan said:


> I fail to think of any good reason why someone wouldn't be willing to state which is their native language. So, I also fail to see why this requisite _has to_ lead that person to lie, except out of inconsiderate unruliness.



How can you fail to see about anonymity?



> As Brian has said, most people will tell the truth and most liars will be "caught" (and those who won't, will be so good that they will be really like natives, so who will care if they lie?). So, I think that your dichotomy is not valid, Vale46. That would be the relevant one, in my opinion: do you prefer to have more or less reliable information about native language?



Reliable information should always be backed up with good sources, regardless to the person's native language.


----------



## Oldy Nuts

Vale, why are you so reluctant/afraid to state your native language if you are hiding under a fake name and nobody will be able to match your language with your real personality without unreasonable efforts?

In any case, the name "native language" has been already been discussed at length in this thread. For me, at least, what helps me in helping someone else or in understanding what s/he means, is to know "the language in which s/he he is most fluent", however you name it. Knowing what other language(s) s/he is also fluent in would be a help. And certainly to know his/her whereabouts is definitenly helpful; we all know that, for example, American and British English can be quite different.


----------



## ampurdan

Oldy Nuts said:


> And certainly to know his/her whereabouts is definitenly helpful; we all know that, for example, American and British English can be quite different.



That information is about a person's native language, not about their whereabouts, but I agree: knowing the particular dialect or variety one speaks is very important.


----------



## brian

vale|46 said:


> brian8733 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1) Most people do not lie because they either agree with the philosophy/rationale or they simply don't care and so follow the rules.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1) That's only your assumption, assumption is not fact. Unless you have the actual stats about people lied or did not lie in their public profile, you cannot use this as your argument. You understand this is the Internet, right?
Click to expand...


Okay you're right, I _am_ assuming, but let's do some logic. I said most people (speaking about active users) do not knowingly lie about native language. If this were not true, it would mean that at least half of our active users _do_ lie. Now, let's assume for the moment that liars are generally easy to spot (for the reasons I gave in my first post to you), such that we do discover them sooner or later. Well, "statistically" I can tell you as a mod that the number of people we catch is low--very low--with respect to the number of active users we have. They are few and far between and do not even come close to reaching half.

Now, I guess you still don't agree that we mods, along with our very helpful foreros, are very good at spotting the liars, so let's remove our assumption. Well, then we get to a moot point: if these people are _so_ good in the languages they claim to be native in, so as not to be suspected by foreros or mods alike, then either (1) they are part of a select few learners who reach full native fluency, and, well, good for them.. they will be valuable members or (2) they have a special story/background which blurs the definition of native language (e.g. immigrated at a young age, etc.). In either case, they will be part of those people who we're okay with saying they speak that language as a native. So no big deal.

But honestly, the people who fall into this category is _not_ 50% or more of our active users. I guess you'll have to accept that on faith though.



			
				vale|46 said:
			
		

> brian8733 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2) Of the minute few who do try to lie, it actually _is_ pretty easy to prove they are lying.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2) One would be pretty foolish to lie and put a native language that's far from what they know. There are so many people that immigrated to another country at a very young age, and the new language they've learned becomes pretty much like their native language but it's not their native language. Good luck trying to prove that person is lying.
Click to expand...


Your first sentence adds to my argument above. Your second sentence is dealt with in my argument above _and_ has been dealt with elsewhere in this thread. Please re-read all the various views we as a community, and we mods, have about "native language."



			
				vale|46 said:
			
		

> I don't think you understand what I was trying to say. I'm not here to debate about native vs. non-native or their instinct. ampurdan has stated that this is a place "for exchanges about translation, word usage, terminology equivalency and other linguistic topics", people come here to offer their help, which is purely optional, it's not a requirement. So why is someone's native language a requirement? It should be optional as well, imho.



I apologize if I've misunderstood.

But I also don't understand your logic here. People optionally sign up for things with non-optional things all the time... that's the point of "optionally" signing up! You optionally agree to things all the time. I mean, you could make the same argument about anything.. "People come here of their own accord, without being forced. Why should they be forced to treat others with respect / write properly / not use foul language / etc. etc.?" They are rules.

Anyway, as to why it is a rule here, we think it's important.. for all the reasons we've stated above. I particularly like Cagey's comments.


----------



## vale|46

Cagey said:


> A small point, but it is relevant to English at least:
> 
> Different varieties of English follow different grammatical rules in certain instances, and use different idioms.  If someone says that a certain usage is (or isn't) grammatical or idiomatic, it is helpful to know for which variety this holds true.
> 
> Conversely, a usage that appears "wrong" to a speaker of one dialect may be standard in another dialect.  If we know that we are dealing with different varieties of English, we can avoid endless and unprofitable arguments about whether or not a usage is acceptable.
> 
> It seems likely that similar issues arise in other languages.



In all my posts, I've never argued or disagreed about the existence of different dialects within the same language.



Oldy Nuts said:


> Vale, why are you so reluctant/afraid to state your native language if you are hiding under a fake name and nobody will be able to match your language with your real personality without unreasonable efforts?
> 
> In any case, the name "native language" has been already been discussed at length in this thread. For me, at least, what helps me in helping someone else or in understanding what s/he means, is to know "the language in which s/he he is most fluent", however you name it. Knowing what other language(s) s/he is also fluent in would be a help. And certainly to know his/her whereabouts is definitenly helpful; we all know that, for example, American and British English can be quite different.



It has nothing to do with being afraid or not, I'm just trying to say this should be optional. If you feel your native language will be helpful to other members, then go ahead and put it. But you must understand that not everyone is comfortable with this.



ampurdan said:


> That information is about a person's native language, not about their whereabouts, but I agree: knowing the particular dialect or variety one speaks is very important.



So far, the best argument from you guys is for when someone is explaining an idiom. Couldn't someone just write about their native language in that particular post if he or she did not put it in their public profile?



brian8733 said:


> Okay you're right, I _am_ assuming, but let's do some logic. I said most people (speaking about active users) do not knowingly lie about native language. If this were not true, it would mean that at least half of our active users _do_ lie. Now, let's assume for the moment that liars are generally easy to spot (for the reasons I gave in my first post to you), such that we do discover them sooner or later. Well, "statistically" I can tell you as a mod that the number of people we catch is low--very low--with respect to the number of active users we have. They are few and far between and do not even come close to reaching half.
> 
> Now, I guess you still don't agree that we mods, along with our very helpful foreros, are very good at spotting the liars, so let's remove our assumption. Well, then we get to a moot point: if these people are _so_ good in the languages they claim to be native in, so as not to be suspected by foreros or mods alike, then either (1) they are part of a select few learners who reach full native fluency, and, well, good for them.. they will be valuable members or (2) they have a special story/background which blurs the definition of native language (e.g. immigrated at a young age, etc.). In either case, they will be part of those people who we're okay with saying they speak that language as a native. So no big deal.
> 
> But honestly, the people who fall into this category is _not_ 50% or more of our active users. I guess you'll have to accept that on faith though.
> 
> Your first sentence adds to my argument above. Your second sentence is dealt with in my argument above _and_ has been dealt with elsewhere in this thread. Please re-read all the various views we as a community, and we mods, have about "native language."
> 
> I apologize if I've misunderstood.
> 
> But I also don't understand your logic here. People optionally sign up for things with non-optional things all the time... that's the point of "optionally" signing up! You optionally agree to things all the time. I mean, you could make the same argument about anything.. "People come here of their own accord, without being forced. Why should they be forced to treat others with respect / write properly / not use foul language / etc. etc.?" They are rules.
> 
> Anyway, as to why it is a rule here, we think it's important.. for all the reasons we've stated above. I particularly like Cagey's comments.



I'm just trying to voice my opinion. When a rule is not fair or reasonable, it can always be changed, no? I'm an admin and member on other technical forums, none of which forces people to put their background or knowledge in their public profiles. Would the information be helpful to other members? Definitely, but it is optional, and that's the way it should be in my opinion. For example, on a computer help forum, there are so many brands, OSs, programming languages, etc., but it is never a requirement to tell people about your computer or knowledge. Will a model number or degree of computer science in your profile make people feel more comfortable with your answers? Maybe. Will it make you more eligible or knowledgeable than someone with nothing in their profile? Not necessarily. On motorcycle forums, it is never a requirement for me to tell people about my license or how many years I've been riding before helping others. I can always make a remark about my background on a particular post that would be relevant. Same for my native language, what would be the problem for me to make a remark on certain posts instead of my profile?


----------



## JeanDeSponde

Vale, the longer you use this forum, the more you understand how valuable this _native language_ data is. 
Because, as with the internet, the issue is not with _getting answers_. The issue is with _weighting_ them. 
It's just like quoting information from a newspaper without giving the name of the newspaper. The name in itself is not a seal of authenticity - it still is a big, valuable information.
The whole issue of this forum is not about liking or disliking a motorcycle - it is about _idioms_ and _context..._ Unless you intend to change your own context for every answer you post, why not simply state it in your profile?...


----------



## Paulfromitaly

vale|46 said:


> But you must understand that not everyone is comfortable with this.



Oh really?
I fail to see why would someone feel uncomfortable with telling us what his native language is.
I've never ever noticed any kind of discrimination against any native language on WRF so I don't see why a forero would feel so uncomfortable to the extent of lying about his native language or try to misrepresent his skills to avoid giving us information about his mother tongue.
Sometimes (rarely I must say) the problem is that some people claim to be *also* native speakers of a language they clearly do not master, but when this happens users list their native language and another language, they don't try to deny what their mother tongue is.
Please cast some light on this, if you please.


----------



## panjandrum

Just in case the point is lost in the noise ...
... native language is also very useful additional context for those who are reading and responding to questions.

When I ring the help desk with a problem the first thing they want to know is model, OS and version of software.
When I post on the car forum if I don't state model and other details that is the first thing I would get asked so those details are in my signature.  That helps the people responding to my queries and also helps people reading my answers.
When I ask about my central heating boiler I get shot down in flames if I haven't mentioned the precise make and model I am asking about (very unfriendly there, but helpful just the same ).

I cannot see any reason to conceal native language in a language forum - other than to make a point of some kind.  As I said before, this issue simply is not a problem for the vast majority of people.  In posting twice in this thread I have spent more time on the issue than in the past several years altogether.


----------



## Oldy Nuts

I could perhaps understand a reluctance/fear to publish such obvious information in a language forum if the audience was very localized and participants could be easily identified. In these forums, we have posts from all over the world, participants rarely give their real names and, even if they did, such names would mean (nearly) nothing for most of us. Just to show: a google search for my own real name gave me nearly 500,000 hits. And although common, my name is definitely not the Spanish equivalent of John Smith.


----------



## vale|46

JeanDeSponde said:


> Vale, the longer you use this forum, the more you understand how valuable this _native language_ data is.
> Because, as with the internet, the issue is not with _getting answers_. The issue is with _weighting_ them.
> It's just like citing information from a newspaper without giving the name of the newspaper. The name in itself is not a seal of authenticity - it still is a big, valuable information.
> The whole issue of this forum is not about liking or disliking a motorcycle - it is about _idioms_ and _context..._ Unless you intend to change your own context for every answer you post, why not simply state it in your profile?...



Maybe you've misunderstood my motorcycle forum example, it has nothing to do with liking or disliking a motorbike. When it comes to giving or getting advices from someone about how to ride or certain techniques, it's actually quite important if the person answering your question has good experience. But is his experience a requirement to enter in his profile? Nope.



Paulfromitaly said:


> Oh really?
> I fail to see why would someone feel uncomfortable with telling us what his native language is.
> I've never ever noticed any kind of discrimination against any native language on WRF so I don't see why a forero would feel so uncomfortable to the extent of lying about his native language or try to misrepresent his skills to avoid giving us information about his mother tongue.
> Sometimes (rarely I must say) the problem is that some people claim to be *also* native speakers of a language they clearly do not master, but when this happens users list their native language and another language, they don't try to deny what their mother tongue is.
> Please cast some light on this, if you please.



Not sure where you've been hiding, but just because you don't notice any, it doesn't mean they don't exist. If this world is exactly like you said, we wouldn't have any wars going on right now. Either way, I've no intention to debate on the subject you've mentioned, and this isn't the reason why I don't want to put my native language in my profile. There could be many other reasons that someone would like to keep his or her information private. Maybe it's related to their profession? Maybe it's related to their current situation?



panjandrum said:


> Just in case the point is lost in the noise ...
> ... native language is also very useful additional context for those who are reading and responding to questions.
> 
> When I ring the help desk with a problem the first thing they want to know is model, OS and version of software.
> When I post on the car forum if I don't state model and other details that is the first thing I would get asked so those details are in my signature.  That helps the people responding to my queries and also helps people reading my answers.
> When I ask about my central heating boiler I get shot down in flames if I haven't mentioned the precise make and model I am asking about (very unfriendly there, but helpful just the same ).
> 
> I cannot see any reason to conceal native language in a language forum - other than to make a point of some kind.  As I said before, this issue simply is not a problem for the vast majority of people.  In posting twice in this thread I have spent more time on the issue than in the past several years altogether.



You just said it, you put that information in your signature yourself, it is completely optional. Maybe you still don't get my point. I'm not saying it's useless, and I have no problem at all about people putting their native language in their profiles. I just don't agree about the idea of being a requirement. When you have a question that the native language is required or would be helpful, that's the time to post the information.

Anyway guys, I just stated opinion and I'll leave it as it is, there is no point for me to continue this debate.


----------



## TrentinaNE

vale|46 said:


> Are you telling me that your answer to someone's question will be different because of his or her native language?


Obviously, it's the other way around. The credence I give to a poster's answer will depend on his/her knowledge of the language at issue.

Part of an ongoing problem in the forum I frequent, IT-EN, is that posters seem to skip over threads that have been "answered" but could still use clarification or correction. People, keep checking those those threads that have only one or two responses to see if the responses are accurate or need elaboration/correction!! 


> Do you guys realize that by forcing people to enter their native language will make those who want to keep this information private lie instead?


No one is forced to join WRF. Those who CHOOSE to do so agree to abide by its rules. Correctly identifying one's native language is one of this community's rules. Those who don't like it don't have to participate.

Elisabetta


----------



## panjandrum

vale|46 said:


> [...]
> You just said it, you put that information in your signature yourself, it is completely optional. Maybe you still don't get my point.
> [...]


Perhaps not, but perhaps you are missing my point too.
If I don't include that essential information in my post in the forums I am alluding to I don't get any answers at all, apart from one or two pointing out that unless I include essential information I won't get an answer - in some cases pretty forceful or frankly rude.
The information I am talking about is not optional, it is mandatory if I expect to be taken seriously.


----------



## Oldy Nuts

vale|46 said:


> ... and this isn't the reason why I don't want to put my native language in my profile. There could be many other reasons that someone would like to keep his or her information private. Maybe it's related to their profession? Maybe it's related to their current situation?



Maybe I'm repeating myself or others, but any information that one includes in one's personal profile is kept completely private by the obvious fact that there is no way for us millions of simple mortals to connect it with the person hiding behind that profile and user name.


----------



## neuromatico

I just became aware of this thread and admit that I'm late to the party, but here are my 2 cents:

1. I agree that the term "native language" is the best option, but I wonder if it might be useful including a brief operational definition in the guidelines, something like, "At WRF, native language means ....".

2. When I first became a member, I recall reading posts in Italian that made no sense and thinking "What am I missing?", when, in fact, they were simply (badly) written by an Anglophone. As I'm sure everyone does, I learned to check the native language field first. I think it's essential for new learners to be able to quickly determine if a post was written by a native speaker.

3. Regarding the location field, the important point about geographical variation in usage has already been made. Another benefit reflects comments made to me by native Italians living abroad, particularly where there's a large Italophone community (like Toronto), that the language changes when spoken outside Italy. I'd be interested to hear what you think of the Italian in Corriere Canadese.


----------



## sokol

vale|46 said:


> I'm just trying to voice my opinion. When a rule is not fair or reasonable, it can always be changed, no?


True, it is possible to change rules, but do you express with this wish the opinion that it were "not fair and reasonable" to state your native language?
If so, there are many foreros who think that it is _perfectly _reasonable and fair to state it (see opinions in this thread; and for good measure: ignore those of moderators and only look at those of "normal" foreros; see for example Oldy Nuts who is not only concerned about wrong native language but also about missing location).

There are of course also foreros who (like you) would prefer that native language were optional.
I cannot see how we could satisfy the wishes of all users.



vale|46 said:


> On motorcycle forums, it is never a requirement for me to tell people about my license or how many years I've been riding before helping others. I can always make a remark about my background on a particular post that would be relevant. Same for my native language, what would be the problem for me to make a remark on certain posts instead of my profile?


I know a photo forum where anyone can give advice about everything and where those users are trusted most who write most (have many posts) and who are more aggressive.
Many times the advice given is not good at all, and many times discussions there result in flame wars and private vendettas.

This does not happen on WordReference; we moderators won't allow it.

Now I am not claiming with this that not to give native language would result in exactly that (wrong people giving wrong advice and so on), but nevertheless in my opinion *native language is what gives quality:* it qualifies what you write, about language. Which is good, in my opinion.

True, many native speakers write careless, even ugly; recently I saw a Spanish post which made me shudder.
Even I, with my very poor Spanish, could have formulated better, and that even though I surely would have put in two or three errors in each sentence, at least.
But the post nevertheless had a _very _native quality. Confirmed by the users profile.

The thing now is that those who know a language to a certain degree can tell if a forero is a native speaker, or at least speaks that language well, or if he definitely is no native speaker. And certainly native speakers can tell apart other native speakers (except in those rare cases when someone acquires near-native competence).

But the *point *is another one: those not very proficient in a certain language can *not *tell if the forero giving advice is reliable.
Native language field filled in properly doesn't guarantee that it is, but at least it helps.


So to conclude: this - the native language field - really is about quality.
Therefore I'm very much in favour keeping it obligatory.

And I say this even though I see quite some problems with native language(s), as stated in my post above.


----------



## Cagey

Going back over the thread, I realize that Vale's original objection was stated from the point of view of someone who _asks _a question:


vale|46 said:


> [....] Are you telling me that your answer to someone's question will be different because of his or her native language?
> 
> [....]
> 
> I joined recently and I put "N/A" as my native language ....



However, for the most part we been discussing the usefulness of knowing the language background of someone who _answers _a question.  

Someone who is simply posting a question might reasonably doubt that his or her native language is relevant. (In fact, occasionally  the information does help someone to give a clearer answer.)  I can also imagine a not-impossible scenario that could make a cautious person  reluctant to provide the information when posting a question. 

So the question might be, why do we require this information of _everyone_?  I think that _ampurdan_ has given the best response to this:


ampurdan said:


> [....] So, it's a quid pro quo. You learn and you teach, that's the philosophy of these forums. Every one that signs in is potentially a learner and "a teacher". [...]


Everyone who asks a question also has the ability to answer questions.  Many people who begin by posting questions in the English Only forum (for instance) answer questions there as well; they also answer questions in the forum devoted to their native language.   It would be impossible to maintain a distinction between those who ask and those who answer, and I would be against it in any case.

As for the suggestion that the information be supplied when appropriate: This is impractical because it is often not clear to us that our answer is influenced by our dialect. For instance, I, a speaker of AE, may think that something is universally true of English syntax and not realize that BE follows different conventions.  Having the native language appear with every post avoids the tedious interchanges would be involved in seeking clarification every time such a question arose.  Also, it is convenient to be able to quickly survey a thread to see which varieties of English are represented.


----------



## ajo fresco

> Originally Posted by vale|46
> Are you telling me that your answer to someone's question will be different because of his or her native language?



To a certain extent, yes.  

My answer itself will be the same, but I do try to tailor my choice of words based on the asker's native language and the proficiency I detect in their question.

An answer is of no help if someone can't understand it.  I've seen posts in which the person who asked the question didn't completely understand the answer and asked for an explanation of one or more words in the answer.

Just my 2 cents, anyway.


----------



## Oldy Nuts

As ajo fresco, I also try to tailor my answers to what the poster knows. That's where to know "the language in which the poster is most fluent" is a must, not a luxury. I don't care how this is called in the rules, provided a very brief explanatory note is added to its name _in the subscription form_, and it is kept as an obligatory information to provide.

All persons who think that asking compulsorily for this very minimum of information is invading their privacy -which really sounds like totally unfounded paranoia to my ears- are free to abstain from subscribing.

I opened this thread to express my amazement by the fact that people are allowed to subscribe to these forums giving this only piece of information. The thread developed into a discussion of the meaning of "native language" and my original question has been almost completely forgotten. And it overwhelms me to see at least one participant who strongly objects to this "invasion to his privacy", as he feels it. I would be grateful if he could explain how does he think that giving this bit of information can help me to trace out his real name, profession, or any other personal information he doesn't want to be made public and hasn't given in his profile.


----------



## JeanDeSponde

panjandrum said:


> I cannot see any reason to conceal native language in a language forum - *other than to make a point of some kind*.


Definitely right to the point, Panj.
Let us get back to some more interesting topics, now...


----------



## vale|46

panjandrum said:


> Perhaps not, but perhaps you are missing my point too.
> If I don't include that essential information in my post in the forums I am alluding to I don't get any answers at all, apart from one or two pointing out that unless I include essential information I won't get an answer - in some cases pretty forceful or frankly rude.
> The information I am talking about is not optional, it is mandatory if I expect to be taken seriously.



It's obvious that either you didn't read all my comments or trying to take my words out of context like most of the members above. Of course if the information is required for a proper answer, you will need to post it. Isn't this a common knowledge or common sense? 



vale|46 said:


> You just said it, you put that information in your signature yourself, it is completely optional. Maybe you still don't get my point. I'm not saying it's useless, and I have no problem at all about people putting their native language in their profiles. I just don't agree about the idea of being a requirement. *When you have a question that the native language is required or would be helpful, that's the time to post the information.*



Most of you still don't understand what I was trying to say. I've never said the native language is not important in some situations, but the fact is that the native language is not important in _every_ one of them.

Seriously, out of all the answers and questions you guys have posted, what's the percentage of the posts that the native language is absolutely relevant or important, and that you couldn't answer a question or accept an answer without knowing the native language of the person?

Let's put it this way, if you guys can show me just one more language learning forum that the native language is a "required" and not an optional field, then I will stand corrected.



TrentinaNE said:


> No one is forced to join WRF. Those who CHOOSE to do so agree to abide by its rules. Correctly identifying one's native language is one of this community's rules. Those who don't like it don't have to participate.
> 
> Elisabetta



Just because you joined a forum, it doesn't mean you have to agree with everything there. Isn't this a *Comments and Suggestions* section?

For the record, I've used this forum for a while and I thought there are a lot of helpful people and useful information here. I only found out about the native language as a requirement when I decided to join.


----------



## Hermocrates

Hi vale. I couldn't help but notice you are quite new to these forums (so am I! so please don't get it wrong). Now, you are strongly opinionated about whether certain kinds of information should be mandatory or not, however, it looks like to me you haven't really participated to these forums yet (with the exception of this thread). All I can say, talking from personal experience, is that if you only took the time to participate actively to the forums you'd realise on your own _why_ members find it so important that everybody states their native language in a honest and exhaustive way. That's all. 

This is not a philosophical debate of sorts - it's just a practical need.  This community has existed for years before you and I joined. Don't you think you could give at least a little credit to those who have volunteered their time and efforts to moderate and maintain it, and trust them if they say this information is necessarily for these forums to work properly? 
Nobody wants to know your name, who you are and what you do for a living, or whether you are a translator or a student... Your private details are your own business and it's up to you to decide what you want to disclose. Said so, I fail to understand how simply stating your native language is going to put in jeopardy your privacy and legit desire to remain anonymous. This is the only piece of information that cannot be overlooked in these forums, because _everything_ revolves around languages here. 
Your opposition to sharing your native language in _this_ context sounds like somebody going to a shoe shop to buy a pair of shoes but refusing to reveal their size and to even allow the shop-keeper to take a glance at their feet. How are we supposed to collaborate, uh? 

Rye


----------



## vale|46

ryenart said:


> Hi vale. I couldn't help but notice you are quite new to these forums (so am I! so please don't get it wrong). Now, you are strongly opinionated about whether certain kinds of information should be mandatory or not, however, it looks like to me you haven't really participated to these forums yet (with the exception of this thread). All I can say, talking from personal experience, is that if you only took the time to participate actively to the forums you'd realise on your own _why_ members find it so important that everybody states their native language in a honest and exhaustive way. That's all.
> 
> This is not a philosophical debate of sorts - it's just a practical need.  This community has existed for years before you and I joined. Don't you think you could give at least a little credit to those who have volunteered their time and efforts to moderate and maintain it, and trust them if they say this information is necessarily for these forums to work properly?
> Nobody wants to know your name, who you are and what you do for a living, or whether you are a translator or a student... Your private details are your own business and it's up to you to decide what you want to disclose. Said so, I fail to understand how simply stating your native language is going to put in jeopardy your privacy and legit desire to remain anonymous. This is the only piece of information that cannot be overlooked in these forums, because _everything_ revolves around languages here.
> Your opposition to sharing your native language in _this_ context sounds like somebody going to a shoe shop to buy a pair of shoes but refusing to reveal their size and to even allow the shop-keeper to take a glance at their feet. How are we supposed to collaborate, uh?
> 
> Rye



Hi Rye,

Thanks for trying to understand. However, I'd like to make something clear, just because I don't agree with one thing and have an opinion, it doesn't mean I don't give credit to or appreciate the people who run this place. This is the Comments and Suggestions section, isn't this the whole purpose of a section like this?

As for my lack of participation on other sections, I don't think my language skills are good enough to help others yet. For the moment, I'm here more to learn and trying to improve my speaking and writing skills. I hope you can understand.

Maybe I've used the wrong reason to defense my opinion at the start. But like I said earlier, when a question or answer that requires the native language information, then of course it should be posted. I just don't agree that it is a required and not an optional field in the profile, that's all.


----------



## elroy

*Moderator Note*:

This thread is closed because there is no clear topic and too many things are being debated. 

It is clear that providing native language information is a  requirement the vast majority of users support. There is no sense in debating this issue further if no arguments more convincing than simple "anonymity" are made against this requirement.

 Apparently, some aspects of this requirement are unclear to some people. We would appreciate it if you could present any specific proposals or ideas regarding particular issues in other threads, each with a clear topic.


----------

