Hi Ron,

When an American friend of mine introduces me with his usual "This is Jacek who speaks seven languages," I usually say "But I no longer speak many of them; I only can read them, and even that not always." Otherwise, I prefer not to say (option #3) because it would take too long to explain about language attrition, active A vs. passive B and C, language maintenance, shifts in dominant language depending where you live, work, with whom, at what age, etc. etc.

Jacek

Hi Ron,

I have never thought of myself as a polyglot, and I don't recall having been asked.

I can read four-five languages, but honestly, you cannot count Norwegian and Swedish as 'other' languages since they are so close to Danish. The German and the French that was once fairly fluent, is stuck somewhere on the back burner - difficult, not impossible, but very difficult to revive. For speaking and writing, I have only Danish and English.

Nanna

I speak, read, and write more than two languages, so I guess technically that makes me a polyglot rather than bilingual.  Does one have to be a good polyglot, or does any level of polyglottism count?  I am an ear person, so I take pleasure in the spoken language.

Maxi

Not a polyglot, no, I tend to think of myself as bilingual (Dutch and English) and I have a more than passing understanding of German because I watched a lot of German TV when I grew up (and still do, whenever I think Germany will loose a football match , we Dutch have a hard time getting over the 1974 World Cup ) and the past year my French has improved somewhat because of my emigrating to the South of France. My family and friends tend to think I know everything there is to know about languages, but that is merely because they are misinformed about my capabilities and seem to think my skills are of mythical proportions. Anyway, I wouldn't want to be a polyglot, either: in which language would you dream, for instance, and what happens when you live your life to a ripe old age? Would you remember the dreams but not be able to understand them? Or would you understand your dreams but not be able to remember them? I am, like Maxi, someone who likes spoken languages but I go a bit further: I love to hear Gaelic or Welsh, but I don't understand a word of it. I just like the sounds .

Theo, Dutchman in France

No (and thanks for bringing up the definition), but when you get asked the question Ron pointed out, it's unavoidable to get bogged down in explanations. That's why I avoid the whole topic outside the United States which is a country with no problems in that respect: everybody can and often does claim that they speak this and that either, as it turns out, because they had some Spanish in high school, or because their great grandparents came from Europe in the 19th c., or because they live in Chinatown and dine in Little Italy...

As for the definition of polyglottism, some of them agree that it involves 'several',i.e., more than two languages, but some will settle for as few as two:

a person who speaks more than one language
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

The term multilingualism can refer to an occurrence regarding an individual speaker who uses two or more languages
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyglot (person)

Someone who speaks and/or writes two or more languages. Multilingual.
www.multilingualchildren.org/resources/glossary.html

When it comes to night dreams, there is no problem at all: I never remember them. As for day-dreaming, I use the language that suits me in the given moment...

Hi, is a polyglot a good thing, or a bad thing like snobbish, or just a hip thing? I am not sure what it is right now. If it means love of languages,  I am definitely a polyglot. 

I speak five well, read quite a few and love all of them. 

It doesn't take much... According to the definitions I quoted, everyone who translates from B to A is, by definition, a polyglot.

An interesting exercise would consist in comparing the definition(s) of 'polyglot' between various languages.

A Polish paper dictionary I have here says: one who speaks many languages. Now, 'many' is different from 'several' or 'from two up' and I think that it is 'many' that influences my interpretation of the term polyglot. 'Many' means 'an indefinite large number.'

See also the following Wikipedia entry in Spanish:

and equivalents of this entry in other languages:

P.S. See also Polyglots

So, moving between various languages, 'polyglot' could be, to some extent, a false friend. While in the English-speaking world a bilingual person can be considered a polyglot, not so elsewhere.

It is also the case of 'linguist' who in Polish has only the first of the following two English meanings:

Hi, Jacek. I think it is sometimes really hard to determine how many languages you speak, or especially how many you understand.   The more languages you learn, the more you understand, not proportionally. For example if you learn a Slavic language, you may be able to understand another two or three Slavic languages. The same is true about Scandinavian languages, some Romance languages, and many others most likely. It is also hard to determine what speaking a language is. Basic communication? Philosophical discourses?Interpreting medical testimony? 

Hi, Jacek. I think it is sometimes really hard to determine how many languages you speak, or especially how many you understand.   ... It is also hard to determine what speaking a language is. Basic communication? Philosophical discourses?Interpreting medical testimony?

I must agree with Liliana here about Jacek's linguistic skills, he never seizes to amaze me with his understanding of linguistic structures. If humans ever encounter alien species I think Jacek must be nominated for participating in the communication with these aliens .

As for what is speaking a language: I don't know. Whenever I go abroad I ususally manage to order a beer in the local language fairly quickly, wheather it be in Slovenian or Gaelic, but that is more because I have found that attitude a great way to strike up a conversation with the locals in the pub. These locals, by the way, usually display a desire to speak in a foreign language, I think this is a univerversal streak of mankind, the urge to communicate. My best guess of what speaking a language is: the ability to think in that language as if it is your native language. But, as I said, this is a guess at best.

Theo, Dutchman in France

Thank you, Theo. I knew I was a maverick, and a fan of X-files for a while, so maybe somewhere out there they will, indeed, require my services one day...

As for

My best guess of what speaking a language is: the ability to think in that language as if it is your native language

we had some discussion in the past about thinking being language-less. See, for example:

http://forums.philosophyforums.com/threads/thought-precedes-language-27660.html

Language Children think before they speak: Nature 

But that would be opening another Pandora's box...

Jacek

Hi, Anne-Christine. I thought most young people in Sweden spoke at least two languages, Swedish and English. I lived in Sweden for a while and this is my experience. Swedish people usually speak English quite well.

Liliana

I am sorry, you said two foreign languages, they just probably understand other Scandinavian languages, without speaking them.

Originally written by Liliana Boladz-Nekipelov on November 27, 2008 4:57 PM The more languages you learn, the more you understand, not proportionally. For example if you learn a Slavic language, you may be able to understand another two or three Slavic languages. The same is true about Scandinavian languages, some Romance languages, and many others most likely.

When first I (tried to) read The Canterbury Tales in Middle English (ME), I was frequently lost to the point where frustration set in. Then I realised that ME reminded me of Danish and German and suddenly reading ME was fun and a very interesting journey.  I cannot read it in chunks like I do English or Danish, and I have to stop and think, but it is no longer frustrating but fun. Looking at the map below, you can see why ME would be easier to understand having Old Norse simmering on the back burner.

The approximate extent of Old Norse and related languages in the early 10th century:       Old West Norse dialect       Old East Norse dialect       Old Gutnish dialect       Crimean Gothic       Old English       Other Germanic languages with which Old Norse still retained some mutual intelligibility

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danish_language

Hi, Nanna. Is  Icelandic much more remote from the other Scandinavian languages. It sounds like an older language, compared to Swedish. Can a Danish person, let's say understand Icelandic, easily? 

Liliana 

Goodness, no, Liliana,

From Wikipedia. This is Icelandic:

Margir Íslendingar telja íslenskuna vera „upprunalegra“ mál en flest önnur og að hún hafi breyst minna. Það er ekki alls kostar rétt og má í því sambandi nefna að íslenskan hefur einungis fjögur föll af átta úr indóevrópska frummálinu, á meðan flest slavnesk mál hafa sex föll og pólska sjö.

The only words I understand are 'Slavic' and 'Polish'...

The Danes can "read" Dutch, but at dimwit speed. Very laborious, but it can be done and it helped me with maps and street signs when last I was in Belgium.

Nanna

Yes, a little bit hard, but isn't it beautiful, Nanna.

Thanks. Liliana

No, I won't say that. But since I don't understand what sex is doing leaning up against og pólska, I am understandably a little loathe doing any leaning myself no matter the direction.

Nanna

I can read and write three languages, English, Greek and Italian, and only read Spanish, and Portuguese, but I do not know if that makes me a polyglot since there have been times when I've caught myself thinking in Greek when living in Greece, or in Albanian when in Albania, or in any language to which I was exposed for a long time over a period. So it depends on the time and the place one is at a particular moment and also on which language one feels more comfortable with at that moment. I'd call myself bilingual at most, but even that does not seem accurate since my mother tongue is Albanian.

I can certainly relate to that language attrition referred to here and in another thread.

Ines

 Yes , as anothet person said  polyglot is the person who speaks more than 2 languages. But I want to make a comment about the text in Icelandic.

Margir Íslendingar telja íslenskuna vera „upprunalegra“ mál en flest önnur og að hún hafi breyst minna. Það er ekki alls kostar rétt og má í því sambandi nefna að íslenskan hefur einungis fjögur föll af átta úr indóevrópska frummálinu, á meðan flest slavnesk mál hafa sex föll og pólska sjö.

    3 Times words starting with islend ; foll seems to be the preposition for  and  it says  indoeuropean also. I think that with patience and a little more text it can be understood . lol

I’d have to agree. I don’t have extensive experience with Icelandic (I took one semester with two weekly hours of basic Icelandic a few years ago and am very much into Icelandic music, and that’s it), and I have absolutely no trouble understanding the above-quoted text. In some cases, I can read and Icelandic text and be completely baffled; but in others (like this one), I find it hard to understand that a Dane should understand as little as Nanna claims to (or not to).

A translation of the text, as I read it (without consulting dictionaries or anything):

Many Icelanders consider Icelandic to be a more ‘original’ language that has changed less than most others. That’s not altogether/necessarily [not quite sure what ‘alls kostar’ means precisely] correct, and it is necessary to mention in this connection that out of the eight Proto-Indoeuropean cases, Icelandic has only four, whereas most Slavic languages have six cases, and Polish seven.

For Nanna, and to illustrate the similarity for others, a very direct translation into Danish follows below. It's not a good translation into good Danish, but it's comprehensible and is made using words close to the source text’s words and constructions, sometimes adding the regular Danish words in brackets, where the meaning of the equivalents of the Icelandic words is not immediately obvious (some articles are in brackets, since Icelandic uses fewer non-enclitic articles than Danish):

Mange islændinge tæller [=mener] islandsk at være [et] ‘oprindeligere’ mål [=sprog] end [de] fleste andre, og at hun [=det, sproget] haver brødes [=ændret sig] mindre. Det er ikke fuldstændig/nødvendigvis [alls kostar] ret [=rigtigt], og [man] må i dette sambånd [=sammenhæng] nævne at islandsken haver enligt [=kun] fire fald [=kasus] af otte ud fra [det] indoeuropæiske fornmål [=ursprog], (i)medens [de] fleste slaviske mål haver sex fald og polsk syv.

Though there are obvious differences, there are also very obvious similarities; similarities that are great and obvious enough that a native Danish speaker who is otherwise good with languages (as we must assume a translator is) should be able to grasp the general, basic meaning of the text with only a little practice.

Thank you, Janus, you are right!

I was merely being lazy and not interested in trying to decipher the Icelandic text, which might have resulted in 'but can you translate this or this or this?' 

Still, I do not understand Icelandic.

Nanna

PS: Jeg kan sagtens følge din danske oversættelse. Tak, Janus. Your Danish translation is quite interesting and you obviously know more about the Icelandic language than I do. Fascinating!

 Very interesting comment Janus,

  Thanks

              Ricardo

A quick comment I forgot earlier, in reply to your first comment, Ricardo:

Föll is not the preposition ‘for’ (that would be fyrir); rather, it’s the plural of fall, which means, well, ‘a fall’ (or in this case, well, ‘a [grammatical] case’).

How would this guy fare on our poll?

Is it possible to learn German in just days? Linguistic savant Daniel Tammet managed to do so in the course of a week. Using his own special technique, the 30-year-old, who has a mild form of autism, has learned to speak more than 10 languages.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,611381,00.html

Hello everybody,

Well, German in just 10 days is almost impossible, but I believe that he at least got familiar with the language and could understand and talk in a few days.

Same thing has happened to me when I was in Greece, for just 5 days. In 2 days I could manage to understand and talk some greek (just spoken not written language of course). This may be a talent, I agree. Same thing with spanish. I'm very familiar with the Spanish language, and 1 telenovela (which I have seen for this purpose) was enough for me to learn the language, the spoken one. Then I had to read a bit to get familiar with the written language too.

Yes, I can call myself a polyglot, as I speak (excellent knowledge-spoken-written-grammar) 5 languages and I'm quite familiar with all of them

Yes, based on the complexity of the vocabullary and grammar that is characteristic of some telenovelas, one can easily speak 15 languages in 10 days.

Well, after having edited subtitles for more than ten years, which include translations of Spanish language soap operas, I can affirm that it is a common misconception that in order to translate these seemingly simple dialogues one requires a superficial knowledge of the language. It might not be rocket science, but these types of translations nevertheless have a certain degree of difficulty and I can assure you that only a few translators manage to deliver qualitative work. Sometimes poor translations are the result of overconfidence.

Ines

This was just kind of sarcastic, Ines, I am sorry, I hardly ever use sarcasm. I do not believe anybody can learn any language in 10 days, or even in half a year: learning a foreign language is a complex process, which takes at least a few years. Knowing a few phrases is not really knowing the language.

In fact it's a fast way to get your ear familiarized with the language. TV and everyday life in a new country. Of course this is not enough for learning a language, but it's a good start. It's just like a melody you hear for the first time. You can tell who is talented in getting fast the notes and reproducing them in the same way.

Anyway there are two (first) approaches with a new language. Vocabulary and grammar. What I meant in my previous post is not only the vocabulary but mainly the grammar. First you have to be talented and secondly you should have good to excellent knowledge of at least 1-2 languages (grammar) in order for you to get familir fast and easily with a new language.

I would like to remind you of the meaning of the term polyglot, one of which is: A person having a speaking, reading, or writing knowledge of several languages.

By this you can tell if you are a polyglot or not. The way you learn a language then, is up to your talent and your will. The important thing is to be capable to speak, read or write good enough in a language in order to build a good communication and also to be able to articulate your thoughts.

I agree with you Liliana.

You are making a difference between basic and professional knowledge of a language. I totally agree that the latter is a product of years of experience. I think that you can never tell of entirely knowing a language as it is a continuing process that lasts a lifetime.

I was not just talking about us profesionals here, but also about them that have a good basic knowledge of a foreign language, and who according to the definition of the term, can be called polyglots.

The other ones that you mentioned are linguists/translators. Please make a difference, this is a profession, while the other is just the everyday life and can be achieved (almost) by anyone.

Concerning the soap operas, they really have a relatively easy level of communicating, but sometimes this can by tricky. As Ines mentioned, this can be percieved only by translators, as sometimes you should have an excellent knowledge of the language and context background in order to better understand their thoughts and communication.

And by the way, Ines, you do an excellent work. Your language skills are really excellent.

Hi Daniela.  Welcome to Translatorscafe.  You make some excellent points and you seem to have some experience behind them. You are right - language learning is indeed a multifaceted affair taking a number of years, and a distinction should also be made between the professional and non-professional polyglot or bilingual.

Maxi

Thank you Maxi.

Indeed I have an experience of more than 10 years behind and I can tell that it has been my best teacher in all these years. I love my job and as such I am very passionate when I discuss about it

Have a nice weekend,

Daniela