Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well, honestly, five was just a random figure. I wanted some feedback, so I thought I would choose a somewhat shocking statement to open with.
Then you are just plain weird. Anyways, my advice is to begin your studies with one language first. Once you gain some conversational skills with one language then move on to another. Study a related language for maximum efficiency, or study something in an entirely different language family to really diversify.
I agree w/ the linguist in terms of related languages. As far as pronunciation, I think Japanese/Spanish are a nice combination. The one problem I had w/ learning French and Portugese is that they're too close to Spanish, so I would be pretty lazy if I didn't know a word. BUT I also didn't study hard. If you study you can definitely do it. To be "well educated" you may need more than 2 years, but how did people learn languages in the past? They read books and practised. Personally I think you can do it.
In additon to the relationship between "romance" languages, if you want to learn Japanese/Korean/Chinese, they all use the chinese character set (at higher levels) so you may save a little time, there too. I say GO FOR IT. Maybe you can start a thread. I have 4 languages I need to learn, maybe I can join you and we can see where we are in 2 years!
The only way to "reproduce" immersion (I use your word although technically there's no way to reproduce immersion, either you're immersed or you're not) is to remain surrounded by the target language whether native speakers are present or not.
The best way to do this is via movies, music and literature of any sort, such as newspapers, magazines and books.
One of the ways I use to help refresh whenever I feel my Russian or Italian are slipping (and believe me, it happens QUICKLY without practice) is to have music and/or movies playing in the background while I'm moving around the house or driving. For that matter, because music and language use the same portion of the brain, it's amazing how much one can pick up from a totally unfamiliar language via music with the aid of a dictionary.
For initiating a language, approaches vary. Some people have a knack for languages, some do not. More mysterious still, tests have demonstrated that some people may have a knack for certain languages while having extreme difficulty in others, as though certain sounds simply "make sense" to them while other sounds slide away like water off a duck's back.
Despite an amazing ability to mimic sounds I had great difficulty comprehending Russian for nearly my entire year at DLI, simply scraping by, until near the end something caused a breakthrough and I began to "get it". Only years later when actually visiting the Ukraine for several weeks did my brain reboot so that the language and the FEEL for that language came to me.
If you really want to develop your basic proficiency quickly it will require some actual devotion, not merely playing around.
IF you're serious, then I recommend the following -- especially if you have native speakers at your disposal, and MOST especially if those native speakers are relatively fluent in English:
First, purchase the book The Quick and Dirty Guide to learning Languages FAST, by A.G. Hawke. I purchased mine through Amazon quite some time ago and although I read it, I ended up shelving it when I ended my military career. However, the reasoning and the structure behind the learning process as outlined by the book are extremely solid, both in critical thinking and in format. I plan to use the book this coming weekend in the pursuit of learning Czech since a native speaker is finally available to me.
Second, I recommend the Pimsleur courses, which are nearly 100 percent audio. Many people who have studied other languages get fussy where Pimsleur is concerned but I think they're perfect for the language novice because they begin by emphasizing the individual sound elements and as vocabulary grows they encourage critical and structural thinking.
With Pimsleur you can't just listen to the lesson once and assume you've got it. The lessons are in 30-minute chunks which I personally find perfect for a morning session and an evening session. Afterward, rather than merely resting on my laurels, I write down what I learned if I know the writing system or its phonetic equivalent OR I review and mix-and-match the words as appropriate.
With language you have ONE answer: Practice-practice-practice.
Between Pimsleur and a good dictionary you've got a solid start. I still recommend books, movies and music in your target language(s) for the next best thing to immersion.
Tried to rep you but couldn't. Only comment on the above is while it's "La France" in French, most Ukrainians I know don't like "The Ukraine" - it carries the implication that it's a region or territory, rather than an independent country.
In my experience, relatively short study sessions daily or at least 5X weekly are more effective than bigger but less frequent classes.
It's important to appreciate that the 4 functions of a language - understand, speak, read, write - are semi-independent. I can read technical German to a small extent, but if a perfect speaker of German reads it to me aloud, I won't do as well as reading myself. Since most of my Russian studies has been reading, I read better than I write, speak, or understand. Usually you understand at a higher level than you can speak.
It seems to me, too, that there is a maximum speed of learning that you can't really exceed - at least I seem to have one. It's like my brain needs a certain amount of time to "file" what's been learned.
Where in all of creation did you get that absurd figure?!?
As a practicing military linguist for several years I can assure you, that unless you're talking about some form of "mastery" involving a complete knowledge of ALL grammatical and vocabulary-related items (an impossibility since language is always changing, mutating through slang and shifting vernacular) your calculations are WAY off! Further, an immersion environment is the FASTEST way to learn, with most people who actually seek out an immersion environment rather than avoiding it (most people tend to congregate with natives of their own language rather than taking advantage of linguistic immersion) requiring a few months of devotion to become travel-proficient and a year or so to achieve real fluency outside of specified technical fields.
Conversational proficiency without technical application requires about a thousand words or so, give or take.
Proficiency for a standard newspaper with some technical terms looked up requires about 1500, again, give or take.
The majority of NATIVE speakers in any given language operate at a proficiency level of 4/4+, with EDUCATED speakers being the only ones to achieve a proficiency level of 5 based on broader exposure and the application of technical terminology outside a specialized or individual field.
Were you to sit down and actually calculate your own vocabulary you'd be surprised at how relatively few ACTIVE words you possessed as opposed to PASSIVE, and amazed at how small THAT was when compared to the total of words in your native language.
To the OP:
If you actually want to learn five different languages within two years you WILL have to consider the level of proficiency you wish to achieve. Further, you will have to consider the specific languages you wish to study and apply this approach to.
For example, you will go further if you study within a language FAMILY, such as studying French, Romanian, Italian, Spanish and Portuguese since they are all part of the Romance family and you will find Latin a strong aid based on this.
If, however, you are choosing to diversify widely and take, for example, Russian, Mandarin, Arabic, Swahili and T'lingit, then you will be achieving only base proficiency at best since you would be forced to either eschew writing systems almost entirely OR give up precious time otherwise devoted to sounds in order to learn these writing systems.
Further, since you would be diminishing the devotional language time to 146 days at a maximum, assuming near-perfect retention on your part and discounting the effects of bleedover (NOT a negligible phenomenon), this is very little time indeed to accomplish more than conversational fluency for politenesses and basics such as directions, moderate discussions of the weather and current events, etc.
Knowing what you have in mind would go a LONG way toward advising you how to best achieve your goal. Do you have any specifics, or is this just something you cooked up haphazardly?
My definition of mastery means native fluency, which does indeed take a very long time. Seven years is a general figure; it may take more or less depending on how talented you are, and usually includes learning all of the grammar as well as learning proper pronunciation. Which was why I very clearly asked the OP about her goals and expectations, as did you.
Now, as a "military linguist," I am glad that you are so gifted and talented wrt foreign languages and are so easily able to acquire them. However, the majority of the population are not linguists and learn languages with much less facility than, say, a military linguist.
And BTW, I am very surprised that someone who works in government and specializes in languages is so lacking in tact and diplomacy. The next time you disagree with someone, you might want to check your attitude before you post. Furthermore, I speak three languages and do not come to this forum to receive a pompous and patronizing lecture about something about which I am already very well educated.
My definition of mastery means native fluency, which does indeed take a very long time. Seven years is a general figure; it may take more or less depending on how talented you are, and usually includes learning all of the grammar as well as learning proper pronunciation. Which was why I very clearly asked the OP about her goals and expectations, as did you.
Now, as a "military linguist," I am glad that you are so gifted and talented wrt foreign languages and are so easily able to acquire them. However, the majority of the population are not linguists and learn languages with much less facility than, say, a military linguist.
And BTW, I am very surprised that someone who works in government and specializes in languages is so lacking in tact and diplomacy. The next time you disagree with someone, you might want to check your attitude before you post. Furthermore, I speak three languages and do not come to this forum to receive a pompous and patronizing lecture about something about which I am already very well educated.
If you think seven years of immersion is an "average" requirement for native proficiency, you may not be as well-educated on the topic as you believe. Even using the figure of seven years as a "general figure", let's say give-or-take two years, it's still WAY out there.
My terse attitude with regard to your response is because over the years I've developed a low tolerance for people who say outlandish things and dole them out as "fact". I'm well aware that not everyone has the same capacity for learning languages, let alone doing so rapidly. Nevertheless, telling someone that mastery (which you have defined as "native fluency") requires seven years of immersion is totally absurd.
People who go through DLI are, admittedly, gifted for languages. That being said, it's relatively common for many to graduate after anywhere from seven months to sixteen months, depending on the target language, with a 2+/3 proficiency level -- and DLI is most assuredly NOT an immersion environment. Those levels are based on rote memorization and classroom practice. Students who actually devote themselves to the language have been known to test at 3+ levels.
Considering the non-immersion nature of the program, these proficiency levels (again, ranging anywhere from seven months to sixteen months) approach native proficiency.
Now let's remove any exceptional gift for languages but supply an immersion environment. An immersion environment means constant exposure and more importantly, necessity.
People are often surprised to hear that African merchants with dingy little shacks speak as many as eight or nine different languages. HOW do these people manage this? Because they are exposed and because there is necessity.
I've seen so many non-English speakers immigrate, people who can converse more readily than most of the natives around me within two years, people with no special gift, only exposure and necessity to communicate, that I find seven years, even as a general figure, to be nonsense.
Age is a relevant factor; another is the level of immersion. If a person speaks one language haltingly in public but seldom goes out, meanwhile speaking another language entirely at home, it's not immersion, it's exposure.
The second edition of the Oxford English Dictionary contains full entries for 171,476 words in current use and 47,156 obsolete words. Another 9,500 derivative words can be added to that via subentries, etc. (Source: AskOxford: How many words are there in the English language? )
The average vocabulary for a native speaker of English opens up a huge can of worms based on how exactly to interpret the estimates. An excellent explanation of this is given here:
However, the UPPER estimates given for college graduates were around 60,000. Opposing estimates fell as low as 20K -- all argued with regard to inflection.
Further arguments still estimate that Shakespeare's vocabulary numbered anywhere from 18K to 25K. Even Russians estimate Pushkin's vocabulary around 25K, and believe you me, they consider themselves a VERY literate lot and not ONE of them would compare his or her self to Pushkin.
I speak the language very much goodly and I'd never dare compare myself to Shakespeare, not for a second.
The average Joe on the streets is a native speaker but certainly not a college graduate, so where do those estimates fall for him? Further, for the majority of these estimates there seems very little to back the claims up.
Or... is Joe NOT a native speaker, probably averaging around 40K words (averaging these estimates very loosely) since that would leave about 200K words which Joe doesn't know? Let's double Shakespeare's estimate to 50K, or even take his genius into consideration and call it 70K; he's still left with quite a gap there between his command and words in the language.
Most of the Russians with whom I converse on a regular basis are far more educated than I, far more educated than most of the Americans with whom I associate or work -- yet I have corrected their grammar on numerous occasions since they're as footloose and fancy-free with their grammar as we are with our own. Does that mean I have BETTER than native fluency despite that their vocabulary in the target language outshines my own?
I think the time one takes to learn a language depends on how much he is exposed to that language: how many times a week does he study? For how long? Does he have a teacher or just a recorded method? Can he interract with native speakers on a regular basis? Does he travel to countries where the language is spoken? Etc...
Then there is the question of motivation: why does one study that language? Is it compulsory in his school? Is he going to relocate to that country? Is he in love with someone from this country? Is he fascinated by the culture from countries where this language is spoken?
If you just learn because you must, then it may not be that easy, because you may not like it. I believe that you need to be interested in the people and the culture if you want to learn "quickly". Don't forget that a language is not just grammar and phonetics, it's also a cultural thing. Someone was advising the OP to listen to music or watch movies in the target language as much a possible: that is culture. If you don't like this culture, then you'll be less likely to listen or watch things from these countries...
I used to teach English in France, and the best students either had the chance to travel and understood how important it was to speak English, or they were so fascinated by the culture (usually US culture) that they were motivated and worked more. The ones who were there just because it was a compulsory course were less likely to make any effort and learn.
Of course, there are exceptions!
..
Now, as a "military linguist," I am glad that you are so gifted and talented wrt foreign languages and are so easily able to acquire them. However, the majority of the population are not linguists and learn languages with much less facility than, say, a military linguist.
And BTW, I am very surprised that someone who works in government and specializes in languages is so lacking in tact and diplomacy. The next time you disagree with someone, you might want to check your attitude before you post. Furthermore, I speak three languages and do not come to this forum to receive a pompous and patronizing lecture about something about which I am already very well educated.
WOOT WOOT Starlita! I can tell you are educated, and you VA chica (that is what we used to say as a joke during my study abroad way back when... ;8) ).
Do you want to start now?
I'm going to start:
Korean
Arabic
Japanese
Portugese (Brazilian)
French (Just added this, I hate French, but maybe I can match your 5)
TODAY!
Okay, If you want to start too, I'm going to do the alphabet and practice writing for 30 minutes each language! I already waste TONS of time watching Korean and Arabic videos on YOUTUBE, so that's studying, right?
Let me know which ones you want to learn, maybe we can do the same ones... I can help a little if you want to learn the pronunciation for K,A,J,P because I have mastered the hard parts because I studied them previously. I guess that's kind of cheating, but so what. My French really really really sucks, though.
That actually sounds like it might be fun. Do you want to do speaking and writing or just speaking? I think I could probably learn speaking and phonetics a lot more easily than I could learn the complex alphabet for some of these languages, but I could go back and learn the alphabet later after I have some idea of the language. If, on the other hand, I try to learn writing first, it will likely take more time. I like the challenge, if you were serious. Thank you very much. Where should I meet you on the net?
That actually sounds like it might be fun. Do you want to do speaking and writing or just speaking? I think I could probably learn speaking and phonetics a lot more easily than I could learn the complex alphabet for some of these languages, but I could go back and learn the alphabet later after I have some idea of the language. If, on the other hand, I try to learn writing first, it will likely take more time. I like the challenge, if you were serious. Thank you very much. Where should I meet you on the net?
I am doing both at the same time for all of the others sort of. Except Arabic. I'm learning the standard alphabet first. For French I skipped the alphabet (it's the same as in English) anyway just PM me back. I don't do facebook etc, but we can email.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
