Is it worth learning ten different languages(or more)?

[Mr.lucifer]

I have been searching for recommendations for poetry for the great world poets, but all I find is complaints. Is poetry translation that really lacking? I am not just talking about the lack of good translations, but I hear if you really want a poet, you would have to learn their language. But there are ten major traditions I can think that would worthy learning an entirely language for. Is it worthy learning every single one of them?

[JBI]

Yes, well at least some. For any serious student of literature, languages is a must. Monolingual academics are useless. You cannot really go anywhere with one language.

As for my field, we are required to know at least 3, with for or so recommended. Chinese, Japanese, English, with either something specialized like Sanskrit or Manchu selected (depending on time specialty), or something pragmatic like Korean, or French, or German.

Now, does that increase enjoyment of literature? Well, languages are hard. To get to the point where you can enjoy poetry in a language you must work unbelievably hard. Something like Russian poetry is hard to work up to, and one is looking at at least 3 years of hard work, plus probably a stint in a Russian speaking environment.

Generally then, one needs to be selective. One can be able to read Italian poetry with good glosses after about a year of intensive every day study. The same may be true of French, though you would need to have a better phonological ear than me to make out the cadence.

So, in a sense, I think everyone should know two or three languages just because I feel the world needs to communicate more, and literature, culture, business and such all function better with more understanding.

That being said, one can get away with only speaking English, or not leaving their native areas. A street beggar in China does not need to speak fluent Portuguese. But I think for everyone with a solid education, international languages should play a role. As it is my friends at Princeton say, for instance, about 30-40% of the university is learning Chinese now, with dreams on getting their hands on some of the Red Money. All diplomats in the world come in contact with French sooner or later. Poets generally work on the side to support themselves, many working through the educational system and working on translation as a means of sustenance.

So, if you want to enter the kind of academic-poetic work where you need to really engage with the work, then I would say learn a language or two. It is good for your mind anyway, and puts you in a good mental place to go through with the discipline. French or Spanish would be the obvious first choice, for a number of reasons, and one in the United States could do much worse than picking up a widely spoken second language. It will only broaden opportunities.

As for literature, well, literature doesn't really pay. If you enjoy it do it, but if you only see yourself as wanting to read one or two poems in a language, don't bother. Poetry tends to be the most difficult aspect of a language. In Chinese for instance, the common famous Tang poetry is made particularly famous by how simple it is in comparison to the more ornate poetics that come before it. Even familiar academics who have been working with the work for 20+ years still clutch to multi-volume mass dictionaries to get through it. Not so easy to just learn for a few months and dive into.

I would recommend setting your eyes on three. Once you have satisfied three languages move on to a fourth if you feel like it. But the most important thing is not to quit no matter what, which explains why my Italian has faltered into an inability to make a sentence, whereas my not-neglected Chinese is now fluent.

[Mr.lucifer]

I really wasn't actually thinking about doing it. I only read for fun and I'm barely familiar with poetry. But would learning a second language help out in the field I'm about to enter, which is network security? I'm going to Mount West, the technical college of Marshall university, and hope to get out of West Virginia someday. Maybe, even travel someday.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Yes, well at least some. For any serious student of literature, languages is a must. Monolingual academics are useless. You cannot really go anywhere with one language.

JBI says these things as if they're universally known fact, but to days he's the only person I've heard claim this. Then again, I'm an American working in America. From what I've seen, you can get by with knowing one language here. My grad school program makes me take two semesters of a foreign language, but that's only a stepping stone and no one really expects you to learn that actual language. (Edit: I admit I didn't read all of JBI's post before writing this, and I now realize he addressed what I said.)

As for translations, there are good and there are bad. If you're like me and only know English, you don't have anything to go by except what people say concerning a translation's quality; I can't read the language, so it's impossible for me to judge for myself. It's true that no one can experience a work as it is truly intended with a translation--the very music that the original may create with the source language is impossible to reproduce. But that doesn't mean we can't at least get a taste of what the author was going for. And I've never really heard any professor or authority suggest one can't gain a wider knowledge of foreign texts through translations.

And, anyways, you said you read for enjoyment, right? I say get the translations, enjoy them, and don't worry about it. :nod:

As for network security, I have absolutely no clue.

[Charles Darnay]

For some academic pursuits, you need multiple languages, as JBI pointed out. To study Classics "properly" you need (obviously) Ancient Greek and Latin, also German, Italian, and French. English is actually not essential. The reason for the three modern languages is because most of the best literature on Ancient Greece and Rome are in these language, and only a small selection has ever been translated.

As for literature and poetry, I think that if you are going to pursue world poetry, translations do not cut it. It doesn't matter how good a translation is, there is subtly built into a language that does not translate. This is far more true in poetry and theatre than prose.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

That makes it sound like it's not even worth reading translations of poetry.

[Mr.lucifer]

Or even a casual read of poetry not worth it.

[JBI]

For some academic pursuits, you need multiple languages, as JBI pointed out. To study Classics "properly" you need (obviously) Ancient Greek and Latin, also German, Italian, and French. English is actually not essential. The reason for the three modern languages is because most of the best literature on Ancient Greece and Rome are in these language, and only a small selection has ever been translated.

As for literature and poetry, I think that if you are going to pursue world poetry, translations do not cut it. It doesn't matter how good a translation is, there is subtly built into a language that does not translate. This is far more true in poetry and theatre than prose.

The only textual-based area of study you can get away with only speaking one language I believe is English literature since the 19th century (whatever the specialty). Renaissance specialists will be required to have more than one language. 18th century specialists should know French. Chaucerians will need to know French and Chaucer English, etc.

In the major Canadian institutions, French is a requirement - how well you actually know it, however, is a subject of debate. In international literatures, more languages is a must - a psycho-analytic critic will need French, as would a Post-Colonial critic probably. In fact, theory-heavy specialists will eventually find they will be engaging a lot with French. Semioticians will be engaging with Italian sooner or later. Historians can slide by, unless they want an international context, in which case French, the international language of Europe, resurfaces again, as would other more specific languages.

But it is beyond that - the American academy will always tell people they are great up until they graduate and stop paying, then enter unemployment. That's the secret of private education, and semi-private state-level education. Europe and to a lesser extent Canada have a more intense system of State funded education, so if you cannot swim, you drown, and there is less flattery, and more self-doubt. So, those coming out of the US system get out ready to take on the world, those coming out of Canada come out disillusioned.

The advanced study of Modern English literature is perhaps the worst, since it has the notorious reputation of being regarded as the easiest field, the fastest degree, and the one least likely to get you a job. I hear philosophy and political science are also suffering now. But English, from my experience, particularly modern to contemporary English novel specialists, has been a breeding ground for mediocrity.


What this all means is simple - they will pass you through, and you won't NEED to really learn much. I have never really heard of anybody failing out of graduate work before, and I am not sure if it is even possible.

Most will go on to teach in Asia or something, or else do work unrelated to their field, or do underpaid work lecturing with no chance of advancement to a non-seasonal position.

As for languages though, one should learn them not because they are needed, but rather, because they are enjoyable, and lead to better experiences. I have never heard of anyone suffering from learning a language, and never heard anybody say they wish they hadn't learned one (except for maybe me joking that I wish I didn't understand what people say on the subway).

You are working with networks right now, to the original poster. Does that not mean you cannot have a hobby. My friends who are computer scientists all assure me that every single one of them has a hobby - the one I know best has a hobby for studying languages, he said others are into things like photography. If you like literature, it couldn't hurt. And only costs about 40minutes of work a day to make progress. It also helps memory a lot.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Well, as someone who has read translations of poetry, I think it's definitely worth it.

[JBI]

Well, as someone who has read translations of poetry, I think it's definitely worth it.

Of course. But then you must choose which one. I think translation is like a sample at Costco of a linguistically-related culture. much of the bigger part is unavailable in translation, and you are left with a taste. If you like it a lot, buy the product.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

As for languages though, one should learn them not because they are needed, but rather, because they are enjoyable, and lead to better experiences. I have never heard of anyone suffering from learning a language, and never heard anybody say they wish they hadn't learned one (except for maybe me joking that I wish I didn't understand what people say on the subway).

I completely agree with his. If you can learn a new language, you should. I can't. Well, I could, but I just don't have enough motivation in me, especially since extended overseas trips where I would actually use and emerge myself in the language just aren't possible for me. And, honestly, even though it's no where near as intellectually stimulating and enriching, I'd rather okay video games,

[Mr.lucifer]

I do have hobbies, JBI. Its just learning languages is a big challenge and if I do learn one ,i want it benefit my life more than just literature. i am curious if it would give opportunities in my field. If not, then maybe for experiences at school.

[JBI]

I completely agree with his. If you can learn a new language, you should. I can't. Well, I could, but I just don't have enough motivation in me, especially since extended overseas trips where I would actually use and emerge myself in the language just aren't possible for me. And, honestly, even though it's no where near as intellectually stimulating and enriching, I'd rather okay video games,

You could just learn Spanish. I am sure you'd find plenty of opportunity to practice it within your borders. It's only the "difficult" languages that need time over seas. Besides. I bet you could get your Spanish education intensely funded by your government anyway, and maybe make money.

[billl]

You could just learn Spanish. I am sure you'd find plenty of opportunity to practice it within your borders. It's only the "difficult" languages that need time over seas. Besides. I bet you could get your Spanish education intensely funded by your government anyway, and maybe make money.

One thing about learning Spanish in the U.S.--there's a rather large supply of individuals who have grown up fluent in both English and Spanish. I live in a majority hispanic area, and regularly encounter people who are fluent in both languages, working in pretty much every profession (including technical fields--I've actually studied network security and networking technology in classes where the students might even have been as much as 20-25% bilingual in Spanish/English, I wouldn't be surprised if it had been more than 50% even, I didn't actually check with everyone about it of course, but I did hear it during personal phone calls, etc. and that's just how it is here...). It's true that there are excellent opportunities to study/practice Spanish in the States, though. But there's another side to that particular coin.

Still, it'd be a good choice. And if there's some other language/culture that really interests you, maybe you could try going that route. I'd say it's worth doing, because it's interesting AND because it could help your job prospects at a multi-national organization/corporation, or working for the U.S. State Department, etc. Of course, you could also get a great career going just by being very good at Network Security, and never learning another language, or working abroad...

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

I took two years of Spanish in high school and absolutely hated it. It left such a bad taste in my mouth I really can't stand the very sound of the language. I'll probably take French for my graduate degree. I think it's the most beautiful language there is. And, if I do get into it, I'd love to be able to read French literatue.

[cafolini]

I really wasn't actually thinking about doing it. I only read for fun and I'm barely familiar with poetry. But would learning a second language help out in the field I'm about to enter, which is network security? I'm going to Mount West, the technical college of Marshall university, and hope to get out of West Virginia someday. Maybe, even travel someday.

I worked for quite a while on AI. NS is a related field. Another language helps you grasp codings and decodings that might be impossible within a single language. I recommend at least one to start; just to start. Poetry is not the issue in this matter.

[Emil Miller]

The answer to the question posited by this thread is no. There are very few people who are able to speak ten languages and the effort required to learn them would be disproportionate to the benefit received if the reason for learning them were to read poetry in the original. It is obvious that the abstract nature of much poetry makes it difficult to convey it's intended meaning in a foreign language and that translations will vary according to the translator, but in essence there will be something missing if only because of inborn incompatibilities of the languages concerned. In the case of prose writing, a good deal of accuracy is possible not only according to the skill of the translator but also because some authors are more accessible to translation than others. I have read very good translations of W S Maugham and Guy de Maupassant in French and German but this is because their style of writing is fluid and unencumbered with the long descriptive passages favoured by some writers of the same period. Similarly, I have read Hemingway in French without difficulty but I don't imagine that Melville or Henry James would be nearly as accessible.

[kiki1982]

My husband speaks ten languages, although he only reads in English :rolleyes:. He's not the literature type.

Translations are good, but the problems is, if you do not know the original language, you need to rely on others to tell you which one is the best (to date) and that depends on their own skill.

Personally, I tend to agree with JBI that there are rarely any literature academics, or philosophy ones for that matter, who do nto know the language they are studying literature from. That could be different in the Anglo-Saxon world, tough. As the original form is always the best one because invariably, unless the translator is skilled to his eyeballs, there will always be something e misses.

In terms of poetry, unless you have poetry that clearly only needs to add up in terms of rhythm or sound and contents doesn't matter, it's not a problem in translation, but get a sonnet like Shapkespeare's and even the best translator, I am confident, would produce something that is lacking in one way or other.

Proze is easier, but some writers are beyond all help because they are too poetic and mind so much about the sound and the stylistic aspects of their text that they don't really translate well. Those who are just about the contents or the imagery can be helped though, provided the imagery is not too monocultural.
And then there is the inherent cultural content, but that also depends on your own reading/knowledge record.

I would say learning other langauegs is a good idea, but it takes a lot of time before you can actually properly appreciate literature in such another language (i.e. without the use of too much dictionary). It's certainly worth it, but as it takes a long time, you can better start as early as possible.
I don't think a stay in another country isn't really necessary, if you are not bent on speaking that language.

[Charles Darnay]

This is old news now, but my comments reflected the academic pursuit of poetry - not reading it. Two separate things. I really enjoyed watching the Curiosity landing last night, and I have no insight into astronomy, physics, the space programme &c. I am in no way going to contribute to that particular field of study, but I enjoyed it.

Poetry is the same. I really enjoy The Divine Comedy, and I speak/read very limited Italian. I would not pursue any detailed study into it, nor would I trust someone's published opinions (I have no aversion to conversations such as these threads) on Dante if he/she is working solely from an English translation.

[kiki1982]

Poetry is difficult to appreciate at the best of times, so probably toffs will say that you can't appreciate it unless in its original language (like me :D), but then it begs the question that you can really appreciate it really to the full if the original language is not your first or close close second.

But then it's also difficult for mother tongue speakers. Hence why not so many read poetry, even in their mother tongue.

Fact is that academics favour the original, of course. But indeed, if you're going to read Dante really in depth, do it in Italian, otherwise probably a translation is enough. Virgil will still travel down into hell with you.

Although I always find that translations take away from the atmosphere of a book. Pride and Prejudice is just not so gentle in German.

[JBI]

The danger is this - can the reputation impact the individual acceptance of a poet in translation? for instance, when I was reading Pindar, I could not help feel bored the whole time. Now my question rests in, is it Pindar or his translator's fault? Sometimes I have been tempted to overlook intense flaws because it was in translation, which to me means that I have a lower critical standard for translation.

Then, one must ask - which texts are not worth reading in translation at all?

[Charles Darnay]

Then, one must ask - which texts are not worth reading in translation at all?

The first one that comes to mind is Moliere's bourgeois gentilhomme. I read it in French, and then in English just to see how it is translated, and it does not hold up. The reason is that the comedy of the play is built into language, and linguistic jokes cannot carry into translation (often). This is why I feel that some Shakespeare plays will not work in other languages (any of the major Clown/Fool roles rely on linguistic jokes). This is also why I think that matter gets lost in poetry, because so much of poetry is built into the words as well as the meaning. You can translate meaning, mood, tone, but when the poem relies on the sounds of the words, or wordplay - it gets lost.

[kiki1982]

I tend to agree. As a translator, you can either concentrate on the words in a poem (the style, the rhythm etc. let's say the things that make up the outside), or on the contents, but most of the time, not both. Or the languages should be very very close, then you could have a chance. But that is very rare.

Another one that is pretty much a lost cause, I think, would be Cyrano de Bergerac. It is very much embedded in French culture and precedent, it delights in wordplay of the absolute highest order (to me at least) and is so brimming with everything that is poetry, that as a translator, there is no way in hell you can reflect and the superb late 19th century melancholy style and the French wordplay and the rhyme and the contents (some of which is based on untranslated French works of literature).

Ok, that's about it singing the praise of that play. :blush: Still, it is the only one I would call sublime.

I think anything that is a play on words would be difficult.

[Emil Miller]

I think anything that is a play on words would be difficult.

Yes, it's amusing that the French translation of Graham Greene's novel Brighton Rock comes out as Le Rocher de Brighton. In my copy, published in the Le Livre de Poche series, it has been necessary for the publisher to add a note explaining that the original title refers to a kind of confectionary rather than a piece of stone.

[kiki1982]

lol, I think 'rocher' is also a kind of confectionery thing, but of course it doesn't come from Brighton. Beside which, 'Le rocher' strikes me as particularly strange if the translator knew what it was, as you would rather have used no article at all or even called it 'rocher Brighton'. Invariably though, you would have to put a note anyway, as not everyone knows that, unless the novel had nothing to do with Brighton in itself, in which case you could have referred to the sugary substance as it is in French. That depends.

[Emil Miller]

lol, I think 'rocher' is also a kind of confectionery thing, but of course it doesn't come from Brighton. Beside which, 'Le rocher' strikes me as particularly strange if the translator knew what it was, as you would rather have used no article at all or even called it 'rocher Brighton'. Invariably though, you would have to put a note anyway, as not everyone knows that, unless the novel had nothing to do with Brighton in itself, in which case you could have referred to the sugary substance as it is in French. That depends.

The name of the French confectionery is caillou or galet, both of which mean pebble rather than rock so I suppose it might have been called Galet de Brighton although neither resemble a stick of rock. It's a matter of semantics as much as translation.

[Alexander III]

I really think one of the greatest gifts a parent can give is to teach their children multiple languages. I am fluent in English, Italian and French, and am conversational in Spanish and German, though my german conversation would be that of a 12 year old. I never studied any of these languages but I lived in a bunch of countries growing up and my parents speak all those languages and by the time I reached maturity, without ever having put effort into it I have an impressive display of lingual ability merely because it had all been imprinted into me as a child. Right now I do not think I have the intelligence or diligence to learn another language because once you are an adult it takes serious studying to do. I have always been amazing by the genius children posses when it comes to learning languages.

[mal4mac]

I have been searching for recommendations for poetry for the great world poets, but all I find is complaints. Is poetry translation that really lacking? I am not just talking about the lack of good translations, but I hear if you really want a poet, you would have to learn their language. But there are ten major traditions I can think that would worthy learning an entirely language for. Is it worthy learning every single one of them?

Internet forums are full of complaints - it's easy to carp. Just try a few translations from the library and see how they go. In my experience many translations are very enjoyable.

[The Truth]

@ the OP:

I'd really love to learn a bunch of languages, especially French, for that very reason but I just can't find the time to do so. I'm learning Spanish in school and it's already hard enough to keep learning when I'm busy reading, writing and doing other school-related things. My lifetime goal would be to learn French & Italian along with Spanish and if I have time maybe a Scandinavian language.

[Venerable Bede]

I will be taking an Italian course this year. Unfortunately, I waited until my fourth year, so I won't be able to take more than one level of it. I do plan to stick with it on my own though, and someday be able to read Italian literature in Italian.

[JuniperWoolf]

As for my field, we are required to know at least 3, with for or so recommended. Chinese, Japanese, English, with either something specialized like Sanskrit or Manchu selected (depending on time specialty), or something pragmatic like Korean, or French, or German.

Yeah, to get a bachelor's degree in arts in BC you need at least two languages as well. It doesn't have to be French though, you can pick whatever you want.

It's easy to learn a language if you're exposed to it being spoken. I reccomend becoming a fan of foreign tv shows and movies in whichever language you're interested in (I like The Killing for Danish, Let The Right One In for Swedish, Run Lola Run for German, anime aplenty for Japanese - maybe we could make a thread asking for foreign language tv and movies). You have to hear the language in order to learn it, if you just read it you won't really be able to understand it, and no one who speaks that language will be able to understand you. Study the language normaly with books and what-not for about an hour every day, then watch an episode through the first time without looking at the subtitles. Try to figure it out. Then, watch it through a second time with the subtitles and pick up anything you missed.


I only read for fun and I'm barely familiar with poetry. But would learning a second language help out in the field I'm about to enter, which is network security?

What kind of career field is Network Security? It sounds like the sort of thing which wouldn't even require you to work with people very often.

[Charles Darnay]

@ the OP:

I'd really love to learn a bunch of languages, especially French, for that very reason but I just can't find the time to do so. I'm learning Spanish in school and it's already hard enough to keep learning when I'm busy reading, writing and doing other school-related things. My lifetime goal would be to learn French & Italian along with Spanish and if I have time maybe a Scandinavian language.

Grammatically, and with regards to the vocabulary, Italian and French are easy enough to pick up if you have a strong Spanish background. You would still have to immerse yourself in the language in order to speak it well enough.

Personally, I love the Romance languages. My goal is to make myself more fluent in Latin, French, Italian. I never had much of an interest in Spanish, not sure why.

[JuniperWoolf]

Me I've never liked French. I mean, do inanimate objects and ideas really need to be identified as male or female? I also don't like the sound of it, too flowery. Give me some nice hard German or Russian any day.

[OrphanPip]

I speak English, French and very poor German, which is a sore spot for me. I've made several attempts at improving my German, but I always fail at them. I have no faculty for learning languages, despite the fact that much of my pre-university education was in French I still feel like there is a lot of room for me to improve at the language.

I'll be taking an intensive Old English course in the Fall, so I'll see how that works out for me. I chose it primarily because it gave me a literature and language credit at the same time.

[Sir Lord Oliver]

Me I've never liked French. I mean, do inanimate objects and ideas really need to be identified as male or female? I also don't like the sound of it, too flowery. Give me some nice hard German or Russian any day.The irony behind your statement is that Russian and German have significantly even more gender words/grammar going on.

[OrphanPip]

Yes at least you don't have to deal with a "neutral" gender in French. Most French speakers will overlook small errors in gender by non-native speakers, sometimes an uncommon word can even give a francophone pause, so it's not that big a deal because attributing the incorrect gender doesn't effect the meaning of a sentence (A lot of people in Quebec slur there la and le so much you can't tell the difference orally anyway). Also, Quebec French has the annoying tendency to have differences in opinion about some words with International French/Parisian French.

[Charles Darnay]

or noun declensions. I hate noun declensions.

[Alexander III]

Me I've never liked French. I mean, do inanimate objects and ideas really need to be identified as male or female? I also don't like the sound of it, too flowery. Give me some nice hard German or Russian any day.

Virtually every language except english has male/female - it makes sense linguistically and the lack of it is one of the reasons english in rather bland as a language. English is versatile and utilitarian but by few standards is it an exciting language.


Also, Quebec French has the annoying tendency to have differences in opinion about some words with International French/Parisian French.

The answer is parisian French, it is always right if the parisians do it and everything else must be wrong because they are not parisian. No culture I have ever known has such Capital focused snobbishness and haughtiness. Being Parisian (when I say parisian I mean from the the central arendesments, everything outside is not even considered paris but just getto) is like a small aristocracy. Every french man who is not parisian knows that the parisians know he is inferior to them. It is such a strong cultural thing, which I think could only have been rivaled by being from Rome in ancient Rome.

[JuniperWoolf]

The irony behind your statement is that Russian and German have significantly even more gender words/grammar going on.

Yes, but I was talking about phonetics there. See?


I also don't like the sound of it, too flowery. Give me some nice hard German or Russian any day.


Virtually every language except english has male/female - it makes sense linguistically and the lack of it is one of the reasons english in rather bland as a language. English is versatile and utilitarian but by few standards is it an exciting language.

Phah, "virtually every language" - in Europe. Mandarin has no grammatical gender, so there's 1/5th of the world right there.

[JBI]

Still, most speakers I would wager speak a language where verbs are inflected based on gender. Arabic, for instance, would be one.

[Raven Falcon.]

English may not be the most flamboyant of languages, but I think it is the most syntactically flexible and lexically the largest of all of languages.

I might be exaggerating, but English surely does sound dull and flat.
Try reading Dante's La Divina Comedia in the original and in English translation to see what I mean.

Nel mezzo di cammin di nostra vita...

Midway in the journey of our life...

[Annamariah]

Finnish doesn't have the gender thing going on, either. We don't even have different pronouns for men and women like "he" and "she", our third person pronoun is simply "hän" for all people.

I think learning languages is always beneficial, though it depends on your situation and ambitions which languages would be most useful in your case. In Finland one has to study Swedish from 7th grade (soon from 6th grade, I think), and it is impossible to study anything without knowing English.

I wouldn't start studying a whole new language just to be able to read poetry in it, but then again, we all have our hobbies, and some people might enjoy doing just that.

[Calidore]

Virtually every language except english has male/female - it makes sense linguistically and the lack of it is one of the reasons english in rather bland as a language. English is versatile and utilitarian but by few standards is it an exciting language.


Just curious: As OrphanPip mentioned above, using the wrong gender form doesn't change the meaning, so how do word genders "make sense linguistically"? Not to mention that genders were created in living creatures by nature for reproductive purposes and have nothing to do with language whatsoever.

I'd also submit that English's versatility and adaptability are what makes it exciting.

[Emil Miller]

Just curious: As OrphanPip mentioned above, using the wrong gender form doesn't change the meaning, so how do word genders "make sense linguistically"? Not to mention that genders were created in living creatures by nature for reproductive purposes and have nothing to do with language whatsoever.

I'd also submit that English's versatility and adaptability are what makes it exciting.

I wouldn't say that versatility and adaptability make English more exciting but they certainly make it easier to use the language. As for gender in other languages, I have found that after a while it ceases to be a problem but you are certainly right that they are unnecessary except perhaps when male and female in relation to humans and other living species need to be differentiated and even then,as in Chinese for example, possibly not.

[JuniperWoolf]

I think learning languages is always beneficial, though it depends on your situation and ambitions which languages would be most useful in your case. In Finland one has to study Swedish from 7th grade (soon from 6th grade, I think), and it is impossible to study anything without knowing English.


In Alberta we have to study French starting in grade six, but we're able to stop once we reach grade eight, and boy did I ever do just that. I wish I hadn't now, I hate that I can't speak French. Well actually, like most Canadians, I can read label-French: all labels in Canada have both French and English, I think we kind of skim the words and absorb it throughout our lives (my friends all call iced tea "the glace," pronounced real anglo-like).

[Heteronym]

And can you learn ten languages?

[Drkshadow03]

One blogger I follow whose original language is American English frequently reads: 1) English 2) Spanish 3) Portuguese 4) Latin 5) French 6) Italian 7) Serbian.

I believe he can also read in Russian, German, and attempts quite a few other languages.

Here is his post about reading The Little Prince (http://ofblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/thoughts-after-re-reading-antoine-de.html) by Antoine de Saint-Exupery in 10 different languages.

[JBI]

One blogger I follow whose original language is American English frequently reads: 1) English 2) Spanish 3) Portuguese 4) Latin 5) French 6) Italian 7) Serbian.

I believe he can also read in Russian, German, and attempts quite a few other languages.

Here is his post about reading The Little Prince (http://ofblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/thoughts-after-re-reading-antoine-de.html) by Antoine de Saint-Exupery in 10 different languages.

I get by in 5, but most people who claim more barely know 3 of them well.

For instance, my grandmother spoke over 10 languages, some of which are dead, and five of which were quite similar - but the actual usage of them is minimal, and in the obscure ones she was no where near as proficient as lets say a native speaker.

Even me with English, I am not as good as some people, and there is still tons of vocabulary left to explore. With ten it would be an endless ocean. Reading uses maybe 5000 common words of a language, some authors, like Racine, only 2000 words, quality writing gets higher.

My experience with people who claim to know 10 languages is they know them all to a mediocre level, enough to function but not enough to watch the news.

I found a website before, and was awed with what people claimed, until I realized they couldn't even read a novel in those languages, and just memorized a few Assimil lessons that promise fluency in 90 days guaranteed or whatever. Some people I guess actually believe that is fluency.

[Raven Falcon.]

I get by in 5, but most people who claim more barely know 3 of them well.

For instance, my grandmother spoke over 10 languages, some of which are dead, and five of which were quite similar - but the actual usage of them is minimal, and in the obscure ones she was no where near as proficient as lets say a native speaker.

Even me with English, I am not as good as some people, and there is still tons of vocabulary left to explore. With ten it would be an endless ocean. Reading uses maybe 5000 common words of a language, some authors, like Racine, only 2000 words, quality writing gets higher.

My experience with people who claim to know 10 languages is they know them all to a mediocre level, enough to function but not enough to watch the news.

I found a website before, and was awed with what people claimed, until I realized they couldn't even read a novel in those languages, and just memorized a few Assimil lessons that promise fluency in 90 days guaranteed or whatever. Some people I guess actually believe that is fluency.

From the linguistics perspective, which is authoritative in this matter since it is the science of language, fluency in a language must be considered in different aspects, which are: speaking, listening, writing and reading.

A person, for example, may be able to read a language at the literary level, but he may not be able to speak with the same fluency.

I do believe, however, that speaking is closely related to listening whereas writing and reading are dependent on each other.

Remember, Joseph Conrad still did not speak English fluently when he was already writing quite proficiently in the language.

[lichtrausch]

You'll find out after learning one or two languages whether or not it's worth it to you to learn many more. I started off with German. After reaching proficiency in that, I was reasonably sure that I'd never have the time or inclination to go through that all again with another language. But then I somehow got sucked into Japanese. After obsessively studying that devilish language for a few years, I became proficient. And now I'm taking on Mandarin and can see myself doing another 10 or so languages. I'm not planning to become perfect in all these languages, but I do want to reach a level where I can enjoy literature in them. One thing about languages is that most of them are connected in some way to others, and you end up saying to yourself: now that I know Spanish, learning Italian would be so much easier. I think I'll give it a go! Or: now that I know Persian, I now possess a copious volume of Arabic vocabulary. Why not learn Arabic?! Or: Now that I know Japanese, Chinese characters aren't scary at all anymore. Here I come Mandarin!

[Raven Falcon.]

You'll find out after learning one or two languages whether or not it's worth it to you to learn many more. I started off with German. After reaching proficiency in that, I was reasonably sure that I'd never have the time or inclination to go through that all again with another language. But then I somehow got sucked into Japanese. After obsessively studying that devilish language for a few years, I became proficient. And now I'm taking on Mandarin and can see myself doing another 10 or so languages. I'm not planning to become perfect in all these languages, but I do want to reach a level where I can enjoy literature in them. One thing about languages is that most of them are connected in some way to others, and you end up saying to yourself: now that I know Spanish, learning Italian would be so much easier. I think I'll give it a go! Or: now that I know Persian, I now possess a copious volume of Arabic vocabulary. Why not learn Arabic?! Or: Now that I know Japanese, Chinese characters aren't scary at all anymore. Here I come Mandarin!
I admire you, my fellow forumer, for having the courage to take on such an endeavor.
Of course, it might be that in your brain exists a sophisticated, non-exhaustible language learning faculty.
Your determination to learn many of the major languages in this world humbles me. I struggle to maintain my proficiency even in one language.

[Mr.lucifer]

How you fluent in reading, but not in speaking? How can the text flow in your head if you can't say the words right?

[JuniperWoolf]

^Easily. I don't know how to pronounce "oeuf," (oaf?) but I can recognize it as easily as I can the word "egg" because I've seen it a billion times.

[OrphanPip]

It is easier to parse language in written form because you can take it slower and think it over. When someone talks to you, you have to be quick enough to understand them immediately. Also, it is often difficult for non-native speakers to differentiate between different phonemes aurally, where as (as Jun pointed out) it's quite easy to understand a word written out.

[Charles Darnay]

^Easily. I don't know how to pronounce "oeuf," (oaf?) but I can recognize it as easily as I can the word "egg" because I've seen it a billion times.

I guess Canada will do that to you. End up in France and you might not be able to get around, but if you find yourself in a grocery store, you'll do fine.

[lichtrausch]

I admire you, my fellow forumer, for having the courage to take on such an endeavor.
Of course, it might be that in your brain exists a sophisticated, non-exhaustible language learning faculty.
Your determination to learn many of the major languages in this world humbles me. I struggle to maintain my proficiency even in one language.
Thanks for the kind words. For some reason I'm incredibly persistent when it comes to learning languages. It's kind of like how normal people get really into a TV series and can't wait to see the next episode. Well I can't wait to see what new surprises a language has in store for me. What interesting ways of expressing a concept it might have, or some interesting connections it has to other languages, and also what kind of interesting things the speakers of that language (past and present) have to say.

[Drkshadow03]

I get by in 5, but most people who claim more barely know 3 of them well.

For instance, my grandmother spoke over 10 languages, some of which are dead, and five of which were quite similar - but the actual usage of them is minimal, and in the obscure ones she was no where near as proficient as lets say a native speaker.

Even me with English, I am not as good as some people, and there is still tons of vocabulary left to explore. With ten it would be an endless ocean. Reading uses maybe 5000 common words of a language, some authors, like Racine, only 2000 words, quality writing gets higher.

My experience with people who claim to know 10 languages is they know them all to a mediocre level, enough to function but not enough to watch the news.

I found a website before, and was awed with what people claimed, until I realized they couldn't even read a novel in those languages, and just memorized a few Assimil lessons that promise fluency in 90 days guaranteed or whatever. Some people I guess actually believe that is fluency.

Well, the blogger in question never claimed to be able to speak all the languages fluently. He claims to be able to read in them and with a lot of help from dictionaries in each language for more difficult words.

He can speak English and Spanish fluently I believe.

[kiki1982]

Ater a marvellous week in London...


The irony behind your statement is that Russian and German have significantly even more gender words/grammar going on.

Haha, yes, and Russian ven has different male word declension from the Accusative onwards for animate and inanimte nouns (adn adjectives, too, I believe)...

I believe all the Indo-European languages at least used to have three genders, even English; I think the latter at one point even had animate ad inaimate nouns too. But some languages lost them patly and some all.


I get by in 5, but most people who claim more barely know 3 of them well.

For instance, my grandmother spoke over 10 languages, some of which are dead, and five of which were quite similar - but the actual usage of them is minimal, and in the obscure ones she was no where near as proficient as lets say a native speaker.

Even me with English, I am not as good as some people, and there is still tons of vocabulary left to explore. With ten it would be an endless ocean. Reading uses maybe 5000 common words of a language, some authors, like Racine, only 2000 words, quality writing gets higher.

My experience with people who claim to know 10 languages is they know them all to a mediocre level, enough to function but not enough to watch the news.

I found a website before, and was awed with what people claimed, until I realized they couldn't even read a novel in those languages, and just memorized a few Assimil lessons that promise fluency in 90 days guaranteed or whatever. Some people I guess actually believe that is fluency.


From the linguistics perspective, which is authoritative in this matter since it is the science of language, fluency in a language must be considered in different aspects, which are: speaking, listening, writing and reading.

A person, for example, may be able to read a language at the literary level, but he may not be able to speak with the same fluency.

I do believe, however, that speaking is closely related to listening whereas writing and reading are dependent on each other.

Remember, Joseph Conrad still did not speak English fluently when he was already writing quite proficiently in the language.

I tend to agree with that. As I said, my husband speaks ten, but not all at a proficient level. I believe having real conversations stops at 5. Although he says his level goes back up again when he is immersed for about a week.

That said, though, he doesn't read in any of them, though his French is much much better than mine... I believe that's pure laziness, but maybe his vocab is limited to that you use for speaking and reading Metro where mine is more focused on reading..

I personally could claim Dutch, English, German and French (in order of proficiency) and also maybe Spanish, Polish and Russian if I was really trying to impress. Spanish is imited to the Argentinian Spanish I learnt from SOS Mi Vida a few years ago; Polish is limited to well spoken general statements and I should find some nice and simple books in Russian - any ideas?


How you fluent in reading, but not in speaking? How can the text flow in your head if you can't say the words right?

Because the process is slower. Even active production on paper (writing) is easier than active production in terms of speaking. You have more time to think about what you write than to produce a coherent sentence while you are talking. For that you need to keep hold of an idea and thus, sometimes, change you thinking process. You can always go back to the start of a written sentence.

I think I can write reasonable French, but after 4 years in Germany, please do not ask me to talk in it. In school I was never taught to speak (since age 11), when at age 17 they suddenly decided to do some talking. Needless to say that didn't work for me. It took 2 years of working in an environment with very patient French speakers to be able to produce an adequate French sentence with the right auxiliaire in the passé composé without hesitating. On paper that all came normally. If I do not get petrified and stall at the mere thought, I tend to correct myself.


^Easily. I don't know how to pronounce "oeuf," (oaf?) but I can recognize it as easily as I can the word "egg" because I've seen it a billion times.

Say 'er' and then put an f at the end of it. The French sound is a little more closed, but they should be able to understand you ;).

[Emil Miller]

I think more English speaking people would learn another language were it not for the genderisation problem. After all, why undertake something in which a large part consists of something that, from one's own experience, is completely unnecessary. Any English speaker will naturally question how an inanimate object can possibly have a gender, and since there isn't an adequate answer the language concerned will often be considered, at best, as slightly ridiculous.
However, if we wish to read the works of writers in the original we must accommodate this facet and reluctantly take it on board.
I think that by restricting gender to the male and female of living species, English becomes much easier to use but where it tends to fall down is in its inconsistency of pronunciation; how foreigner's manage to overcome that hurdle is a mystery to me.

[kiki1982]

Hmm, I've never thought about that aspect, but I can imagine that the conjugation of a simple French verb like être is already weird for a monolingual person. I mean, what? how many endings? Even a regular French verb like manger is a challenge. In many cases you can't even hear the difference, but spelling is different.

Although, when it comes to dealing with weird things (like different word order or there being no verb 'to be' in Russian), the best thing is to modestly accept that fact. Once you start comparing, things go pear-shaped.

Although, it is weird that animals go from neutral creatures - the cat, it is sitting on the chair) to either female or male if they have a personality - our dog is very clumsy, he often knocks over his bowl. I suppose that is because from then on you know it's a male or a female whereas otherwise you don't. I don't know which animals that includes though. I mean, does it stop at horses, dogs and cats, or does it also include tortoises, budgies, gekkos and things (they also have gnders ultimately).

As to pronunciation, I see what you mean. I am now at the point where I know words that I have seen spelled in books and totally mispronounce them or heard words and misspell them. Most of the ones I learned in school I pronounce properly (I think?), but the new ones depend on how I have encountered them.

[Aylinn]

Knowing a foreign language is definitely a very enriching experience. I know two languages: Polish and English, and I am trying to gain proficiency in Spanish. Fortunately, it is easier to learn anther language, once you have a good command of two languages.


I think that by restricting gender to the male and female of living species, English becomes much easier to use but where it tends to fall down is in its inconsistency of pronunciation; how foreigner's manage to overcome that hurdle is a mystery to me.
Yeah, that's the most difficult thing about English. The way words are written often has a very little to do with the way they are spelled. I simply bought a good dictionary on a CD that has the way words are pronounced recorded by native speakers and I tried to watch in English as many films and TV series as possible, so I was gradually becoming better and better, but I am still nowhere near as good as native speakers.

[lawpark]

Knowing a foreign language is definitely a very enriching experience. I know two languages: Polish and English, and I am trying to gain proficiency in Spanish. Fortunately, it is easier to learn anther language, once you have a good command of two languages.


I tend to think that whether it is easier to learn another language only hinges upon whether you already know a language that is somehow similar to the new language in question ...

[Aylinn]

I tend to think that whether it is easier to learn another language only hinges upon whether you already know a language that is somehow similar to the new language in question ...

That's true. The more closely related the languages, the easier is to master them. I haven't tried to learn a language that is completely different from these two I already know, but I think nothing is as discouraging as learning language you don't like. I had to learn German in the past and I hated it, mainly because I didn't like my teacher who made the Snow Queen look like a very nice person. Besides, I wanted to learn Russian, not German. :bawling:

On topic: I think that having a good command of two languages makes things a little easier in any case. Knowing tow languages made me realise how languages work and how important grammar is. Now I think of languages as complex games where grammar is a set of rules that needs to be memorized and the words are like pawns which can only move in the ways the rules allow. It's not a perfect comparison, but I find it practicable. When I was teaching, I noticed that people who learn a second language make the mistake of trying to apply rules from their native language to create sentences in another language. The result most often than not is bad. They often take a dictionary and use a word that was there without checking out how the word 'works' in that language, for example, if it is uncountable or countable or if it is a verb if it is transitive or intransitive. When I had explained to them that using foreign words as if they were the same as native words is like using a chess pawn as if it were a draughts piece, they told me that they found writing a bit easier, though it took them more time, and they began to understand what a blessing a dictionary with collocations, etc is! (http://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/support_1)

[lawpark]

I guess I happen to know two languages (Chinese / English) that somehow still make learning new grammar difficult ... Chinese has minimal grammar compared to Indo-European languages (no gender, no real tense, no transitive / intransitive), word order is similar to English. So start from Chinese as first language, English is tough enough, and no synergies are obvious to me

[Raven Falcon.]

I guess I happen to know two languages (Chinese / English) that somehow still make learning new grammar difficult ... Chinese has minimal grammar compared to Indo-European languages (no gender, no real tense, no transitive / intransitive), word order is similar to English. So start from Chinese as first language, English is tough enough, and no synergies are obvious to me

Despite that, your command of the written English language surpasses mine.
No, friend, it's not a farcical statement. I am that serious here.

As for Mandarin (I believe you're referring to Mandarin here), it proved very difficult for me to grasp its basics when I enrolled in a foundation course for the language last year. Therein lies my disagreement with you regarding the complexities of languages. Grammar alone does not make a language more complex than others; it's the combination of many aspects. While I don't deny the depth of grammar Indo-European languages typically posses, at the same time, however, I would like to say that the Chinese language emphasizes tones more. Words are differentiated by tones.

What meaning does the above purport?
Herein be the answer: novice learners who are not familiar with tonal languages will find it excruciating to grasp the language even at the most basic level.

In essence, familiarity influences an individual's (a layman, not a hardcore linguist) perception of a language's complexities.

[JBI]

Lawpark makes a point that many probably will not understand. Chinese. Irtually has no complex grammar. It is an intensely vocabulary driven language. Classical Chinese is even less restricted. For the native Chinese speaker, they must consider every word and sentence in a foreign light to speak. Easy for English since many are forgiving of weak grammar in spoken English, but just try French. Gender, time, agreements, subjunctive moods etc are murder for someone who must consider each word before they can begin to formulate a sentence. Compare that to a Russian speaker who basically has all grammar as rules hard lined in his/her brain from l1 and just needs to switch sounds and learn vocabulary.

That being said, I don't find most Chinese speakers good conversationalists in Chinese to begin with, so if you drop them in Italy where all talk is religion and politics, and people don't really self-censor, good luck. They will never open their mouths.

[Raven Falcon.]

Lawpark makes a point that many probably will not understand. Chinese. Irtually has no complex grammar. It is an intensely vocabulary driven language. Classical Chinese is even less restricted. For the native Chinese speaker, they must consider every word and sentence in a foreign light to speak. Easy for English since many are forgiving of weak grammar in spoken English, but just try French. Gender, time, agreements, subjunctive moods etc are murder for someone who must consider each word before they can begin to formulate a sentence. Compare that to a Russian speaker who basically has all grammar as rules hard lined in his/her brain from l1 and just needs to switch sounds and learn vocabulary.

That being said, I don't find most Chinese speakers good conversationalists in Chinese to begin with, so if you drop them in Italy where all talk is religion and politics, and people don't really self-censor, good luck. They will never open their mouths.
That enlightens me, thank you.

About Russian, I thought it was forgivable to write bad prose in Russian since both Dostoevsky and Tolstoy aren't great when it comes to prose

[lawpark]

In essence, familiarity influences an individual's (a layman, not a hardcore linguist) perception of a language's complexities.

Thanks, that is essentially my point. I think the fact that one knows 2 or 3 languages to start with does not matter as much as the fact that one already knows a language that would help make learning the target language easier.

JBI clarifies what I was trying to say very well - despite actively using English for 2 decades I still find have many slips when I don't differentiate he or she, singular / plural, or tense correctly.

Just saw JBI is now in Shanghai. Do you find the educational scene much different from Beijing?

[JBI]

Has not started yet. I am just visiting friends until Semptember. We'll see then. I feel like china as a whole is mOre hostile to westerners this time around. And that the looming recession here and general dissatisfaction with life here is being channeled at me instead of at those whose fault it is. Simply put, I did not create a recession in china.

As for the rest, well, I feel Prices have skyrocketted, and it is reflected in general mOods here. Everyone has a cellphone they cannot afford and wants to be a westerner with the difference that they want it in a place devoid of us. Simply they want what I have but are too racist to want me there too.

As for the intellectual climate, it never existed. That's just the product of a country where everybody has the same government propaganda textbooks and constantly cheats. They take themselves way to seriously and unfounded victim histories as culture are tedious and annoying cultures to deal with

[Annamariah]

In Alberta we have to study French starting in grade six, but we're able to stop once we reach grade eight, and boy did I ever do just that. I wish I hadn't now, I hate that I can't speak French. Well actually, like most Canadians, I can read label-French: all labels in Canada have both French and English, I think we kind of skim the words and absorb it throughout our lives (my friends all call iced tea "the glace," pronounced real anglo-like).
Everything is in both Finnish and Swedish here. So here too people know the Swedish words for most foods, I guess, from reading the packages at the breakfast table throughout their lives :D We also have the texts on the street signs in both Finnish and Swedish. Sometimes it's rather confusing to have two names for most cities and streets...

http://www.uwasa.fi/midcom-serveattachmentguid-1e0dcfdc6dc1c2ffa9ee1de2e57518ac/katukyltti.jpg

[lawpark]

Has not started yet. I am just visiting friends until Semptember. We'll see then. I feel like china as a whole is mOre hostile to westerners this time around. And that the looming recession here and general dissatisfaction with life here is being channeled at me instead of at those whose fault it is. Simply put, I did not create a recession in china.

As for the rest, well, I feel Prices have skyrocketted, and it is reflected in general mOods here. Everyone has a cellphone they cannot afford and wants to be a westerner with the difference that they want it in a place devoid of us. Simply they want what I have but are too racist to want me there too.

As for the intellectual climate, it never existed. That's just the product of a country where everybody has the same government propaganda textbooks and constantly cheats. They take themselves way to seriously and unfounded victim histories as culture are tedious and annoying cultures to deal with

I recalled your prior posts on your experience in China. This really begs the question: why would you want to do a Masters there?

[JBI]

I recalled your prior posts on your experience in China. This really begs the question: why would you want to do a Masters there?

"field time". I am in Area studies by definition in the West, therefore it is a requirement. Plus they pay me handsomely to just sit here.