# new category for fluency



## panjabigator

Is it possible to make a new category for fluency? It is possible to be a native of a language and to be fluent in others...and it also gives us more information on the background of our foreros and where the answers are comming from. Not to imply that natives know best or anything, but it is definitely helpful.

For example, when I am eventually fluent in Spanish, I would put it under the fluency category so that people know that I know it, but I am not a native in it.


----------



## natasha2000

Yes, I think this is a good idea, since it woudl ocuppy only one line more, but it would help a lot. For example, in my case, I find the line Languages learning unuseful, since I am not actually learn English and Spanish, but I do speak them and as a matter of fact I gave a pretty good number of useful and correct answers for both languages even though they are not my native tongues. So I put them together in th ecategory native tongue which sometimes makes confusion of other foreros. actually, I got some PM asking me which language is actually my mother tongue, since they see I live in Spain but I have three languages as native tongues...


----------



## panjabigator

natasha2000 said:


> Yes, I think this is a good idea, since it woudl ocuppy only one line more, but it would help a lot. For example, in my case, I find the line Languages learning unuseful, since I am not actually learn English and Spanish, but I do speak them and as a matter of fact I gave a pretty good number of useful and correct answers for both languages even though they are not my native tongues. So I put them together in th ecategory native tongue which sometimes makes confusion of other foreros. actually, I got some PM asking me which language is actually my mother tongue, since they see I live in Spain but I have three languages as native tongues...



Exactly!


----------



## ElaineG

I like it in theory.  But I see so much misrepresentation of language abilities -- I've had foreros without a minimal command of vocabulary or grammar tell me that I should listen to them because they were "almost an Italian native".

On the other hand, some of the most talented foreros are hesitant to lay claim to "fluency", often deferring uneccessarily to native speakers.

I find often an inverse relationship between actual fluency and someone's willingness to lay claim to it.  Perhaps because the more you know, the more you realize there is more to learn!

I find that I learn who is fluent and who is not from day in day out frequenting of the forums.  Not the most efficient solution, I know!


----------



## natasha2000

ElaineG said:


> I find that I learn who is fluent and who is not from day in day out frequenting of the forums. Not the most efficient solution, I know!


 
I see your point. This is how I learned my "Who's who" of WR... 

Maybe you're right. Those who are interested enough to stay will form their own opinions on fluency of others by visiting WR frequently enough.


----------



## panjabigator

Very true Elaine.  Perhaps maybe a new category under languages learning...proficiency maybe?


----------



## lsp

I agree with ElaineG thoroughly. Self-proclaimed fluency/non-fluency (and the same goes for "proficiency") has never proven to be a fair indication of anything here. Newbies would give it weight; yet those of us who have been around a long time would know better, but would not be in a position to comment.


----------



## danielfranco

I had wondered about that too, so thanks Panjabigator for bringing it up. I often wondered if people who ask for my help realize what my profile describes: Yeah, I live in the USA and yes, I was born in Mexico. But that really doesn't have to do much with which languages I speak best.
Or in my very specific case, badly or _worser!_


----------



## natasha2000

Oh, Dani, you are too modest to be true ....


----------



## panjabigator

But I think it reflects the languages we know better than the current native category does.  Foreros that know multiple languages fluently place those as their native tongue (ie mother tongue) when they are not mother tongues.

But by now, I do have a good idea of who knows what and such, so Elain does make a good argument.


----------



## natasha2000

panjabigator said:


> But I think it reflects the languages we know better than the current native category does. Foreros that know multiple languages fluently place those as their native tongue (ie mother tongue) when they are not mother tongues.
> 
> But by now, I do have a good idea of who knows what and such, so Elain does make a good argument.


 
I think that Elaine and LSP have made an excellent point. Really. Not all people are so honest as you and I, Panja (and Dani, of course )...
Sometimes it is not even the question of honesty, but self centrism and foolishness or fatal misinterpretation of grammar rules (there are couple of them that are real "pearls", scholar examples of it), and this also can produce serious mistakes in beginners. If someone says that is fluent in X language, and constantly gives wrong or semi-wrong answers to newbies who enter once and never come back because the answer they got was marked as wrong in a test, it is also a "bad advetrising" for WR and for us all. I think this is the best way, even though it seems a little bit confusing at the beginning.


----------



## Paulfromitaly

The truth is that each of us is a learner in every single language, our mother tongue included; we have different skills degrees and knack, but still what we need to learn is way more than what we already know.


----------

