Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Fluent versus Bilingual versus Biliterate
475 views
Skip to first unread message
Binya Kobayashi
Sep 4, 2014, 9:30:31 PM9/4/14
to
My wife is filling out a job application which is asking about her
language ability.
The question has three checkboxes:
[ ] fluent
[ ] biliterate
[ ] bilingual
She checked "bilingual" because she can read and write two languages
fluently.
I would have checked "biliterate", for the same reason.
Googling, I see that "fluent" means you can "speak" both, and "biliterate"
means you can both speak and read and write both, but what does bilingual
mean (as compared to biliterate)?
language ability.
The question has three checkboxes:
[ ] fluent
[ ] biliterate
[ ] bilingual
She checked "bilingual" because she can read and write two languages
fluently.
I would have checked "biliterate", for the same reason.
Googling, I see that "fluent" means you can "speak" both, and "biliterate"
means you can both speak and read and write both, but what does bilingual
mean (as compared to biliterate)?
Peter Moylan
Sep 4, 2014, 9:59:33 PM9/4/14
to
without saying anything about whether you can read or write in either.
Until your post I had never encountered "biliterate", but the meaning
seems obvious enough: you can read and write in two languages, but not
necessarily speak them both.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Binya Kobayashi
Sep 4, 2014, 10:01:44 PM9/4/14
to
On Fri, 05 Sep 2014 11:59:33 +1000, Peter Moylan wrote:
> I would take "bilingual" to mean that you speak both languages, but
> without saying anything about whether you can read or write in either.
>
> Until your post I had never encountered "biliterate", but the meaning
> seems obvious enough: you can read and write in two languages, but not
> necessarily speak them both.
But then, why does the form have "fluent", which, to me, means the same
> I would take "bilingual" to mean that you speak both languages, but
> without saying anything about whether you can read or write in either.
>
> Until your post I had never encountered "biliterate", but the meaning
> seems obvious enough: you can read and write in two languages, but not
> necessarily speak them both.
as "bilingual" does to you and me?
Peter T. Daniels
Sep 4, 2014, 11:13:27 PM9/4/14
to
And I can't know what newsgroup you're actually reading, so you may or may
not see this:
_Possibly_, "fluent" means learned to speak the second language as an
adult really well, and "bilingual" means has both languages natively.
Read-and-write both, but not so good at speaking, is "biliterate."
Charles Bishop
Sep 4, 2014, 11:41:22 PM9/4/14
to
In article
<d6e15$54091237$43da7656$89...@nntpswitch.blueworldhosting.com>,
A friend of mine applied for a job in a school in Florida somewhere. She
check the bilingual box because she is fluent in two languages.
She is fluent in English (as much as any of us are) and Hebrew.
They meant bilingual in /Spanish/ as well as English.
--
\C
<d6e15$54091237$43da7656$89...@nntpswitch.blueworldhosting.com>,
check the bilingual box because she is fluent in two languages.
She is fluent in English (as much as any of us are) and Hebrew.
They meant bilingual in /Spanish/ as well as English.
--
\C
Steve Hayes
Sep 5, 2014, 2:03:19 AM9/5/14
to
On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 20:30:31 -0500, Binya Kobayashi <binyako...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
I take "bilingual" to mean you are fluent in both languages, and that you can
speak, read and write them both equally well.
I would take "biliterate" to mean that you can read and or write both
languages, but not necessarily speak both fluently. Otherwise it merely seems
to be a synonym for "bilingual".
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
wrote:
speak, read and write them both equally well.
I would take "biliterate" to mean that you can read and or write both
languages, but not necessarily speak both fluently. Otherwise it merely seems
to be a synonym for "bilingual".
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
Peter Moylan
Sep 5, 2014, 2:52:03 AM9/5/14
to
competent in both the spoken form and the written form of the languages.
Having said that, I would maintain that the job application form was
badly designed, because different people are going to have different
interpretations of the words.
It occurs to me, too, that you need some minimal understanding of Latin
to perceive clearly the difference between "bilingual" and "biliterate",
given that most dictionaries don't even seem to have heard of "biliterate".
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Sep 5, 2014, 3:37:18 AM9/5/14
to
Anyway, I agree with those who have said that "bilterate" is not an
everyday word, and although anyone knowing some Latin can guess its
meaning, but that leaves out a lot of people.
--
athel
Ian Jackson
Sep 5, 2014, 4:44:12 AM9/5/14
to
In message <c6t7hd...@mid.individual.net>, Athel Cornish-Bowden
<acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> writes
On a similar subject, what does having a "working knowledge" of a
language mean?
--
Ian
<acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> writes
language mean?
--
Ian
Pablo
Sep 5, 2014, 4:50:31 AM9/5/14
to
speak better Spanish than a lot of them. But in no way is my Spanish
"natural" like my English.
--
Pablo
http://www.ipernity.com/home/313627
http://paulc.es/
Stan Brown
Sep 5, 2014, 6:37:38 AM9/5/14
to
Why is it that people who write things never look at them and ask
what a reader is going to think?
--
"The difference between the /almost right/ word and the /right/ word
is ... the difference between the lightning-bug and the lightning."
--Mark Twain
Stan Brown, Tompkins County, NY, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com
Stan Brown
Sep 5, 2014, 6:39:19 AM9/5/14
to
On Fri, 5 Sep 2014 09:44:12 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
>
> On a similar subject, what does having a "working knowledge" of a
> language mean?
It means you listened to a tape on the way to the job interview.
>
> On a similar subject, what does having a "working knowledge" of a
> language mean?
Seriously, I think it means you can stumble along in restricted
settings, but are not really fluent.
quia...@yahoo.com
Sep 5, 2014, 7:45:26 AM9/5/14
to
On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 20:30:31 -0500, Binya Kobayashi
and only those who check all three boxes are judged confident enough.
--
John
CDB
Sep 5, 2014, 7:46:13 AM9/5/14
to
where bilingualism requires French and English, who claimed informally
to be bilingual because he had been taught Irish Gaelic.
As Peter M has suggested, the terms above are ambiguous and should be
defined by the user. I might define "fluent" as "able to communicate in
your second language well enough not to frustrate your interlocutor into
switching to your first language".
Cheryl
Sep 5, 2014, 7:59:03 AM9/5/14
to
On 2014-09-05 9:16 AM, CDB wrote:
> On 04/09/2014 11:41 PM, Charles Bishop wrote:
>> Binya Kobayashi <binyako...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>> My wife is filling out a job application which is asking about her
>>> language ability.
>
>>> The question has three checkboxes: [ ] fluent [ ] biliterate [ ]
>>> bilingual
>
>>> She checked "bilingual" because she can read and write two
>>> languages fluently.
>
>>> I would have checked "biliterate", for the same reason.
>
>>> Googling, I see that "fluent" means you can "speak" both, and
>>> "biliterate" means you can both speak and read and write both, but
>>> what does bilingual mean (as compared to biliterate)?
>
>> A friend of mine applied for a job in a school in Florida somewhere.
>> She check the bilingual box because she is fluent in two languages.
>
>> She is fluent in English (as much as any of us are) and Hebrew.
>
>> They meant bilingual in /Spanish/ as well as English.
>
> I had a colleague from Ireland, a fellow-civil servant here in Canada
> where bilingualism requires French and English, who claimed informally
> to be bilingual because he had been taught Irish Gaelic.
There's also the old joke about the federal politician touring Cape
> On 04/09/2014 11:41 PM, Charles Bishop wrote:
>> Binya Kobayashi <binyako...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>> My wife is filling out a job application which is asking about her
>>> language ability.
>
>>> The question has three checkboxes: [ ] fluent [ ] biliterate [ ]
>>> bilingual
>
>>> She checked "bilingual" because she can read and write two
>>> languages fluently.
>
>>> I would have checked "biliterate", for the same reason.
>
>>> Googling, I see that "fluent" means you can "speak" both, and
>>> "biliterate" means you can both speak and read and write both, but
>>> what does bilingual mean (as compared to biliterate)?
>
>> A friend of mine applied for a job in a school in Florida somewhere.
>> She check the bilingual box because she is fluent in two languages.
>
>> She is fluent in English (as much as any of us are) and Hebrew.
>
>> They meant bilingual in /Spanish/ as well as English.
>
> I had a colleague from Ireland, a fellow-civil servant here in Canada
> where bilingualism requires French and English, who claimed informally
> to be bilingual because he had been taught Irish Gaelic.
Breton who requested a bilingual driver, and got one who was bilingual
in English and Gaelic.
> As Peter M has suggested, the terms above are ambiguous and should be
> defined by the user. I might define "fluent" as "able to communicate in
> your second language well enough not to frustrate your interlocutor into
> switching to your first language".
>
>
is both fluent and literate in both languages, but of course that might
not be the case. It's entirely possible to speak a language but not be
able to write it, or vice versa. This is, however, the first time I have
encountered 'biliterate'. I have seen forms with check boxes for whether
you can understand, speak and read each of the languages you claim to
know. That approach is much more clear.
--
Cheryl
Steve Hayes
Sep 5, 2014, 8:23:09 AM9/5/14
to
On Fri, 05 Sep 2014 09:29:03 -0230, Cheryl <cper...@mun.ca> wrote:
>The terms are confusing. I always assumed that someone who is bilingual
>is both fluent and literate in both languages, but of course that might
>not be the case. It's entirely possible to speak a language but not be
>able to write it, or vice versa. This is, however, the first time I have
>encountered 'biliterate'. I have seen forms with check boxes for whether
>you can understand, speak and read each of the languages you claim to
>know. That approach is much more clear.
Indeed.
>The terms are confusing. I always assumed that someone who is bilingual
>is both fluent and literate in both languages, but of course that might
>not be the case. It's entirely possible to speak a language but not be
>able to write it, or vice versa. This is, however, the first time I have
>encountered 'biliterate'. I have seen forms with check boxes for whether
>you can understand, speak and read each of the languages you claim to
>know. That approach is much more clear.
I can read Dutch, but I can't speak or write it, and I can barely understand
it when spoken.
I'm not sure how one would describe that.
CDB
Sep 5, 2014, 8:33:25 AM9/5/14
to
On 05/09/2014 7:59 AM, Cheryl wrote:
Michael knew it, no doubt. He was a lovely man (as one might say) who
left us too soon.
>> As Peter M has suggested, the terms above are ambiguous and should
>> be defined by the user. I might define "fluent" as "able to
>> communicate in your second language well enough not to frustrate
>> your interlocutor into switching to your first language".
> The terms are confusing. I always assumed that someone who is
> bilingual is both fluent and literate in both languages, but of
> course that might not be the case. It's entirely possible to speak a
> language but not be able to write it, or vice versa. This is,
> however, the first time I have encountered 'biliterate'. I have seen
> forms with check boxes for whether you can understand, speak and read
> each of the languages you claim to know. That approach is much more
> clear.
"Biliterate" is new to me too. In official Ottawa, "bilingual" means
"having passed the language tests administered by Secretary of State
with a sufficiently high mark", in the three categories you mention.
Many civil servants are bilingual without being entirely fluent.
left us too soon.
>> As Peter M has suggested, the terms above are ambiguous and should
>> be defined by the user. I might define "fluent" as "able to
>> communicate in your second language well enough not to frustrate
>> your interlocutor into switching to your first language".
> The terms are confusing. I always assumed that someone who is
> bilingual is both fluent and literate in both languages, but of
> course that might not be the case. It's entirely possible to speak a
> language but not be able to write it, or vice versa. This is,
> however, the first time I have encountered 'biliterate'. I have seen
> forms with check boxes for whether you can understand, speak and read
> each of the languages you claim to know. That approach is much more
> clear.
"having passed the language tests administered by Secretary of State
with a sufficiently high mark", in the three categories you mention.
Many civil servants are bilingual without being entirely fluent.
Pablo
Sep 5, 2014, 9:17:15 AM9/5/14
to
Steve Hayes wrote:
> On Fri, 05 Sep 2014 09:29:03 -0230, Cheryl <cper...@mun.ca> wrote:
>
>>The terms are confusing. I always assumed that someone who is bilingual
>>is both fluent and literate in both languages, but of course that might
>>not be the case. It's entirely possible to speak a language but not be
>>able to write it, or vice versa. This is, however, the first time I have
>>encountered 'biliterate'. I have seen forms with check boxes for whether
>>you can understand, speak and read each of the languages you claim to
>>know. That approach is much more clear.
>
> Indeed.
>
> I can read Dutch, but I can't speak or write it, and I can barely
> understand it when spoken.
I'm the same with Catalan, Portuguese, Italian and probably a few others.
> On Fri, 05 Sep 2014 09:29:03 -0230, Cheryl <cper...@mun.ca> wrote:
>
>>The terms are confusing. I always assumed that someone who is bilingual
>>is both fluent and literate in both languages, but of course that might
>>not be the case. It's entirely possible to speak a language but not be
>>able to write it, or vice versa. This is, however, the first time I have
>>encountered 'biliterate'. I have seen forms with check boxes for whether
>>you can understand, speak and read each of the languages you claim to
>>know. That approach is much more clear.
>
> Indeed.
>
> I can read Dutch, but I can't speak or write it, and I can barely
> understand it when spoken.
Portuguese sounds like Russian to me.
Jerry Friedman
Sep 5, 2014, 9:40:24 AM9/5/14
to
both languages or would be mistaken for one by a native speaker (a rare
phenomenon). However, it's certainly not always used that way.
--
Jerry Friedman
Christian Weisgerber
Sep 5, 2014, 8:31:58 AM9/5/14
to
On 2014-09-05, Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> Whoever wrote that application is apparently not even monolingual.
Unilingual? Monoglot(tic)?
> Whoever wrote that application is apparently not even monolingual.
--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de
Christian Weisgerber
Sep 5, 2014, 8:39:19 AM9/5/14
to
On 2014-09-05, Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org> wrote:
> It occurs to me, too, that you need some minimal understanding of Latin
> to perceive clearly the difference between "bilingual" and "biliterate",
> given that most dictionaries don't even seem to have heard of "biliterate".
Do you? All I know about Latin I know from English word formation.
> It occurs to me, too, that you need some minimal understanding of Latin
> to perceive clearly the difference between "bilingual" and "biliterate",
> given that most dictionaries don't even seem to have heard of "biliterate".
Jerry Friedman
Sep 5, 2014, 11:11:57 AM9/5/14
to
On 9/5/14 6:31 AM, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
> On 2014-09-05, Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
>> Whoever wrote that application is apparently not even monolingual.
>
> Unilingual? Monoglot(tic)?
"Monolingual" is the usual word, as I imagine you know. People even use
> On 2014-09-05, Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
>> Whoever wrote that application is apparently not even monolingual.
>
> Unilingual? Monoglot(tic)?
it on television.
--
Jerry Friedman
Jerry Friedman
Sep 5, 2014, 11:13:33 AM9/5/14
to
On 9/5/14 4:37 AM, Stan Brown wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 20:30:31 -0500, Binya Kobayashi wrote:
>>
>> My wife is filling out a job application which is asking about her
>> language ability.
>>
>> The question has three checkboxes:
>> [ ] fluent
>> [ ] biliterate
>> [ ] bilingual
>>
>> She checked "bilingual" because she can read and write two languages
>> fluently.
>>
>> I would have checked "biliterate", for the same reason.
>>
>> Googling, I see that "fluent" means you can "speak" both, and "biliterate"
>> means you can both speak and read and write both, but what does bilingual
>> mean (as compared to biliterate)?
>
> Whoever wrote that application is apparently not even monolingual.
In English.
> On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 20:30:31 -0500, Binya Kobayashi wrote:
>>
>> My wife is filling out a job application which is asking about her
>> language ability.
>>
>> The question has three checkboxes:
>> [ ] fluent
>> [ ] biliterate
>> [ ] bilingual
>>
>> She checked "bilingual" because she can read and write two languages
>> fluently.
>>
>> I would have checked "biliterate", for the same reason.
>>
>> Googling, I see that "fluent" means you can "speak" both, and "biliterate"
>> means you can both speak and read and write both, but what does bilingual
>> mean (as compared to biliterate)?
>
> Whoever wrote that application is apparently not even monolingual.
> Why is it that people who write things never look at them and ask
> what a reader is going to think?
some jargon meaning of those words.
--
Jerry Friedman
the Omrud
Sep 5, 2014, 2:52:31 PM9/5/14
to
--
David
the Omrud
Sep 5, 2014, 2:56:18 PM9/5/14
to
I'm surprised at the varying answers.
Fluent - can live/work in the stated language but is not a native.
Bilingual - native speaker of more than one language. These days, all
native Welsh speakers are Welsh/English bilingual.
Biliterate - no idea. I hever heard it before.
Did the questionnaire specify which language(s) it was asking about?
You can't just be "bilingual" or "fluent".
--
David
Binya Kobayashi
Sep 5, 2014, 3:34:52 PM9/5/14
to
On Fri, 05 Sep 2014 19:56:18 +0100, the Omrud wrote:
> Did the questionnaire specify which language(s) it was asking about?
> You can't just be "bilingual" or "fluent".
It was for a California government position.
> Did the questionnaire specify which language(s) it was asking about?
> You can't just be "bilingual" or "fluent".
Most likely they care most about Hispanish.
John Varela
Sep 5, 2014, 5:21:25 PM9/5/14
to
On Fri, 5 Sep 2014 11:46:13 UTC, CDB <belle...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I had a colleague from Ireland, a fellow-civil servant here in Canada
> where bilingualism requires French and English, who claimed informally
> to be bilingual because he had been taught Irish Gaelic.
>
> As Peter M has suggested, the terms above are ambiguous and should be
> defined by the user. I might define "fluent" as "able to communicate in
> your second language well enough not to frustrate your interlocutor into
> switching to your first language".
Fifty-odd years ago my cousin was a junior Foreign Service Officer.
>
> I had a colleague from Ireland, a fellow-civil servant here in Canada
> where bilingualism requires French and English, who claimed informally
> to be bilingual because he had been taught Irish Gaelic.
>
> As Peter M has suggested, the terms above are ambiguous and should be
> defined by the user. I might define "fluent" as "able to communicate in
> your second language well enough not to frustrate your interlocutor into
> switching to your first language".
The State Department sent him to school to learn French. As near as
I can recall, he said that there were something like three levels of
skill. The lowest was about my skill level in Spanish: enough to
talk to hotel clerks and taxi drivers, get directions, and carry on
a rudimentary conversation. The second level was the ability to
carry on conversations in a social setting: discuss the children's
ailments, describe vacation plans, give directions to servants, and
so forth. Spouses were expected to achieve that level. The highest
level, which was required of Foreign Service Officers, was the
ability to carry on conversations about complex abstract topics.
--
John Varela
Robert Bannister
Sep 5, 2014, 6:20:12 PM9/5/14
to
On 5/09/2014 9:30 am, Binya Kobayashi wrote:
> My wife is filling out a job application which is asking about her
> language ability.
>
> The question has three checkboxes:
> [ ] fluent
> [ ] biliterate
> [ ] bilingual
>
> She checked "bilingual" because she can read and write two languages
> fluently.
>
> I would have checked "biliterate", for the same reason.
>
> Googling, I see that "fluent" means you can "speak" both, and "biliterate"
> means you can both speak and read and write both, but what does bilingual
> mean (as compared to biliterate)?
>
It means you are as good as a native speaker in two languages. The
> My wife is filling out a job application which is asking about her
> language ability.
>
> The question has three checkboxes:
> [ ] fluent
> [ ] biliterate
> [ ] bilingual
>
> She checked "bilingual" because she can read and write two languages
> fluently.
>
> I would have checked "biliterate", for the same reason.
>
> Googling, I see that "fluent" means you can "speak" both, and "biliterate"
> means you can both speak and read and write both, but what does bilingual
> mean (as compared to biliterate)?
>
others just mean you are good.
--
Robert Bannister - 1940-71 SE England
1972-now W Australia
Robert Bannister
Sep 5, 2014, 6:22:42 PM9/5/14
to
the meaning of biliterate.
Robert Bannister
Sep 5, 2014, 6:26:43 PM9/5/14
to
mean you can use the language well enough to get by in a working
situation (which would depend on the job concerned), but it could mean a
knowledge of how the language works, which is a very different thing. I
suspect, however, that the degree of proficiency required for my first
meaning above would vary immensely especially between an prospective
employer and the employee.
Robert Bannister
Sep 5, 2014, 6:31:00 PM9/5/14
to
thankfully-now-scrapped "outcomes based education" idea, was that some
of the outcomes suggested for Year 12 students in French were things I
can't do even in English.
Hüseyin Bölükbaşı
Sep 5, 2014, 6:31:28 PM9/5/14
to
On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 06:22:42 +0800, Robert Bannister wrote:
> I agree with Christian. A good knowledge of English would let you guess
> the meaning of biliterate.
I get Biliterate versus Bilingual.
> I agree with Christian. A good knowledge of English would let you guess
> the meaning of biliterate.
But how is Fluent different than Bilingual?
Robert Bannister
Sep 5, 2014, 6:35:45 PM9/5/14
to
On 5/09/2014 2:03 pm, Steve Hayes wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 20:30:31 -0500, Binya Kobayashi <binyako...@yahoo.com>
> speak, read and write them both equally well.
More than just fluent - as fluent as a native speaker of each language,
which requires an extensive knowledge not just of the educated language,
but of current buzzwords, current slang and even current "issues" and
fashions. The ability to communicate on different levels without
thinking too much about it. It is very hard to maintain this bilingual
state unless you are constantly in touch with speakers and writers in
both areas where the two languages are spoken.
>
> I would take "biliterate" to mean that you can read and or write both
> languages, but not necessarily speak both fluently. Otherwise it merely seems
> to be a synonym for "bilingual".
> On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 20:30:31 -0500, Binya Kobayashi <binyako...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>> My wife is filling out a job application which is asking about her
>> language ability.
>>
>> The question has three checkboxes:
>> [ ] fluent
>> [ ] biliterate
>> [ ] bilingual
>>
>> She checked "bilingual" because she can read and write two languages
>> fluently.
>>
>> I would have checked "biliterate", for the same reason.
>>
>> Googling, I see that "fluent" means you can "speak" both, and "biliterate"
>> means you can both speak and read and write both, but what does bilingual
>> mean (as compared to biliterate)?
>
> I take "bilingual" to mean you are fluent in both languages, and that you can
>
>> My wife is filling out a job application which is asking about her
>> language ability.
>>
>> The question has three checkboxes:
>> [ ] fluent
>> [ ] biliterate
>> [ ] bilingual
>>
>> She checked "bilingual" because she can read and write two languages
>> fluently.
>>
>> I would have checked "biliterate", for the same reason.
>>
>> Googling, I see that "fluent" means you can "speak" both, and "biliterate"
>> means you can both speak and read and write both, but what does bilingual
>> mean (as compared to biliterate)?
>
> speak, read and write them both equally well.
More than just fluent - as fluent as a native speaker of each language,
which requires an extensive knowledge not just of the educated language,
but of current buzzwords, current slang and even current "issues" and
fashions. The ability to communicate on different levels without
thinking too much about it. It is very hard to maintain this bilingual
state unless you are constantly in touch with speakers and writers in
both areas where the two languages are spoken.
>
> I would take "biliterate" to mean that you can read and or write both
> languages, but not necessarily speak both fluently. Otherwise it merely seems
> to be a synonym for "bilingual".
Robert Bannister
Sep 5, 2014, 6:36:50 PM9/5/14
to
Ian Jackson
Sep 5, 2014, 6:39:53 PM9/5/14
to
In message
<ba137$540a39c0$6cb2360a$13...@nntpswitch.blueworldhosting.com>,
=?iso-8859-9?b?SPxzZXlpbiBC9mz8a2Jh/v0=?= <husb...@aol.com> writes
Some monolingual people are not even "fluent" in their native language.
--
Ian
<ba137$540a39c0$6cb2360a$13...@nntpswitch.blueworldhosting.com>,
=?iso-8859-9?b?SPxzZXlpbiBC9mz8a2Jh/v0=?= <husb...@aol.com> writes
--
Ian
Steve Hayes
Sep 5, 2014, 11:31:08 PM9/5/14
to
while the third level would qualify as "fluent".
Peter Moylan
Sep 5, 2014, 11:34:15 PM9/5/14
to
On 05/09/14 22:39, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
> On 2014-09-05, Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org> wrote:
>
>> It occurs to me, too, that you need some minimal understanding of Latin
>> to perceive clearly the difference between "bilingual" and "biliterate",
>> given that most dictionaries don't even seem to have heard of "biliterate".
>
> Do you? All I know about Latin I know from English word formation.
That's why I wrote "minimal". Most of what I know about Latin I learnt
> On 2014-09-05, Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org> wrote:
>
>> It occurs to me, too, that you need some minimal understanding of Latin
>> to perceive clearly the difference between "bilingual" and "biliterate",
>> given that most dictionaries don't even seem to have heard of "biliterate".
>
> Do you? All I know about Latin I know from English word formation.
as an altar boy, having to memorise the responses. (I did start to study
Latin in my first year of high school, but the teacher was so
incompetent that we never got past Chapter 1 of the text book.) If I had
to read a passage in Latin, I'd probably understand fewer than 10% of
the words. And most of that, I imagine, would come from my knowledge of
French rather than from elsewhere.
In my day, though, English classes included a little bit about Greek and
Latin roots of English words. That's where I would have found out that
"bilingual" comes from a word for "tongue" and "literate" is related to
writing, leading me to deduce that bilingual is about speech and
biliterate is about the written languages.
As far as I know, that sort of thing is no longer taught in Australian
schools, so people younger than me might have trouble guessing the nuances.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Peter Moylan
Sep 5, 2014, 11:48:36 PM9/5/14
to
course, is what it meant to the person who designed the form that
started this thread.
Peter Moylan
Sep 5, 2014, 11:55:16 PM9/5/14
to
On 06/09/14 08:31, Robert Bannister wrote:
>
> One of my objections when our schools were struggling to adopt the
> thankfully-now-scrapped "outcomes based education" idea, was that some
> of the outcomes suggested for Year 12 students in French were things I
> can't do even in English.
When politicians or bureaucrats want to meddle in education, one of the
>
> One of my objections when our schools were struggling to adopt the
> thankfully-now-scrapped "outcomes based education" idea, was that some
> of the outcomes suggested for Year 12 students in French were things I
> can't do even in English.
first things that should be asked is "Have any of these people ever
taught a class?"
Peter Moylan
Sep 6, 2014, 12:09:40 AM9/6/14
to
On 05/09/14 11:30, Binya Kobayashi wrote:
> My wife is filling out a job application which is asking about her
> language ability.
>
> The question has three checkboxes:
> [ ] fluent
> [ ] biliterate
> [ ] bilingual
>
> She checked "bilingual" because she can read and write two languages
> fluently.
>
> I would have checked "biliterate", for the same reason.
It's a sad fact of life that employment decisions can be affected by
> My wife is filling out a job application which is asking about her
> language ability.
>
> The question has three checkboxes:
> [ ] fluent
> [ ] biliterate
> [ ] bilingual
>
> She checked "bilingual" because she can read and write two languages
> fluently.
>
> I would have checked "biliterate", for the same reason.
badly designed forms.
I was once on a selection committee to hire someone for a senior
academic position in a university. One of the candidates was, in our
view, well ahead of the pack based on achievements and past experience.
It turned out that that person had already been eliminated by the Human
Resources department, based on their reading of the "essential
requirements" in the job advertisement. We fought that decision, but
were not permitted to interview him. The permission went unfilled
because the remaining candidates weren't good enough.
Lanarcam
Sep 6, 2014, 3:44:25 AM9/6/14
to
instance here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_European_Framework_of_Reference_for_Languages
Level C2, the highest listed is described as very fluent.
It is still a degree lower as bilingual where the person
masters both languages as a mother language each.
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Sep 6, 2014, 5:55:13 AM9/6/14
to
restaurant in which two men were speaking some language at the bar, too
far away for me to hear the words. At first I thought it was English,
because it had heavy stress, but then I realized I couldn't understand
any words even when I could hear them, and decided it was probably
Russian. Eventually I asked the waitress, who said that she didn't
know, but thought it was probably Russian or Portuguese. She went and
asked them, and as we were leaving they spoke to me. They could clearly
speak and understand Russian, but didn't say in so many words that that
was what they were speaking to one another. I then thought it might be
Serbian (which to my ears sounds more like Russian than, say, Polish or
Czech do).
Once in a restaurant at Gatwick I spend the entire lunch trying to
decide if the waiters were speaking Russian or Portuguese: at first I
thought it was Russian (especially because I thought I caught the word
хорошо) but then I switched to Portuguese and back again several times.
Eventually I settled on Portuguese, but I didn't ask them.
--
athel
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Sep 6, 2014, 5:57:26 AM9/6/14
to
conversations. I could discuss biochemistry in Spanish a long time
before I could have a friendly chat.
--
athel
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Sep 6, 2014, 6:01:26 AM9/6/14
to
On 2014-09-05 15:11:57 +0000, Jerry Friedman said:
> On 9/5/14 6:31 AM, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
>> On 2014-09-05, Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>
>>> Whoever wrote that application is apparently not even monolingual.
>>
>> Unilingual? Monoglot(tic)?
>
> "Monolingual" is the usual word,
Maybe it is on your side of the Atlantic, but I don't think it is here.
> On 9/5/14 6:31 AM, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
>> On 2014-09-05, Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>
>>> Whoever wrote that application is apparently not even monolingual.
>>
>> Unilingual? Monoglot(tic)?
>
> "Monolingual" is the usual word,
Probably I'd say "monoglot" when speaking to educated people, or "able
to speak only one language" otherwise.
> as I imagine you know. People even use it on television.
--
Jerry Friedman
Sep 6, 2014, 10:05:21 AM9/6/14
to
Spanish spoken by Martians.
--
Jerry Friedman
Jerry Friedman
Sep 6, 2014, 10:16:11 AM9/6/14
to
On 9/6/14 4:01 AM, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2014-09-05 15:11:57 +0000, Jerry Friedman said:
>
>> On 9/5/14 6:31 AM, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
>>> On 2014-09-05, Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Whoever wrote that application is apparently not even monolingual.
>>>
>>> Unilingual? Monoglot(tic)?
>>
>> "Monolingual" is the usual word,
>
> Maybe it is on your side of the Atlantic, but I don't think it is here.
At the British National Corpus
> On 2014-09-05 15:11:57 +0000, Jerry Friedman said:
>
>> On 9/5/14 6:31 AM, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
>>> On 2014-09-05, Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Whoever wrote that application is apparently not even monolingual.
>>>
>>> Unilingual? Monoglot(tic)?
>>
>> "Monolingual" is the usual word,
>
> Maybe it is on your side of the Atlantic, but I don't think it is here.
monolingual: 42
monoglot: 7
only one language: 1 (referring to Bill Bryson's abilities)
[speak] one language: 1 (where "[speak]" includes "spoke", etc.)
> Probably I'd say "monoglot" when speaking to educated people, or "able
> to speak only one language" otherwise.
--
Jerry Friedman
Message has been deleted
Stan Brown
Sep 6, 2014, 8:57:36 PM9/6/14
to
On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 13:34:15 +1000, Peter Moylan wrote:
> In my day, though, English classes included a little bit about Greek and
> Latin roots of English words. That's where I would have found out that
> "bilingual" comes from a word for "tongue" and "literate" is related to
> writing, leading me to deduce that bilingual is about speech and
> biliterate is about the written languages.
I don't think that the "tongue" (lingua) in "bilingual" refers to
> In my day, though, English classes included a little bit about Greek and
> Latin roots of English words. That's where I would have found out that
> "bilingual" comes from a word for "tongue" and "literate" is related to
> writing, leading me to deduce that bilingual is about speech and
> biliterate is about the written languages.
speech; rather, I think it's "tongue" as in "language". "Lingua
latina" = [the] Latin language. I've never seen "bilingual" as
referring to _spoken_ language specifically.
AHD4 agrees. It gives four meanings (three for the adjective and one
for the noun), and all four refer to language, not speech.
--
"The difference between the /almost right/ word and the /right/ word
is ... the difference between the lightning-bug and the lightning."
--Mark Twain
Stan Brown, Tompkins County, NY, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com
John Varela
Sep 6, 2014, 8:59:04 PM9/6/14
to
French and I don't know more than a few words and phrases of French.
The jargon carries over from one language to another and my few
French words together with my Spanish were enough to cover the gaps.
I would have gotten nowhere trying to read an article about, say,
the upcoming ballet season.
--
John Varela
Stan Brown
Sep 6, 2014, 9:03:38 PM9/6/14
to
On Sat, 6 Sep 2014 12:01:26 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2014-09-05 15:11:57 +0000, Jerry Friedman said:
>
> > "Monolingual" is the usual word,
>
> Maybe it is on your side of the Atlantic, but I don't think it is here.
> Probably I'd say "monoglot" when speaking to educated people, or "able
> to speak only one language" otherwise.
"Monoglot" seems to me the opposite of "polyglot". I'd describe a
> On 2014-09-05 15:11:57 +0000, Jerry Friedman said:
>
> > "Monolingual" is the usual word,
>
> Maybe it is on your side of the Atlantic, but I don't think it is here.
> Probably I'd say "monoglot" when speaking to educated people, or "able
> to speak only one language" otherwise.
people or a region as polyglot, but not one person.
Peter Moylan
Sep 6, 2014, 10:34:54 PM9/6/14
to
On 07/09/14 10:59, John Varela wrote:
>
> I once read and critiqued a long Eurocontrol report written in
> French and I don't know more than a few words and phrases of French.
> The jargon carries over from one language to another and my few
> French words together with my Spanish were enough to cover the gaps.
> I would have gotten nowhere trying to read an article about, say,
> the upcoming ballet season.
As a postgraduate student I had to read a highly technical research
>
> I once read and critiqued a long Eurocontrol report written in
> French and I don't know more than a few words and phrases of French.
> The jargon carries over from one language to another and my few
> French words together with my Spanish were enough to cover the gaps.
> I would have gotten nowhere trying to read an article about, say,
> the upcoming ballet season.
paper in German, without knowing any German. Because it was so
technical, it was packed solid with mathematics, meaning that I had to
go to the dictionary only occasionally to understand it.
In the intervening years I've had to read other research publications in
German. I still don't understand German, but I get by anyway. The most
recent case was an interesting struggle. It was written by a
mathematician in about 1902, at a time when notions of mathematical
rigour were a little different from what they are today. I couldn't make
head nor tail of it, apart from recognising that it was the only
published proof of a theorem that seemed to be what I needed for my own
work. I painfully translated it with the aid of a bilingual dictionary,
and then had the translation checked by a native German speaker, but at
the end of that exercise I still couldn't make any sense of his proof;
in fact, I wasn't entirely certain what his theorem statements were
claiming.
In the middle of all this struggling I suddenly found a way to prove the
result using a different method. That meant that I finally knew what he
was claiming. But I still don't understand his proof.
Ian Jackson
Sep 7, 2014, 6:09:04 AM9/7/14
to
In message <MPG.2e75778ef...@news.individual.net>, Stan Brown
<the_sta...@fastmail.fm> writes
>
>
>
>
--
Ian
<the_sta...@fastmail.fm> writes
>On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 13:34:15 +1000, Peter Moylan wrote:
>> In my day, though, English classes included a little bit about Greek and
>> Latin roots of English words. That's where I would have found out that
>> "bilingual" comes from a word for "tongue" and "literate" is related to
>> writing, leading me to deduce that bilingual is about speech and
>> biliterate is about the written languages.
>
>I don't think that the "tongue" (lingua) in "bilingual" refers to
>speech; rather, I think it's "tongue" as in "language". "Lingua
>latina" = [the] Latin language. I've never seen "bilingual" as
>referring to _spoken_ language specifically.
>
>AHD4 agrees. It gives four meanings (three for the adjective and one
>for the noun), and all four refer to language, not speech.
>
Do bilingual people speak with forked tongue?
>> In my day, though, English classes included a little bit about Greek and
>> Latin roots of English words. That's where I would have found out that
>> "bilingual" comes from a word for "tongue" and "literate" is related to
>> writing, leading me to deduce that bilingual is about speech and
>> biliterate is about the written languages.
>
>I don't think that the "tongue" (lingua) in "bilingual" refers to
>speech; rather, I think it's "tongue" as in "language". "Lingua
>latina" = [the] Latin language. I've never seen "bilingual" as
>referring to _spoken_ language specifically.
>
>AHD4 agrees. It gives four meanings (three for the adjective and one
>for the noun), and all four refer to language, not speech.
>
>
>
>
>
--
Ian
Peter Moylan
Sep 7, 2014, 8:06:00 AM9/7/14
to
On 07/09/14 10:57, Stan Brown wrote:
> On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 13:34:15 +1000, Peter Moylan wrote:
>> In my day, though, English classes included a little bit about Greek and
>> Latin roots of English words. That's where I would have found out that
>> "bilingual" comes from a word for "tongue" and "literate" is related to
>> writing, leading me to deduce that bilingual is about speech and
>> biliterate is about the written languages.
>
> I don't think that the "tongue" (lingua) in "bilingual" refers to
> speech; rather, I think it's "tongue" as in "language". "Lingua
> latina" = [the] Latin language. I've never seen "bilingual" as
> referring to _spoken_ language specifically.
>
> AHD4 agrees. It gives four meanings (three for the adjective and one
> for the noun), and all four refer to language, not speech.
Fair enough. Yes, I was looking at the wrong sense of "tongue".
> On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 13:34:15 +1000, Peter Moylan wrote:
>> In my day, though, English classes included a little bit about Greek and
>> Latin roots of English words. That's where I would have found out that
>> "bilingual" comes from a word for "tongue" and "literate" is related to
>> writing, leading me to deduce that bilingual is about speech and
>> biliterate is about the written languages.
>
> I don't think that the "tongue" (lingua) in "bilingual" refers to
> speech; rather, I think it's "tongue" as in "language". "Lingua
> latina" = [the] Latin language. I've never seen "bilingual" as
> referring to _spoken_ language specifically.
>
> AHD4 agrees. It gives four meanings (three for the adjective and one
> for the noun), and all four refer to language, not speech.
Peter T. Daniels
Sep 7, 2014, 8:15:27 AM9/7/14
to
On Saturday, September 6, 2014 8:57:36 PM UTC-4, Stan Brown wrote:
> On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 13:34:15 +1000, Peter Moylan wrote:
> > In my day, though, English classes included a little bit about Greek and
> > Latin roots of English words. That's where I would have found out that
> > "bilingual" comes from a word for "tongue" and "literate" is related to
> > writing, leading me to deduce that bilingual is about speech and
> > biliterate is about the written languages.
>
> I don't think that the "tongue" (lingua) in "bilingual" refers to
> speech; rather, I think it's "tongue" as in "language". "Lingua
> latina" = [the] Latin language. I've never seen "bilingual" as
> referring to _spoken_ language specifically.
> AHD4 agrees. It gives four meanings (three for the adjective and one
> for the noun), and all four refer to language, not speech.
Speech is central to language, writing peripheral. I can read technical
> On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 13:34:15 +1000, Peter Moylan wrote:
> > In my day, though, English classes included a little bit about Greek and
> > Latin roots of English words. That's where I would have found out that
> > "bilingual" comes from a word for "tongue" and "literate" is related to
> > writing, leading me to deduce that bilingual is about speech and
> > biliterate is about the written languages.
>
> I don't think that the "tongue" (lingua) in "bilingual" refers to
> speech; rather, I think it's "tongue" as in "language". "Lingua
> latina" = [the] Latin language. I've never seen "bilingual" as
> referring to _spoken_ language specifically.
> AHD4 agrees. It gives four meanings (three for the adjective and one
> for the noun), and all four refer to language, not speech.
Italian well enough to translate from it, but I can't speak it. I am
certainly not bilingual w.r.t. Italian.
Peter T. Daniels
Sep 7, 2014, 8:15:59 AM9/7/14
to
On Saturday, September 6, 2014 9:03:38 PM UTC-4, Stan Brown wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Sep 2014 12:01:26 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> > On 2014-09-05 15:11:57 +0000, Jerry Friedman said:
> > > "Monolingual" is the usual word,
> > Maybe it is on your side of the Atlantic, but I don't think it is here.
> > Probably I'd say "monoglot" when speaking to educated people, or "able
> > to speak only one language" otherwise.
>
> "Monoglot" seems to me the opposite of "polyglot". I'd describe a
> people or a region as polyglot, but not one person.
Then you would be wrong.
> On Sat, 6 Sep 2014 12:01:26 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> > On 2014-09-05 15:11:57 +0000, Jerry Friedman said:
> > > "Monolingual" is the usual word,
> > Maybe it is on your side of the Atlantic, but I don't think it is here.
> > Probably I'd say "monoglot" when speaking to educated people, or "able
> > to speak only one language" otherwise.
>
> "Monoglot" seems to me the opposite of "polyglot". I'd describe a
> people or a region as polyglot, but not one person.
Charles Bishop
Sep 7, 2014, 10:58:55 AM9/7/14
to
In article <lugg8i$dss$1...@dont-email.me>,
name on graduation (or something) if you had studied German. At this
time (Gad, so long ago) there were many research papers that were
available only in German and the thought was that German would help you
find information.
I never did need to do research where I needed the German, but I've
enjoyed having the little I do have. I still do wonder if there is
somewhere a research paper in German that would be of interest to
someone who doesn't read German. I suspect there is easier access now
than there was in the middle of the 20th C.
Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org> wrote:
> On 07/09/14 10:59, John Varela wrote:
> >
> > I once read and critiqued a long Eurocontrol report written in
> > French and I don't know more than a few words and phrases of French.
> > The jargon carries over from one language to another and my few
> > French words together with my Spanish were enough to cover the gaps.
> > I would have gotten nowhere trying to read an article about, say,
> > the upcoming ballet season.
>
> As a postgraduate student I had to read a highly technical research
> paper in German, without knowing any German. Because it was so
> technical, it was packed solid with mathematics, meaning that I had to
> go to the dictionary only occasionally to understand it.
When I was in college for a BsChem, you got an asterisk next to your
> On 07/09/14 10:59, John Varela wrote:
> >
> > I once read and critiqued a long Eurocontrol report written in
> > French and I don't know more than a few words and phrases of French.
> > The jargon carries over from one language to another and my few
> > French words together with my Spanish were enough to cover the gaps.
> > I would have gotten nowhere trying to read an article about, say,
> > the upcoming ballet season.
>
> As a postgraduate student I had to read a highly technical research
> paper in German, without knowing any German. Because it was so
> technical, it was packed solid with mathematics, meaning that I had to
> go to the dictionary only occasionally to understand it.
name on graduation (or something) if you had studied German. At this
time (Gad, so long ago) there were many research papers that were
available only in German and the thought was that German would help you
find information.
I never did need to do research where I needed the German, but I've
enjoyed having the little I do have. I still do wonder if there is
somewhere a research paper in German that would be of interest to
someone who doesn't read German. I suspect there is easier access now
than there was in the middle of the 20th C.
>
> In the intervening years I've had to read other research publications in
> German. I still don't understand German, but I get by anyway. The most
> recent case was an interesting struggle. It was written by a
> mathematician in about 1902, at a time when notions of mathematical
> rigour were a little different from what they are today. I couldn't make
> head nor tail of it, apart from recognising that it was the only
> published proof of a theorem that seemed to be what I needed for my own
> work. I painfully translated it with the aid of a bilingual dictionary,
> and then had the translation checked by a native German speaker, but at
> the end of that exercise I still couldn't make any sense of his proof;
> in fact, I wasn't entirely certain what his theorem statements were
> claiming.
>
> In the middle of all this struggling I suddenly found a way to prove the
> result using a different method. That meant that I finally knew what he
> was claiming. But I still don't understand his proof.
--
charles
> In the intervening years I've had to read other research publications in
> German. I still don't understand German, but I get by anyway. The most
> recent case was an interesting struggle. It was written by a
> mathematician in about 1902, at a time when notions of mathematical
> rigour were a little different from what they are today. I couldn't make
> head nor tail of it, apart from recognising that it was the only
> published proof of a theorem that seemed to be what I needed for my own
> work. I painfully translated it with the aid of a bilingual dictionary,
> and then had the translation checked by a native German speaker, but at
> the end of that exercise I still couldn't make any sense of his proof;
> in fact, I wasn't entirely certain what his theorem statements were
> claiming.
>
> In the middle of all this struggling I suddenly found a way to prove the
> result using a different method. That meant that I finally knew what he
> was claiming. But I still don't understand his proof.
--
Robert Bannister
Sep 7, 2014, 8:55:33 PM9/7/14
to
or C2 in their own native language.
Peter T. Daniels
Sep 7, 2014, 11:18:24 PM9/7/14
to
When there is some artificial literary language, as in English, there
is no question of being a "native speaker" of it.
Robert Bannister
Sep 8, 2014, 12:08:24 AM9/8/14
to
On 8/09/2014 11:18 am, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Sunday, September 7, 2014 8:55:33 PM UTC-4, Robert Bannister wrote:
>> On 6/09/2014 3:44 pm, Lanarcam wrote:
>
>>> Level C2, the highest listed is described as very fluent.
>>> It is still a degree lower as bilingual where the person
>>> masters both languages as a mother language each.
>>
>> From which it is clear that a large number of people never achieve C1
>> or C2 in their own native language.
>
> Every native speaker, by definition, is at C2.
Did you read the descriptors?
> On Sunday, September 7, 2014 8:55:33 PM UTC-4, Robert Bannister wrote:
>> On 6/09/2014 3:44 pm, Lanarcam wrote:
>
>>> Level C2, the highest listed is described as very fluent.
>>> It is still a degree lower as bilingual where the person
>>> masters both languages as a mother language each.
>>
>> From which it is clear that a large number of people never achieve C1
>> or C2 in their own native language.
>
> Every native speaker, by definition, is at C2.
C Proficient User C1 Effective Operational Proficiency or advanced
Can understand a wide range of demanding, longer texts, and
recognise implicit meaning.
Can express ideas fluently and spontaneously without much obvious
searching for expressions.
Can use language flexibly and effectively for social, academic and
professional purposes.
Can produce clear, well-structured, detailed text on complex
subjects, showing controlled use of organisational patterns, connectors
and cohesive devices.
C2 Mastery or proficiency
Can understand with ease virtually everything heard or read.
Can summarise information from different spoken and written
sources, reconstructing arguments and accounts in a coherent presentation.
Can express him/herself spontaneously, very fluently and precisely,
differentiating finer shades of meaning even in the most complex situations.
Lots of native speakers are unable to express complex situations
fluently and precisely, and even fewer are able to produce clear,
well-structured, detailed text on complex subjects. I think these
descriptors were written with university graduates in mind.
Peter T. Daniels
Sep 8, 2014, 7:22:27 AM9/8/14
to
express complex situations fluently and precisely." They just
don't do it in some Standard Literary Language. You repeat the
English sociologist Basil Bernstein's class-based claims about
language that had no basis in fact.
I'd like to see a "university graduate" give a "clear, well-structured,
detailed" description of everything a farmer or laborer or shaman
does in the pursuit of their daily activities.
Those categories appear to be solely for second-language learners.
Oliver Cromm
Sep 9, 2014, 12:51:12 PM9/9/14
to
* Peter T. Daniels:
University graduates should be able to summarize a coherent text
or oral description describing those activities, because that's
part of their training at high school and college level.
I don't expect most farmers, laborers or shamans to be able to
produce a description of their activities in a way that someone
unfamiliar with their doings can understand. I expect that their
descriptions would often be underdetermined - helpful for their
peers, but not necessarily outsiders.
But the same is true of many physicists or doctors, who are also
not automatically expert users of language.
--
Microsoft designed a user-friendly car:
instead of the oil, alternator, gas and engine
warning lights it has just one: "General Car Fault"
or oral description describing those activities, because that's
part of their training at high school and college level.
I don't expect most farmers, laborers or shamans to be able to
produce a description of their activities in a way that someone
unfamiliar with their doings can understand. I expect that their
descriptions would often be underdetermined - helpful for their
peers, but not necessarily outsiders.
But the same is true of many physicists or doctors, who are also
not automatically expert users of language.
--
Microsoft designed a user-friendly car:
instead of the oil, alternator, gas and engine
warning lights it has just one: "General Car Fault"
Oliver Cromm
Sep 9, 2014, 12:51:12 PM9/9/14
to
* Jerry Friedman:
> On 9/6/14 4:01 AM, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>> On 2014-09-05 15:11:57 +0000, Jerry Friedman said:
>>
>>> On 9/5/14 6:31 AM, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
>>>> On 2014-09-05, Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Whoever wrote that application is apparently not even monolingual.
>>>>
>>>> Unilingual? Monoglot(tic)?
>>>
>>> "Monolingual" is the usual word,
>>
>> Maybe it is on your side of the Atlantic, but I don't think it is here.
>
> At the British National Corpus
>
> monolingual: 42
> monoglot: 7
> only one language: 1 (referring to Bill Bryson's abilities)
> [speak] one language: 1 (where "[speak]" includes "spoke", etc.)
But not every use of "monolingual" refers to people. I think I've
seen it more often in reference to media (books?)
Google:
"monolingual person" 7.850
"monolingual speaker" 8.940
"monolingual edition" 42.500
"monolingual version" 10.300
"monolingual school" 14.000
--
XML combines all the inefficiency of text-based formats with most
of the unreadability of binary formats.
Oren Tirosh, comp.lang.python
> On 9/6/14 4:01 AM, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>> On 2014-09-05 15:11:57 +0000, Jerry Friedman said:
>>
>>> On 9/5/14 6:31 AM, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
>>>> On 2014-09-05, Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Whoever wrote that application is apparently not even monolingual.
>>>>
>>>> Unilingual? Monoglot(tic)?
>>>
>>> "Monolingual" is the usual word,
>>
>> Maybe it is on your side of the Atlantic, but I don't think it is here.
>
> At the British National Corpus
>
> monolingual: 42
> monoglot: 7
> only one language: 1 (referring to Bill Bryson's abilities)
> [speak] one language: 1 (where "[speak]" includes "spoke", etc.)
seen it more often in reference to media (books?)
Google:
"monolingual person" 7.850
"monolingual speaker" 8.940
"monolingual edition" 42.500
"monolingual version" 10.300
"monolingual school" 14.000
--
XML combines all the inefficiency of text-based formats with most
of the unreadability of binary formats.
Oren Tirosh, comp.lang.python
Oliver Cromm
Sep 9, 2014, 12:51:14 PM9/9/14
to
* Jerry Friedman:
> On 9/5/14 2:50 AM, Pablo wrote:
>> I deny being bilingual and Spanish friends keep telling me I am because I
>> speak better Spanish than a lot of them. But in no way is my Spanish
>> "natural" like my English.
>
> Yes, "bilingual" to me suggests that the person is a native speaker of
> both languages or would be mistaken for one by a native speaker (a rare
> phenomenon). However, it's certainly not always used that way.
In Canada, or at least here in Montreal, I think to count as
"bilingual" it is usually enough that in both languages it is not
*immediately* obvious (after one or two sentences) that the person
is not a native speaker. There are certainly a lot of people like
that here. Having a slight foreign accent doesn't invalidate
bilingualism.
And of course "bilingual" is often used without stating which
languages involved, then defaulting to French and English. For
more than a few of those who are "bilingual" in that sense, their
actual first language is a third one.
--
Bill Gates working as a waiter:
- Waiter, there's a fly in my soup
- Try again, maybe it won't be there this time
> On 9/5/14 2:50 AM, Pablo wrote:
>> I deny being bilingual and Spanish friends keep telling me I am because I
>> speak better Spanish than a lot of them. But in no way is my Spanish
>> "natural" like my English.
>
> Yes, "bilingual" to me suggests that the person is a native speaker of
> both languages or would be mistaken for one by a native speaker (a rare
> phenomenon). However, it's certainly not always used that way.
In Canada, or at least here in Montreal, I think to count as
"bilingual" it is usually enough that in both languages it is not
*immediately* obvious (after one or two sentences) that the person
is not a native speaker. There are certainly a lot of people like
that here. Having a slight foreign accent doesn't invalidate
bilingualism.
And of course "bilingual" is often used without stating which
languages involved, then defaulting to French and English. For
more than a few of those who are "bilingual" in that sense, their
actual first language is a third one.
--
Bill Gates working as a waiter:
- Waiter, there's a fly in my soup
- Try again, maybe it won't be there this time
Peter Young
Sep 9, 2014, 1:26:24 PM9/9/14
to
On 9 Sep 2014 Oliver Cromm <lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:
> * Jerry Friedman:
>> On 9/5/14 2:50 AM, Pablo wrote:
>>> I deny being bilingual and Spanish friends keep telling me I am because I
>>> speak better Spanish than a lot of them. But in no way is my Spanish
>>> "natural" like my English.
>>
>> Yes, "bilingual" to me suggests that the person is a native speaker of
>> both languages or would be mistaken for one by a native speaker (a rare
>> phenomenon). However, it's certainly not always used that way.
> In Canada, or at least here in Montreal, I think to count as
> "bilingual" it is usually enough that in both languages it is not
> *immediately* obvious (after one or two sentences) that the person
> is not a native speaker. There are certainly a lot of people like
> that here. Having a slight foreign accent doesn't invalidate
> bilingualism.
An interesting fact described by my brother, who has lived in Montreal
> * Jerry Friedman:
>> On 9/5/14 2:50 AM, Pablo wrote:
>>> I deny being bilingual and Spanish friends keep telling me I am because I
>>> speak better Spanish than a lot of them. But in no way is my Spanish
>>> "natural" like my English.
>>
>> Yes, "bilingual" to me suggests that the person is a native speaker of
>> both languages or would be mistaken for one by a native speaker (a rare
>> phenomenon). However, it's certainly not always used that way.
> In Canada, or at least here in Montreal, I think to count as
> "bilingual" it is usually enough that in both languages it is not
> *immediately* obvious (after one or two sentences) that the person
> is not a native speaker. There are certainly a lot of people like
> that here. Having a slight foreign accent doesn't invalidate
> bilingualism.
since the early 1970s (and whom I will be visiting next week) gives to
me a partial definition of bilingualism. His son, born in Montreal and
now adult, after he was watched a TV programme he can't tell you
whether it was in English or French.
Peter.
--
Peter Young, (BrE, RP), Consultant Anaesthetist, 1975-2004.
(US equivalent: Certified Anesthesiologist) (AUE Re)
Cheltenham and Gloucester, UK. Now happily retired.
http://pnyoung.orpheusweb.co.uk
Charles Bishop
Sep 9, 2014, 4:34:49 PM9/9/14
to
In article <18s27ksr...@mid.crommatograph.info>,
Oliver Cromm <lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:
[snip]
> I don't expect most farmers, laborers or shamans to be able to
> produce a description of their activities in a way that someone
> unfamiliar with their doings can understand. I expect that their
> descriptions would often be underdetermined - helpful for their
> peers, but not necessarily outsiders.
>
> But the same is true of many physicists or doctors, who are also
> not automatically expert users of language.
Does "their descriptions would often be underdetermined" mean they would
leave things out, or make assumptions that peers would know and/or take
for granted?
Is this a standard meaning for underdetermined?
--
charles
Oliver Cromm <lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:
[snip]
> I don't expect most farmers, laborers or shamans to be able to
> produce a description of their activities in a way that someone
> unfamiliar with their doings can understand. I expect that their
> descriptions would often be underdetermined - helpful for their
> peers, but not necessarily outsiders.
>
> But the same is true of many physicists or doctors, who are also
> not automatically expert users of language.
leave things out, or make assumptions that peers would know and/or take
for granted?
Is this a standard meaning for underdetermined?
--
charles
Peter Moylan
Sep 10, 2014, 4:08:33 AM9/10/14
to
On 10/09/14 03:26, Peter Young wrote:
> An interesting fact described by my brother, who has lived in Montreal
> since the early 1970s (and whom I will be visiting next week) gives to
> me a partial definition of bilingualism. His son, born in Montreal and
> now adult, after he was watched a TV programme he can't tell you
> whether it was in English or French.
Two of my children grew up French/English bilingual. Something that used
> An interesting fact described by my brother, who has lived in Montreal
> since the early 1970s (and whom I will be visiting next week) gives to
> me a partial definition of bilingualism. His son, born in Montreal and
> now adult, after he was watched a TV programme he can't tell you
> whether it was in English or French.
to fascinate me, when they were at preschool age, was that they would
switch languages in the middle of a sentence depending on who they were
facing. They always knew which language to use with which person,
apparently unconsciously.
Some of their (francophone) Belgian cousins didn't always get it right.
They would turn to me and switch from French to Dutch, even though at a
conscious level they knew that I didn't speak Dutch.
Peter T. Daniels
Sep 10, 2014, 9:59:21 AM9/10/14
to
On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 4:08:33 AM UTC-4, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 10/09/14 03:26, Peter Young wrote:
> > An interesting fact described by my brother, who has lived in Montreal
> > since the early 1970s (and whom I will be visiting next week) gives to
> > me a partial definition of bilingualism. His son, born in Montreal and
> > now adult, after he was watched a TV programme he can't tell you
> > whether it was in English or French.
>
> Two of my children grew up French/English bilingual. Something that used
> to fascinate me, when they were at preschool age, was that they would
> switch languages in the middle of a sentence depending on who they were
> facing. They always knew which language to use with which person,
> apparently unconsciously.
That appears to be the normal situation for humanity. The widespread
> On 10/09/14 03:26, Peter Young wrote:
> > An interesting fact described by my brother, who has lived in Montreal
> > since the early 1970s (and whom I will be visiting next week) gives to
> > me a partial definition of bilingualism. His son, born in Montreal and
> > now adult, after he was watched a TV programme he can't tell you
> > whether it was in English or French.
>
> Two of my children grew up French/English bilingual. Something that used
> to fascinate me, when they were at preschool age, was that they would
> switch languages in the middle of a sentence depending on who they were
> facing. They always knew which language to use with which person,
> apparently unconsciously.
monolingualism of the modern industrial world is a very recent development.
> Some of their (francophone) Belgian cousins didn't always get it right.
> They would turn to me and switch from French to Dutch, even though at a
> conscious level they knew that I didn't speak Dutch.
discover their mistake and try again.
Reinhold {Rey} Aman
Sep 10, 2014, 2:37:27 PM9/10/14
to
PeteY "AUE's Idiot #1" Daniels wrote:
>
> The widespread monolingualism of the modern industrial world
> is a very recent development.
>
Total nonsense. No explanation necessary.
>
> The widespread monolingualism of the modern industrial world
> is a very recent development.
>
--
~~~ Reinhold {Rey} Aman ~~~
Message has been deleted
Cheryl
Sep 12, 2014, 6:36:51 AM9/12/14
to
On 2014-09-12 3:49 AM, Wolfgang Schwanke wrote:
> Binya Kobayashi <binyako...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:d6e15$54091237$43da7656$89...@nntpswitch.blueworldhosting.com:
> environement where two languages were spoken and you picked both up as
> a native speaker. If you learnt a second language later in life as a
> foreign speaker, you're not bilingual. I don't know what "biliterate"
> means.
>
As I think was mentioned before, this is not the case in some places. In
Canada, where language status is often important, 'bilingual' simply
means that you can function well in two languages, generally English and
French. Some employers - eg the federal government - have tests which
determine whether employees can be considered bilingual or not. Most of
those who are bilingual will have learned their second language after
they learned their mother tongue.
--
Cheryl
> Binya Kobayashi <binyako...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:d6e15$54091237$43da7656$89...@nntpswitch.blueworldhosting.com:
>
>>
>> Googling, I see that "fluent" means you can "speak" both, and
>> "biliterate" means you can both speak and read and write both, but
>> what does bilingual mean (as compared to biliterate)?
>
> Bilingual means you have two mother tongues, i.e. you grew up in an
>>
>> Googling, I see that "fluent" means you can "speak" both, and
>> "biliterate" means you can both speak and read and write both, but
>> what does bilingual mean (as compared to biliterate)?
>
> environement where two languages were spoken and you picked both up as
> a native speaker. If you learnt a second language later in life as a
> foreign speaker, you're not bilingual. I don't know what "biliterate"
> means.
>
As I think was mentioned before, this is not the case in some places. In
Canada, where language status is often important, 'bilingual' simply
means that you can function well in two languages, generally English and
French. Some employers - eg the federal government - have tests which
determine whether employees can be considered bilingual or not. Most of
those who are bilingual will have learned their second language after
they learned their mother tongue.
--
Cheryl
![Peter Duncanson [BrE]'s profile photo](http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/a-/ALV-UjU1GGYFBCZgBCNB-pRgkosMu-ej0qpnECw3jc8uGYOTiF8a=s40-c)
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Sep 12, 2014, 7:29:48 AM9/12/14
to
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/bilingual
Speaking two languages fluently
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Peter T. Daniels
Sep 12, 2014, 8:47:53 AM9/12/14
to
Years ago, we were taught that the technical linguistic term "allophone"
means, in Canada, someone who speaks the _other_ of the official languages,
from the point of view of the context of its use.
"Alloglot" would be more convenient in that sense.
Hans Aberg
Sep 12, 2014, 9:16:11 AM9/12/14
to
having or using two languages especially as spoken with the fluency
characteristic of a native speaker
Oliver Cromm
Sep 12, 2014, 1:30:28 PM9/12/14
to
* Peter T. Daniels:
> On Friday, September 12, 2014 6:36:51 AM UTC-4, Cheryl wrote:
>> On 2014-09-12 3:49 AM, Wolfgang Schwanke wrote:
>>> Binya Kobayashi <binyako...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>>> news:d6e15$54091237$43da7656$89...@nntpswitch.blueworldhosting.com:
>
>>>> Googling, I see that "fluent" means you can "speak" both, and
>>>> "biliterate" means you can both speak and read and write both, but
>>>> what does bilingual mean (as compared to biliterate)?
>>> Bilingual means you have two mother tongues, i.e. you grew up in an
>>> environement where two languages were spoken and you picked both up as
>>> a native speaker. If you learnt a second language later in life as a
>>> foreign speaker, you're not bilingual. I don't know what "biliterate"
>>> means.
>>
>> As I think was mentioned before, this is not the case in some places. In
>> Canada, where language status is often important, 'bilingual' simply
>> means that you can function well in two languages, generally English and
>> French. Some employers - eg the federal government - have tests which
>> determine whether employees can be considered bilingual or not. Most of
>> those who are bilingual will have learned their second language after
>> they learned their mother tongue.
>
> That's its meaning in Canadian law, rather than its meaning in general.
Yes, and as mentioned before, this usage specifically implies "in
the two official languages". Being bilingual French/Spanish or
Chinese/English does not count, and being "trilingual" is not an
official status.
> Years ago, we were taught that the technical linguistic term "allophone"
> means, in Canada, someone who speaks the _other_ of the official languages,
> from the point of view of the context of its use.
>
> "Alloglot" would be more convenient in that sense.
I have only encountered "allophone" as meaning "native speaker of
neither English nor French". Statistics give the number of
Anglophones, Francophones and Allophones in a geographic area.
Wikipedia calls this a Quebec usage, and does not list any other
Canadian usage. I see no evidence for the usage you mentioned.
<http://angryfrenchguy.com/2010/05/03/allophone-is-a-french-word/>
--
The most likely way for the world to be destroyed, most experts
agree, is by accident. That's where we come in; we're computer
professionals. We cause accidents.
Nathaniel Borenstein
> On Friday, September 12, 2014 6:36:51 AM UTC-4, Cheryl wrote:
>> On 2014-09-12 3:49 AM, Wolfgang Schwanke wrote:
>>> Binya Kobayashi <binyako...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>>> news:d6e15$54091237$43da7656$89...@nntpswitch.blueworldhosting.com:
>
>>>> Googling, I see that "fluent" means you can "speak" both, and
>>>> "biliterate" means you can both speak and read and write both, but
>>>> what does bilingual mean (as compared to biliterate)?
>>> Bilingual means you have two mother tongues, i.e. you grew up in an
>>> environement where two languages were spoken and you picked both up as
>>> a native speaker. If you learnt a second language later in life as a
>>> foreign speaker, you're not bilingual. I don't know what "biliterate"
>>> means.
>>
>> As I think was mentioned before, this is not the case in some places. In
>> Canada, where language status is often important, 'bilingual' simply
>> means that you can function well in two languages, generally English and
>> French. Some employers - eg the federal government - have tests which
>> determine whether employees can be considered bilingual or not. Most of
>> those who are bilingual will have learned their second language after
>> they learned their mother tongue.
>
> That's its meaning in Canadian law, rather than its meaning in general.
the two official languages". Being bilingual French/Spanish or
Chinese/English does not count, and being "trilingual" is not an
official status.
> Years ago, we were taught that the technical linguistic term "allophone"
> means, in Canada, someone who speaks the _other_ of the official languages,
> from the point of view of the context of its use.
>
> "Alloglot" would be more convenient in that sense.
neither English nor French". Statistics give the number of
Anglophones, Francophones and Allophones in a geographic area.
Wikipedia calls this a Quebec usage, and does not list any other
Canadian usage. I see no evidence for the usage you mentioned.
<http://angryfrenchguy.com/2010/05/03/allophone-is-a-french-word/>
--
The most likely way for the world to be destroyed, most experts
agree, is by accident. That's where we come in; we're computer
professionals. We cause accidents.
Nathaniel Borenstein
Cheryl
Sep 12, 2014, 1:36:00 PM9/12/14
to
On 2014-09-12 10:17 AM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Friday, September 12, 2014 6:36:51 AM UTC-4, Cheryl wrote:
>> On 2014-09-12 3:49 AM, Wolfgang Schwanke wrote:
>>> Binya Kobayashi <binyako...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>>> news:d6e15$54091237$43da7656$89...@nntpswitch.blueworldhosting.com:
>
>>>> Googling, I see that "fluent" means you can "speak" both, and
>>>> "biliterate" means you can both speak and read and write both, but
>>>> what does bilingual mean (as compared to biliterate)?
>>> Bilingual means you have two mother tongues, i.e. you grew up in an
>>> environement where two languages were spoken and you picked both up as
>>> a native speaker. If you learnt a second language later in life as a
>>> foreign speaker, you're not bilingual. I don't know what "biliterate"
>>> means.
>>
>> As I think was mentioned before, this is not the case in some places. In
>> Canada, where language status is often important, 'bilingual' simply
>> means that you can function well in two languages, generally English and
>> French. Some employers - eg the federal government - have tests which
>> determine whether employees can be considered bilingual or not. Most of
>> those who are bilingual will have learned their second language after
>> they learned their mother tongue.
>
> That's its meaning in Canadian law, rather than its meaning in general.
It's also it's meaning in general use in Canada - although not,
> On Friday, September 12, 2014 6:36:51 AM UTC-4, Cheryl wrote:
>> On 2014-09-12 3:49 AM, Wolfgang Schwanke wrote:
>>> Binya Kobayashi <binyako...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>>> news:d6e15$54091237$43da7656$89...@nntpswitch.blueworldhosting.com:
>
>>>> Googling, I see that "fluent" means you can "speak" both, and
>>>> "biliterate" means you can both speak and read and write both, but
>>>> what does bilingual mean (as compared to biliterate)?
>>> Bilingual means you have two mother tongues, i.e. you grew up in an
>>> environement where two languages were spoken and you picked both up as
>>> a native speaker. If you learnt a second language later in life as a
>>> foreign speaker, you're not bilingual. I don't know what "biliterate"
>>> means.
>>
>> As I think was mentioned before, this is not the case in some places. In
>> Canada, where language status is often important, 'bilingual' simply
>> means that you can function well in two languages, generally English and
>> French. Some employers - eg the federal government - have tests which
>> determine whether employees can be considered bilingual or not. Most of
>> those who are bilingual will have learned their second language after
>> they learned their mother tongue.
>
> That's its meaning in Canadian law, rather than its meaning in general.
possibly, in the rest of the world. I don't think many Canadians would
assume that a bilingual person "picked up both as a native speaker".
They'd assume that in many - probably most - cases the person learned
the second language very well, but as a foreign speaker. Some people
even talk informally of people who are 'French bilingual' or 'English
bilingual', depending on which is their mother tongue.
> Years ago, we were taught that the technical linguistic term "allophone"
> means, in Canada, someone who speaks the _other_ of the official languages,
> from the point of view of the context of its use.
>
> "Alloglot" would be more convenient in that sense.
>
neither English nor French. Years ago there were a lot of complaints
from allophones (often Italian speakers) in Quebec who wanted their
children educated in English rather than French.
--
Cheryl
Peter T. Daniels
Sep 12, 2014, 4:44:17 PM9/12/14
to
understands 'allophone' the way we do!")
Stan Brown
Sep 12, 2014, 10:10:07 PM9/12/14
to
On Fri, 12 Sep 2014 15:06:00 -0230, Cheryl wrote:
> On 2014-09-12 10:17 AM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > [quoted text muted]
> On 2014-09-12 10:17 AM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >> those who are bilingual will have learned their second language after
> >> they learned their mother tongue.
> >
> > That's its meaning in Canadian law, rather than its meaning in general.
>
> It's also it's meaning in general use in Canada - although not,
> possibly, in the rest of the world. I don't think many Canadians would
> assume that a bilingual person "picked up both as a native speaker".
> They'd assume that in many - probably most - cases the person learned
> the second language very well, but as a foreign speaker.
I think that's the usual meaning in AmE as well. AHD4 gives as its
> >> they learned their mother tongue.
> >
> > That's its meaning in Canadian law, rather than its meaning in general.
>
> It's also it's meaning in general use in Canada - although not,
> possibly, in the rest of the world. I don't think many Canadians would
> assume that a bilingual person "picked up both as a native speaker".
> They'd assume that in many - probably most - cases the person learned
> the second language very well, but as a foreign speaker.
first meaning, "Using or able to use two languages, especially with
equal or nearly equal fluency."
--
"The difference between the /almost right/ word and the /right/ word
is ... the difference between the lightning-bug and the lightning."
--Mark Twain
Stan Brown, Tompkins County, NY, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com
Peter T. Daniels
Sep 12, 2014, 11:10:48 PM9/12/14
to
On Friday, September 12, 2014 10:10:07 PM UTC-4, Stan Brown wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Sep 2014 15:06:00 -0230, Cheryl wrote:
> > It's also it's meaning in general use in Canada - although not,
> > possibly, in the rest of the world. I don't think many Canadians would
> > assume that a bilingual person "picked up both as a native speaker".
> > They'd assume that in many - probably most - cases the person learned
> > the second language very well, but as a foreign speaker.
>
> I think that's the usual meaning in AmE as well. AHD4 gives as its
> first meaning, "Using or able to use two languages, especially with
> equal or nearly equal fluency."
And AHD5 defines "fluent" as 'Able to express oneself readily and
> On Fri, 12 Sep 2014 15:06:00 -0230, Cheryl wrote:
> > It's also it's meaning in general use in Canada - although not,
> > possibly, in the rest of the world. I don't think many Canadians would
> > assume that a bilingual person "picked up both as a native speaker".
> > They'd assume that in many - probably most - cases the person learned
> > the second language very well, but as a foreign speaker.
>
> I think that's the usual meaning in AmE as well. AHD4 gives as its
> first meaning, "Using or able to use two languages, especially with
> equal or nearly equal fluency."
effortlessly'.
Steve Hayes
Sep 12, 2014, 11:26:11 PM9/12/14
to
nationalist hegemony.
"Bilingual" meant that you could speak, read and write Afrikaans to the
standards of the civil service. Native Afrikaans-speakeras were assumed to be
bilingual because they could speak Afrikaans.
Back then we had 2 official languages, Afrikaans and English. Now we have 11.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
Peter T. Daniels
Sep 12, 2014, 11:28:33 PM9/12/14
to
On Friday, September 12, 2014 11:26:11 PM UTC-4, Steve Hayes wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Sep 2014 08:06:51 -0230, Cheryl <cper...@mun.ca> wrote:
> >As I think was mentioned before, this is not the case in some places. In
> >Canada, where language status is often important, 'bilingual' simply
> >means that you can function well in two languages, generally English and
> >French. Some employers - eg the federal government - have tests which
> >determine whether employees can be considered bilingual or not. Most of
> >those who are bilingual will have learned their second language after
> >they learned their mother tongue.
>
> And it wasn't the case in South Africa during the period of Afrikaner
> nationalist hegemony.
> "Bilingual" meant that you could speak, read and write Afrikaans to the
> standards of the civil service. Native Afrikaans-speakeras were assumed to be
> bilingual because they could speak Afrikaans.
> Back then we had 2 official languages, Afrikaans and English. Now we have 11.
The BBC's South Africa correspondent, speaking to a US radio program,
> On Fri, 12 Sep 2014 08:06:51 -0230, Cheryl <cper...@mun.ca> wrote:
> >As I think was mentioned before, this is not the case in some places. In
> >Canada, where language status is often important, 'bilingual' simply
> >means that you can function well in two languages, generally English and
> >French. Some employers - eg the federal government - have tests which
> >determine whether employees can be considered bilingual or not. Most of
> >those who are bilingual will have learned their second language after
> >they learned their mother tongue.
>
> And it wasn't the case in South Africa during the period of Afrikaner
> nationalist hegemony.
> "Bilingual" meant that you could speak, read and write Afrikaans to the
> standards of the civil service. Native Afrikaans-speakeras were assumed to be
> bilingual because they could speak Afrikaans.
> Back then we had 2 official languages, Afrikaans and English. Now we have 11.
pointed out how extraordinary it was that none of the principals in
the trial was using their native language: the judge is a Zulu-speaker,
and the defendant, his attorney, and the prosecutor are all Afrikaans-
speakers; yet the trial was held in English.
Reinhold {Rey} Aman
Sep 13, 2014, 12:22:27 AM9/13/14
to
PeteY "AUE's Idiot #1" Daniels wrote:
>
>
> The BBC's South Africa correspondent, speaking to a US radio program,
> pointed out how extraordinary it was that none of the principals in
> the trial was using their native language: the judge is a Zulu-speaker,
> and the defendant, his attorney, and the prosecutor are all Afrikaans-
> speakers; yet the trial was held in English.
>
Why is that "extraordinary"? You expect the Afrikaans-speakers to learn
> pointed out how extraordinary it was that none of the principals in
> the trial was using their native language: the judge is a Zulu-speaker,
> and the defendant, his attorney, and the prosecutor are all Afrikaans-
> speakers; yet the trial was held in English.
>
Zulu just for this trial?
English is the _lingua franca_ in South Africa.
Steve Hayes
Sep 13, 2014, 1:02:08 AM9/13/14
to
Ian Jackson
Sep 13, 2014, 3:50:23 AM9/13/14
to
In message <ntj71adcpq1lg3uh1...@4ax.com>, Steve Hayes
<haye...@telkomsa.net> writes
Presumably it would have been possible to have held the trial in
Afrikaans, which seemed to be the more-common language of the principal
players. However, holding the trial in English ensured the maximum
possible world-wide audience.
While English and Afrikaans are the two main languages, and all
Afrikaaners seem to speak fluent English (albeit sometimes with an
accent you could cut with a knife), how many English speakers are
equally at home with their Afrikaans?
>
>
--
Ian
<haye...@telkomsa.net> writes
Afrikaans, which seemed to be the more-common language of the principal
players. However, holding the trial in English ensured the maximum
possible world-wide audience.
While English and Afrikaans are the two main languages, and all
Afrikaaners seem to speak fluent English (albeit sometimes with an
accent you could cut with a knife), how many English speakers are
equally at home with their Afrikaans?
>
>
--
Ian
Steve Hayes
Sep 13, 2014, 4:14:57 AM9/13/14
to
doesn't seem to mean quite the same thing as it means in other places.
But, in perhaps an interesting sidelight on cultures, back in the apartheid
days white English-speaking sugar farmers in Zululand tended to speak to their
black workers in Zulu, and any of them who presumed to speak English to the
boss would be regarded as cheeky kaffirs.
But in what was then the Eastern Transvaal Highveld (now part of Mpumalanga)
Afrikaans-speaking mealie (BrE=maize, AmE- censored by PTD) farmers spoke to
their black workers in Afrikaans, and expected them to answer in the same
language. If any of them used another language, they were regarded as a
"parmantige houtkop".
Ian Jackson
Sep 13, 2014, 5:34:03 AM9/13/14
to
In message <fiu71admodj1a7i01...@4ax.com>, Steve Hayes
<haye...@telkomsa.net> writes
>"parmantige houtkop".
>
"Pesky woodenhead"?
--
Ian
<haye...@telkomsa.net> writes
>"parmantige houtkop".
>
"Pesky woodenhead"?
--
Ian
Steve Hayes
Sep 13, 2014, 6:09:57 AM9/13/14
to
Figuratively, "cheeky kaffir".
CDB
Sep 13, 2014, 6:33:27 AM9/13/14
to
On 13/09/2014 6:09 AM, Steve Hayes wrote:
every holt and heath", which would bring it closer to "bush-head", or
"kaffir'.
> Ian Jackson <ianREMOVET...@g3ohx.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> Steve Hayes <haye...@telkomsa.net> writes
>>> "parmantige houtkop".
>> "Pesky woodenhead"?
> Literally, yes.
> Figuratively, "cheeky kaffir".
Is "hout" always wood, the material? I was thinking of "holt", as "in
>> Steve Hayes <haye...@telkomsa.net> writes
>>> "parmantige houtkop".
>> "Pesky woodenhead"?
> Literally, yes.
> Figuratively, "cheeky kaffir".
every holt and heath", which would bring it closer to "bush-head", or
"kaffir'.
Steve Hayes
Sep 13, 2014, 7:48:08 AM9/13/14
to
suggest other meanings, but I'm not aware of any other current ones.
Peter Moylan
Sep 13, 2014, 8:00:48 AM9/13/14
to
On 13/09/14 18:14, Steve Hayes wrote:
> mealie (BrE=maize, AmE- censored by PTD)
That's getting to be a corny joke.
> mealie (BrE=maize, AmE- censored by PTD)
Peter T. Daniels
Sep 13, 2014, 9:28:53 AM9/13/14
to
On Saturday, September 13, 2014 12:22:27 AM UTC-4, Reinhold {Rey} Aman:
Then why don't you turn all your vast amount of charm and persuasiveness
toward the BBC reporter who found this interesting, and explain to her
what an idiot she is?
Jackass.
toward the BBC reporter who found this interesting, and explain to her
what an idiot she is?
Jackass.
Peter T. Daniels
Sep 13, 2014, 9:31:40 AM9/13/14
to
On Saturday, September 13, 2014 4:14:57 AM UTC-4, Steve Hayes wrote:
> Afrikaans-speaking mealie (BrE=maize, AmE- censored by PTD) farmers
You mean, you were going to say something other than "corn"?
> Afrikaans-speaking mealie (BrE=maize, AmE- censored by PTD) farmers
Jerry Friedman
Sep 13, 2014, 11:34:13 AM9/13/14
to
On 9/9/14 10:51 AM, Oliver Cromm wrote:
> * Jerry Friedman:
>
>> On 9/6/14 4:01 AM, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>>> On 2014-09-05 15:11:57 +0000, Jerry Friedman said:
>>>
>>>> On 9/5/14 6:31 AM, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
>>>>> On 2014-09-05, Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Whoever wrote that application is apparently not even monolingual.
>>>>>
>>>>> Unilingual? Monoglot(tic)?
>>>>
>>>> "Monolingual" is the usual word,
>>>
>>> Maybe it is on your side of the Atlantic, but I don't think it is here.
>>
>> At the British National Corpus
>>
>> monolingual: 42
>> monoglot: 7
>> only one language: 1 (referring to Bill Bryson's abilities)
>> [speak] one language: 1 (where "[speak]" includes "spoke", etc.)
>
> But not every use of "monolingual" refers to people. I think I've
> seen it more often in reference to media (books?)
>
> Google:
>
> "monolingual person" 7.850
> "monolingual speaker" 8.940
> "monolingual edition" 42.500
> "monolingual version" 10.300
> "monolingual school" 14.000
Okay. BNC again:
monolingual speaker, family, community, etc.: 24
monolingual book, edition, version: 0
monoglot (of people): 6
monoglottic, monoglossic: 0
Google counts are unreliable. They also have a lot more advertising
than the BNC does, if that's important.
--
Jerry Friedman
> * Jerry Friedman:
>
>> On 9/6/14 4:01 AM, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>>> On 2014-09-05 15:11:57 +0000, Jerry Friedman said:
>>>
>>>> On 9/5/14 6:31 AM, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
>>>>> On 2014-09-05, Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Whoever wrote that application is apparently not even monolingual.
>>>>>
>>>>> Unilingual? Monoglot(tic)?
>>>>
>>>> "Monolingual" is the usual word,
>>>
>>> Maybe it is on your side of the Atlantic, but I don't think it is here.
>>
>> At the British National Corpus
>>
>> monolingual: 42
>> monoglot: 7
>> only one language: 1 (referring to Bill Bryson's abilities)
>> [speak] one language: 1 (where "[speak]" includes "spoke", etc.)
>
> But not every use of "monolingual" refers to people. I think I've
> seen it more often in reference to media (books?)
>
> Google:
>
> "monolingual person" 7.850
> "monolingual speaker" 8.940
> "monolingual edition" 42.500
> "monolingual version" 10.300
> "monolingual school" 14.000
Okay. BNC again:
monolingual speaker, family, community, etc.: 24
monolingual book, edition, version: 0
monoglot (of people): 6
monoglottic, monoglossic: 0
Google counts are unreliable. They also have a lot more advertising
than the BNC does, if that's important.
--
Jerry Friedman
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Sep 13, 2014, 12:18:11 PM9/13/14
to
On 2014-09-10 08:08:33 +0000, Peter Moylan said:
> On 10/09/14 03:26, Peter Young wrote:
>
>> An interesting fact described by my brother, who has lived in Montreal
>> since the early 1970s (and whom I will be visiting next week) gives to
>> me a partial definition of bilingualism. His son, born in Montreal and
>> now adult, after he was watched a TV programme he can't tell you
>> whether it was in English or French.
>
> Two of my children grew up French/English bilingual. Something that used
> to fascinate me, when they were at preschool age, was that they would
> switch languages in the middle of a sentence depending on who they were
> facing. They always knew which language to use with which person,
> apparently unconsciously.
My daughter was like that from the age of about 3. At that time it was
just English and Spanish, but since then she's added French.
>
> Some of their (francophone) Belgian cousins didn't always get it right.
> They would turn to me and switch from French to Dutch, even though at a
> conscious level they knew that I didn't speak Dutch.
--
athel
> On 10/09/14 03:26, Peter Young wrote:
>
>> An interesting fact described by my brother, who has lived in Montreal
>> since the early 1970s (and whom I will be visiting next week) gives to
>> me a partial definition of bilingualism. His son, born in Montreal and
>> now adult, after he was watched a TV programme he can't tell you
>> whether it was in English or French.
>
> Two of my children grew up French/English bilingual. Something that used
> to fascinate me, when they were at preschool age, was that they would
> switch languages in the middle of a sentence depending on who they were
> facing. They always knew which language to use with which person,
> apparently unconsciously.
My daughter was like that from the age of about 3. At that time it was
just English and Spanish, but since then she's added French.
>
> Some of their (francophone) Belgian cousins didn't always get it right.
> They would turn to me and switch from French to Dutch, even though at a
> conscious level they knew that I didn't speak Dutch.
--
athel
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Sep 13, 2014, 12:20:33 PM9/13/14
to
On 2014-09-09 17:26:24 +0000, Peter Young said:
>>> On 9/5/14 2:50 AM, Pablo wrote:
>
>>>> I deny being bilingual and Spanish friends keep telling me I am because I
>>>> speak better Spanish than a lot of them. But in no way is my Spanish
>>>> "natural" like my English.
>>>
>>> Yes, "bilingual" to me suggests that the person is a native speaker of
>>> both languages or would be mistaken for one by a native speaker (a rare
>>> phenomenon). However, it's certainly not always used that way.
>
>> In Canada, or at least here in Montreal, I think to count as
>> "bilingual" it is usually enough that in both languages it is not
>> *immediately* obvious (after one or two sentences) that the person
>> is not a native speaker. There are certainly a lot of people like
>> that here. Having a slight foreign accent doesn't invalidate
>> bilingualism.
(and understood) is in English or French or Spanish.
--
athel
>>> On 9/5/14 2:50 AM, Pablo wrote:
>
>>>> I deny being bilingual and Spanish friends keep telling me I am because I
>>>> speak better Spanish than a lot of them. But in no way is my Spanish
>>>> "natural" like my English.
>>>
>>> Yes, "bilingual" to me suggests that the person is a native speaker of
>>> both languages or would be mistaken for one by a native speaker (a rare
>>> phenomenon). However, it's certainly not always used that way.
>
>> In Canada, or at least here in Montreal, I think to count as
>> "bilingual" it is usually enough that in both languages it is not
>> *immediately* obvious (after one or two sentences) that the person
>> is not a native speaker. There are certainly a lot of people like
>> that here. Having a slight foreign accent doesn't invalidate
>> bilingualism.
>
> An interesting fact described by my brother, who has lived in Montreal
> since the early 1970s (and whom I will be visiting next week) gives to
> me a partial definition of bilingualism. His son, born in Montreal and
> now adult, after he was watched a TV programme he can't tell you
> whether it was in English or French.
My wife is often unable to say whether something she has just heard
> An interesting fact described by my brother, who has lived in Montreal
> since the early 1970s (and whom I will be visiting next week) gives to
> me a partial definition of bilingualism. His son, born in Montreal and
> now adult, after he was watched a TV programme he can't tell you
> whether it was in English or French.
(and understood) is in English or French or Spanish.
--
athel
Cheryl
Sep 13, 2014, 4:02:33 PM9/13/14
to
On 2014-09-13 2:32 AM, Steve Hayes wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Sep 2014 20:28:33 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> On Friday, September 12, 2014 11:26:11 PM UTC-4, Steve Hayes wrote:
>>> On Fri, 12 Sep 2014 08:06:51 -0230, Cheryl <cper...@mun.ca> wrote:
>>
>>>> As I think was mentioned before, this is not the case in some places. In
>>>> Canada, where language status is often important, 'bilingual' simply
>>>> means that you can function well in two languages, generally English and
>>>> French. Some employers - eg the federal government - have tests which
>>>> determine whether employees can be considered bilingual or not. Most of
>>>> those who are bilingual will have learned their second language after
>>>> they learned their mother tongue.
>>>
>>> And it wasn't the case in South Africa during the period of Afrikaner
>>> nationalist hegemony.
>>> "Bilingual" meant that you could speak, read and write Afrikaans to the
>>> standards of the civil service. Native Afrikaans-speakeras were assumed to be
>>> bilingual because they could speak Afrikaans.
>>> Back then we had 2 official languages, Afrikaans and English. Now we have 11.
>>
>> The BBC's South Africa correspondent, speaking to a US radio program,
>> pointed out how extraordinary it was that none of the principals in
>> the trial was using their native language: the judge is a Zulu-speaker,
>> and the defendant, his attorney, and the prosecutor are all Afrikaans-
>> speakers; yet the trial was held in English.
>
> There's multiculturalism at work.
>
>
There's an upcoming trial in Montreal in which the defendant (being
> On Fri, 12 Sep 2014 20:28:33 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> On Friday, September 12, 2014 11:26:11 PM UTC-4, Steve Hayes wrote:
>>> On Fri, 12 Sep 2014 08:06:51 -0230, Cheryl <cper...@mun.ca> wrote:
>>
>>>> As I think was mentioned before, this is not the case in some places. In
>>>> Canada, where language status is often important, 'bilingual' simply
>>>> means that you can function well in two languages, generally English and
>>>> French. Some employers - eg the federal government - have tests which
>>>> determine whether employees can be considered bilingual or not. Most of
>>>> those who are bilingual will have learned their second language after
>>>> they learned their mother tongue.
>>>
>>> And it wasn't the case in South Africa during the period of Afrikaner
>>> nationalist hegemony.
>>> "Bilingual" meant that you could speak, read and write Afrikaans to the
>>> standards of the civil service. Native Afrikaans-speakeras were assumed to be
>>> bilingual because they could speak Afrikaans.
>>> Back then we had 2 official languages, Afrikaans and English. Now we have 11.
>>
>> The BBC's South Africa correspondent, speaking to a US radio program,
>> pointed out how extraordinary it was that none of the principals in
>> the trial was using their native language: the judge is a Zulu-speaker,
>> and the defendant, his attorney, and the prosecutor are all Afrikaans-
>> speakers; yet the trial was held in English.
>
> There's multiculturalism at work.
>
>
anglophone) is being tried in English and French. They're requiring all
the jurors to be bilingual and are determining whether or not potential
jurors are bilingual though interviews.
--
Cheryl
John Holmes
Sep 13, 2014, 11:36:22 PM9/13/14
to
might as well be black magic.
--
Regards
John
for mail: my initials plus a u e
at tpg dot com dot au
CDB
Sep 14, 2014, 8:30:32 AM9/14/14
to
On 13/09/2014 7:48 AM, Steve Hayes wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Sep 2014 06:33:27 -0400, CDB <belle...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Steve Hayes wrote:
>>> Ian Jackson <ianREMOVET...@g3ohx.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> Steve Hayes <haye...@telkomsa.net> writes
>>>>> "parmantige houtkop".
>>>> "Pesky woodenhead"?
>>> Literally, yes.
>>> Figuratively, "cheeky kaffir".
>> Is "hout" always wood, the material? I was thinking of "holt", as
>> "in every holt and heath", which would bring it closer to
>> "bush-head", or "kaffir'.
> As far as I know "hout" is always wood, the material. Its etymology
> may suggest other meanings, but I'm not aware of any other current
> ones.
Thank you. Interesting parallel drift.
> On Sat, 13 Sep 2014 06:33:27 -0400, CDB <belle...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Steve Hayes wrote:
>>> Ian Jackson <ianREMOVET...@g3ohx.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> Steve Hayes <haye...@telkomsa.net> writes
>>>>> "parmantige houtkop".
>>>> "Pesky woodenhead"?
>>> Literally, yes.
>>> Figuratively, "cheeky kaffir".
>> Is "hout" always wood, the material? I was thinking of "holt", as
>> "in every holt and heath", which would bring it closer to
>> "bush-head", or "kaffir'.
> As far as I know "hout" is always wood, the material. Its etymology
> may suggest other meanings, but I'm not aware of any other current
> ones.
Ian Jackson
Sep 14, 2014, 10:26:03 AM9/14/14
to
In message <lv41p9$oi8$1...@speranza.aioe.org>, CDB <belle...@gmail.com>
writes
Just another (final?) suggestion - "Woodentop".
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEgg0h2FvFY>
>
--
Ian
writes
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEgg0h2FvFY>
>
--
Ian
Robert Bannister
Sep 14, 2014, 8:07:53 PM9/14/14
to
isn't "kaffir" Arabic for "infidel"?
--
Robert Bannister - 1940-71 SE England
1972-now W Australia
David Kleinecke
Sep 14, 2014, 8:51:09 PM9/14/14
to
On Sunday, September 14, 2014 5:07:53 PM UTC-7, Robert Bannister wrote:
> isn't "kaffir" Arabic for "infidel"?
"Infidel" is best avoided (loaded with nuance). Basically
> isn't "kaffir" Arabic for "infidel"?
it means non-Muslim (those who are ungrateful [to Allah for
his gifts]). The current important use is by one set of
Muslims to describe another set as apostate from Islam - and
therefore subject to the death penalty.
Muslims who read other Muslims out of Islam are called Takfiri.
The outlaw band that calls themselves the Islamic State are
takfiris - all other Muslims except them are apostate
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages