User:NorwegianBlue/refdesk/language

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents


[edit] Norwegian name pronunciation (Trygve Lie)

How is the Norwegian name Trygve Lie (the first Secretary General of the United Nations) pronounced?

Is the last name a long "i" sound (as in a falsehood), or is it like "lee", or is it "lee-eh", or something else?

What are the vowel sounds in the first name? One or two syllables, and which gets emphasis?

This is my understanding, but I'm not a speaker of Norwegian, so I'd be happy to be corrected:
/?t?yg?? 'li?/
Rather /?t?yg?? 'li:?/, anyway... (Roughly "lee-eh"). By the way, he's a popular fellow in Norwegian crosswords... ;) ?? ???? 14:08, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
I don't know how to represent the pitch accent. Informally, the last name is like "lee-eh" but the second syllable is very weak, like the first "a" in "around". The first name has two syllables, of which the first gets the stress. The "r" is not trilled, but a single flap, almost like a "d". The "y" is like French "u", German "ü". The "v" is soft, like a "w" but also a bit like initial "r" in English. The final "e" is again like "a" in "around".  --LambiamTalk 08:31, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Here is the pronunciation by a native:
Image:Trygve_lie.ogg
. --NorwegianBlue talk 12:58, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
And here's an audio link: Norwegian pronunciation (help·info) --Kjoonlee 14:26, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A or an, "Aitch" vs "Haitch"

For the sentence:

"A HFH team" (HFH = Habitat for Humanity"

Should it be "A" or "an"

"An HFH team"

99.240.177.206 (talk) 01:05, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

The preceding article depends on how you actually say the first letter. So, it will depend on whether you say "aitch" or "haitch". Which is a bit of an issue in itself, and when it comes to a written text, I don't know how you'd decide what the reader would expect. If the expectation is "aitch", it would be "an HFH team"; if "haitch", it'd be "a HFH team" (although some would prefer "an" either way). Best I can do. -- JackofOz (talk) 01:24, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
I never heard the name of the letter "H" pronounced "haitch", only "aitch". In which dialects/sociolects is it pronounced "haitch"? However, it is my impression that saying "an historian" etc. is becoming more common, even when the "h" is pronounced. --NorwegianBlue talk 22:27, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Maybe the reason you've never heard this pronunciation is that you've been a bit restricted in your movements, having been nailed to your perch since the early 1970s. :) H will answer this question. It doesn't mention, however, that many Australians say "haitch". Some other Australians consider them to be displaying ignorance by so doing, but maybe those critics are in turn displaying snobbery. -- JackofOz (talk) 05:19, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Lol. Thanks for directing me to the article. I added your information and that from ColinFine to H#Pronunciation --NorwegianBlue talk 16:11, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Recently we have a question related to this issue, which has been filed here. Pallida  Mors 06:01, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
While I see "an historian" written often, as an American speaker it strikes me as either a Britishism or an affectation. I've only seen it on the words "historian" and "historical". I'm curious what's in NorwegianBlue's "etc." -- are there any words not derived from "history" where people commonly say "an" before a pronounced H? rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 06:52, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Pretty sure this issue, including some very nicely formulated rules, has been discussed previously. Follow the link above?--PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 06:57, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
However, the general rule would be that the article "an" can be used when the first syllable of the word beginning with h is not stressed, for example "an hotel", "an hysterical attack", but "a hysterectomy", "a high building". SaundersW (talk) 10:12, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Whose general rule is that, SW? Is it prescriptive or descriptive (roughly speaking!)? In fact stressed is ambiguous in what you have written. In hysterectomy the first syllable is stressed relative to the second syllable (usually), but not relative to the third syllable. See the discussion linked above (here) for my descriptive treatment of this matter.
– Noetica♬♩ Talk 01:25, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
'Haitch' is common in parts of Northern England as well. However, I suspect that the original question wasn't about either the name or the pronunciation of the letter 'H', but about whether to pretend the abbreviated phrase had been spelt out or not. (I may be wrong, though). If that is the question, I would say that it depends on whether you expect your readers to expand the abbreviation when reading it: usually not. --ColinFine (talk) 23:59, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Estimating word count of personal vocabulary

Does anyone know of a test I can take? 66.91.224.203 (talk) 10:51, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

yeah, pick the first word you don't know and you'll learn the order of the size of your vocabulary.

 the   I    too   similar   incarnadine     haruspex
 1    10    100    1000       10,000        100,000

Note: Completely unscientific, made up by me on the spot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.122.117.186 (talk) 11:13, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

  • Nice try, but it does not work. This test might lead most people to believe that their word range is somewhere between 10,000 and 100,000 (assuming they have leafed through their Shakespeare) — but where exactly? And the, supposing you have never heard of incarnadine, but are familiar with numbers 9,999 and 10,0001, what would your conclusion be?
  • The question should be put in more precise terms. We all have four types of vocabulary: both spoken and written, and either active (we use the word) or passive (we understand it). So which of your personal vocabularies would you like to count? Active written would seem to pose the least problems: scan all texts you have written over the last 40 years (or 4, if you're less ambitious), put them in a database, order them according to the alphabet, eliminate doubles and count.
  • Which is not to deny that the test devised by 79.122.117.186 could be refined, using a frequency list. Bessel Dekker (talk) 15:06, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Another problem with 79.122's scale is there's no way of gauging the vocabulary of those of us who know the word "haruspex" but not the word "incarnadine". —Angr If you've written a quality article... 15:09, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Select a dictionary. By random sampling, calculate the average number of words per page. Generate a list of random numbers in the range [first page with contents]...[last page with contents]. Generate a second list (same size) of random numbers in the range 1...[Average number of words per page]. Then have a friend look up a page number from the first list, and a word number (counting from the top of the page) from the second list, and ask you either for a word from its definition/translation (to measure your active vocabulary), or a definition from a word (to measure your passive vocabulary). Multiply the percentage of correct answers with the number of words in the dictionary. --NorwegianBlue talk 20:32, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Or try here. can't vouch for its accuracy, but it will give you a numerical result. Choose the advanced option.
– Noetica♬♩ Talk 00:59, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
This method isn't totally scientific either, and it won't give you a precise number, but it will give you some kind of rating of your vocabulary knowledge, it claims to be for a good cause, and you will probably enjoy it: http://www.freerice.com/ I'm not affiliated with this website, but I've spent more than my share of time there. --Diacritic (talk) 22:21, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Letter head (Dear Sir, Yours sincerely)

Hi, I am German and I'd like to know how to formally address somebody in a letter head. My first try is "Dear Sir or Madam", so you can see which direction I am heading. Thanks for any helpful suggestion. -- 217.232.38.106 (talk) 09:05, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

"Dear Sir or Madam" works perfectly well in a formal letter which is sent to an unknown individual (probably in an organisation). The corresponding formula at the end is "Yours faithfully". SaundersW (talk) 09:50, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
If you're writing to an organisation and don't even have a specific job title to address then you can use "Dear Sirs" but if you're addressing a letter to a specific job title like "Head of ..." then "Dear Sir or Madam" or "Dear Sir/Madam" is standard.86.143.33.38 (talk) 10:59, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm wiki sneakily logged me out. Anyway above comment was me. TheMathemagician (talk) 11:01, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
By the way, this is usually called the salutation or greeting of a letter. Letterhead is another name for headed paper, that is, stationery with the name and address of the person or organisation already printed on it. Both articles contain references if you wish to learn more. BrainyBabe (talk) 11:05, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again for your answers. -- 217.232.38.106 (talk) 14:11, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Of course, if you know the gender of the person you are addressing, then you should use either "Dear Sir" or "Dear Madam", as the person might be offended if you know their name but find their gender ambiguous. Also, "Yours faithfully" sounds very old-fashioned to my American ears, though it would be excused of a foreigner. (It may be normal in the United Kingdom.) The standard formula before the signature in the United States is "Sincerely". Marco polo (talk) 21:45, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
The rule here (in the UK) is (or was. Maybe I am just old!) that with "Dear Sir" one uses "Yours faithully" and with "Dear Mr Polo" one uses "Yours sincerely". However formal letters are probably in decline here, and the rules may fall into disuse. SaundersW (talk) 23:12, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm in my twenties and I was taught at school (UK) that it's Yours Faithfully if you don't know their name and Yours Sincerely if you do. My office uses Kind Regards for all variations though, which is also acceptable. MorganaFiolett (talk) 16:00, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

"Dear Sir or Madam" is perfectly acceptable for a formal letter, although somewhat old-fashioned. "To Whom It May Concern" is probably more common. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:23, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't thinking straight in my last comment. If you know the name of the person being addressed, then you wouldn't use "Dear Madam" or "Dear Sir", you'd use "Dear Ms. X" or "Dear Mr. X". I am not so young myself, but in the United States we would sign the letter in either case with just "Sincerely," followed by your signature. "To Whom It May Concern" is an acceptable way to begin a letter if you don't particularly care about the impression you make. To my ears, it has a cold, impersonal, offhand tone. If you are merely informing the recipient of the letter of something, then "To Whom It May Concern" would be okay. However, if the letter is asking for something, then "Dear Madam or Sir" is more engaging and probably more effective (if still formal). Marco polo (talk) 01:57, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
To agree with Marco, if you know the name of the person, then "Dear Mr X" (and in the UK, because the abbreviation ends with the last letter of the word abbreviated you don't need a full stop, period, or whatever you might call it!) Mrs X, Dr X or whatever and end with "Yours sincerely". If you have no idea who will read it, but it is a particular person such as the personnel director, or a notional person in charge of complaints, then "Dear Sir or Madam" is a good start, ending with "yours faithfully". If you are writing an open letter such as a reference which the bearer can show to many people, then "To whom it may concern" would be appropriate. In any case you can see that there are regional or national variations which will make a slight deviation from any "norm" or "rule" not very visible. SaundersW (talk) 09:16, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Another thing to consider is that you might want to write the salutation and sign-off by hand rather than typing them. I believe it is good practice, if you are typing or word processing a letter, to leave gaps at the beginning and end of the letter, where the "Dear Sir/Madam/Mr or Mrs Whoever" and "Yours faithfully/sincerely" would go, print off the letter and then write them in by hand. This adds a personal touch. You would also have your name printed at the bottom, below where your signature goes. --Richardrj talk email 16:22, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spanish pronunciation of "s" as "h" (Language)

I have noticed that some Spanish speakers pronounce "s" at the end of unstressed syllables as "h", "las ciudades" might be pronounced as "lah siuthatheh". An example is found here Vanguardia de la ciencia - liquenes , in the item on lichens. The first time I noticed this was in an interview of Augusto Pinochet. Is this feature of certain dialects (which ones?) or sociolects, or what? --NorwegianBlue talk 19:11, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

At Spanish dialects and varieties#Evolution, we are told, "The realization of syllable-final /s/ as a barely audible [h] or simply nothing is rather noticeable in many dialects, including the Argentine ones. In the Castilian variety, this tendency exists but is less marked." The brief discussion at Spanish phonology (under /s/) also seems to imply that the phenomenon can occur in Madrid Spanish too. Wareh 19:48, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
The person with the "s as h" pronunciation in the audio file that I linked to is Ana Crespo, who works in Madrid as a botanist at the Universidad Complutense, but I don't know if she actually is from Madrid. She also pronounces "c" as "s" (seseo). Can anyone pinpoint her dialect from the podcast? --NorwegianBlue talk 21:04, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Anyone with a ceceo in Madrid would not likely be from Madrid. If she's Spanish, she'd be from Andalusia or the Canary Islands. I can never make audio files work on Wikipedia so I won't try.
The weakening of /s/ to [h] or elision is very widespread in Spanish. It is typical of what is sometimes called the lowland dialects, including most of Southern Spain, the Canaries, the Caribbean, and most of coastal Ibero-America except Pacific Mexico, Peru, and perhaps parts of Central America (I'm not sure about that). Because of the large-scale migration of Andalusians to Barcelona and Madrid, the weakening can be found there too, particularly in the working classes. Someone, not me, oughta clean up the Spanish phonology pages. Argentine Spanish has that feature, but it is far more widespread. I did ceceo, and that was enough for now. mnewmanqc 01:55, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Once upon a time, in Spanish (Language)

Spanish fairy tales often begin with the phrase "Érase una vez", which I assume means "Once upon a time". I'm a bit puzzled by the first word, "Érase". It's not in my dictionary, and appears to be a reflexive use of the verb "ser". Is this correct? "Lavarse", "irse" etc are in my dictionary, but not "serse". If it indeed is a reflexive use of "ser", is it used in any other context, or any other tense? --NorwegianBlue talk 18:42, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

"Érase una vez... " o "érase que se era... ", son formas del verbo "ser", o mejor dicho serían del verbo pronominal "serse", pero este verbo de hecho no existe salvo estas 2 frases hechas, equivalentes al inglés "once upon a time". Skarioffszky 19:05, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Muchas gracias. I was wondering, could this construct be used in the future tense, "Se sera un dia, cuando ..."? Google gives some hits indicating that this indeed may be the case, but it is difficult for a non-native speaker to understand how the use of the reflexive pronoun is modifying the intended meaning of the sentence. Couldn't it just have been omitted, with no loss of meaning or clarity? --NorwegianBlue talk 21:30, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
I asked a well-known Spanish linguist, who assures me that it is simply the reflexive in the archaic word order for that tense verb clitic. Se es is used to this day. Here's a citation from the Spanish writer, Javier Marías's, blog: [[1]] mnewmanqc 15:59, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Thank you very much! --NorwegianBlue talk 10:23, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Catalan and Castellano, Mutual intelligibility (Spanish)

I noticed on Catalan television last summer in a talk show that one of the participants spoke Castellano, while the others spoke Catalan. Evidently, the Castellano speaker understood Catalan without trouble. Just about everybody in Catalunya speeks Castellano fluently (although I have noticed that people in their twenties often have a characteristic accent that the parent generation lacks). I doubt, however, that the converse holds. I have three questions:

  1. To what extent do children in the Castellano-speaking parts of Spain learn Catalan, and the others Spanish languages?
  2. Approximately what proportion of native inhabitants of Madrid understand Catalan?
  3. Has anyone else here observed this phenomenon - conversations where one participant speaks Catalan and another speaks Castellano? In a conversation between a Norwegian and a Swede, each uses his own language because they are mutually intelligible, but (to me, at least) the "distance" between Castellano and Catalan is much greater than the "distance" between Norwegian and Swedish. --NorwegianBlue talk 22:24, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
PS: Is there a technical term for "distance" as used in question 3? --NorwegianBlue talk 22:24, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
"Distance" is a term widely used to discuss the concept, although I just saw a presentation that used the word "dialectometry". Measuring the distance between dialects and languages is not easy. The only rigorous, objective effort I've heard of is this one, which uses conditional entropy and Levenshtein distance to try to measure information loss between dialects.
The main problem is that where two language communities coexist for a long time, people become multilingual. For example, in Switzerland, I've heard conversations where one person spoke German and the other spoke French, each speaking their own language and understanding the other just fine. Yet, no one would ask if French and German are similar enough for people to understand each other automatically. Catalan/Spanish bilingualism is a bit like Swedish/Norwegian bilingualism in that the two language are in many ways similar, but it's also like French/German bilingualism in Switzerland in that many people just speak and understand both, so you can use whichever. There's something of a continuum between the two kinds of multilingualism.
I would expect that teenagers in Barcelona might well be highly bilingual, but that teenagers in Madrid would have no easier a time understanding Catalan than they would Italian. --Diderot 10:00, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Thank you Diderot, for an insightful comment, and for a very interesting link! I posed this question also on the Spanish equivalent of the reference desk, and the answer somewhat surprised me:
(From Usuario Camimo, any errors in translation are of course mine!):
In lack of surveys on the subject, and leaving aside the fact that the concept of "understanding a language" implies a gradation, is evident that any Spanish-speaking adult is moderately able to understand Catalan without too much difficulty, always better if the conditions are optimal: clear articulation and separation between words, etc. As with Galician, the linguistical similarities between the languages are so strong that this is logical.
In no community of Spain where the only official language is Castellano, does the obligatory curriculum of a pre-college student include the language of other communities (there are particular cases like, for example, the possibility of voluntarily attending such classes in some centers of Asturias Gallego...).
Interestingly, the Spanish page on mutual intelligibility lists Castellano and Catalan as mutually inteligible, as well as Castellano and Italian! --NorwegianBlue talk 09:14, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
When a Czech person and a Slovak person meet, the Czech speaks Czech and the Slovak speaks Slovak. (Of course, if a Slovak person is living in the Czech Republic and interacts with Czechs every day he/she would learn and use Czech with his/her colleagues.) When Czechoslovakia was around, there was a "federal" TV channel that alternated between the two languages, even on the same newscast. So Czechs were used to hearing Slovak. Interestingly, Czech kids today can't understand Slovak like their parents can because they haven't been exposed to it as much. When I was living in Prague and would visit Bratislava, I would speak in Czech, and the waiters/bartenders/ticket sellers would answer in Slovak. I had to explain that I could barely understand Czech, let alone Slovak. -- Mwalcoff 23:45, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
That's interesting! We have a similar situation in the eastern parts of Norway. When I grew up, Norway had only one TV channel, but the eastern parts of the country could receive Swedish television as well. Therefore, I and my generation understand Swedish much better than our children do. --NorwegianBlue talk 09:29, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Holds true for Swedish and Danish as well. I grew up in the southern part of Sweden, with convenient access to Danish TV. As a result, I understand Danish without a problem, and can even speak (a little). When I meet people who live in Stockholm however, they tell me that it's just impossible to understand what a Dane says. TERdON 18:17, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Catalan y castellano (Spanish)

Observé en un "talk show" (entrevista) en la televisión catalana el verano pasado, que uno de los participantes habló castellano, mientras que los otros hablaron catalán. Evidentemente, el hablante de castellano entendía catalán sin problemas. Yo sé que todo el mundo en Cataluña domina el castellano, y sé tambien que el revés no es verdad.

Tengo cuatro preguntas relacionadas con esto:

  1. ¿Aproximadamente qué proporción de madrileños nativos entienden el catalán?
  2. ¿En cataluña, es comun que un participante en una conversación habla catalán y otro habla Castellano?
  3. ¿Los niños en las partes de España donde se habla castellano, aprenden catalán, y los otros idiomas españolas en colegio?
  4. ¿Existe un continuo dialectal entre las regiones donde se hablan el catalan y el castellano?

Gracias, --Noruego azul] 22:33 27 ene 2007 (CET)

A falta de localizar datos precisos al respecto en forma de encuestas, le puedo comentar lo siguiente:
Respecto de su primera pregunta, y dejando a un lado que el concepto "entender una lengua" implica una gradación, es evidente que cualquier hispanohablante adulto está moderadamente capacitado para entender sin demasiadas dificultades el catalán, siempre mejor si las condiciones son las más propicias: articulación diáfana y espaciosa, etc. Al igual que ocurre con el gallego, las similitudes lingüísticas entre ambas lenguas son tan fuertes que es algo lógico.
En cuanto a su segunda cuestión, existe también un problema con el concepto de "común" pues depende de una cuestión meramente aleatoria que dos hablantes de castellano y catalán queden frente a frente; en cualquier caso, e independientemente de lo que puedan decir las posibles encuestas que haya al respecto, e intuyendo hacia dónde dirige Ud. su pregunta, lo que sí se puede afirmar es que en la actualidad esa situación no llevaría a que ninguno de los dos participantes cambiase de código o recriminase al otro por usar la otra lengua, pues el grado de normalización del uso de ambas lenguas es elevadísimo.
Por lo que respecta a su tercer pregunta, en ninguna comunidad de España donde no haya más lengua oficial que el español, forma parte del currículo educativo pre-universitario la enseñanza obligatoria de otra u otras lenguas de otras comunidades (hay casos particulares como, por ejemplo, la posibilidad de cursar voluntariamente en algunos centros de Asturias el gallego...).
Por último: por supuesto, como en cualquier otro lugar del mundo, el continuo dialectal existe en las zonas limítrofes entre castellano y catalán, por más que esas hablas no tengan reconocimiento oficial y por más que sea difícil establecer si pertenecen al catalán, aragonés, castellano, francés, valenciano, etc.
--Camima 00:11 28 ene 2007 (CET)

[edit] Consultas, castellano y catalan (Spanish)

¡Muchas gracias por su respuesta! Mi impresion era que la diferencia entre el catalan y el castellano fuera mucho mas grande que la diferencia entre el castellano y el gallego o el portugués. ¿No es asi? En la wikipedia ingles, la pagina Mutual intelligibility dice que el castellano y el portugés tiene un alto nivel de inteligibilidad entre sí, pero no menciona el hecho que catalan y castellano son mutuamente inteligibles. Sin embargo, despues de leer su respuesta, he leido la página correspondiente aquí, y esta dice que sí son mutuamente intelegibles. Para mi sorpresa, también indica que castellano y italiano son mutuamente inteligibles! --azul Noruego azul] 03:09 28 ene 2007 (CET)

Solo quisiera notificarle que he citado su respuesta aqui en el "Reference desk" de la Wikipedia ingles. --Noruego azul] 10:21 28 ene 2007 (CET)
¡Gracias! --Noruego azul 11:44 28 ene 2007 (CET)

[edit] Consulta español-catalán (Spanish)

Piensa, primero, que todas ellas (gallego, portugués, catalán, español...) son lenguas_románicas; segundo, que han compartido durante siglos un mismo espacio cultural que ha implicado, inevitablemente, numerosísimos contactos; tercero que, en algunos casos, cuestiones políticas han ido matizando sus relaciones: en la Edad Media, el gallego y el portugués eran la misma lengua, el llamado gallegoportugués; tras la independencia de Portugal, la variante correspondiente, el portugués, se fue diferenciando cada vez más del gallego, el cual, sin embargo, estuvo durante siglos viviendo únicamente como lengua oral, pues la lengua de cultura pasó a ser, tras la edad media, el castellano. Por el otro lado, el catalán siempre ha tenido más vitalidad por razones geográficas y su "personalidad" se vio aderezada, en la Edad Media, con muchos toques del provenzal, lo que le han conferido un pequeño matiz de distinción respecto de otras lengua peninsulares. Además, su proceso de normativización (de establecimiento de unas claras reglas de uso) comenzó ya a comienzos del siglo XX, mientras que en el caso del gallego ese proceso ha sido mucho más tardío (después de 1975).

Así las cosas, para un hispanohablante resultará siempre más próximo el gallego (que de una forma u otra se ha mantenido siempre mucho más cerca del español) que el catalán o el portugués. Sin embargo, y como ya te comentaba, las similitudes son tan grandes que bajo unas determinadas condiciones de conversación el entendimiento mutuo es relativamente fácil.

--Camima 11:34 28 ene 2007 (CET)

[edit] Learning to speak Spanish.

Anyone care to recommend an effective Spanish Language Course for me? I go to southern Spain quite regularly for annual holidays of a week or two, and I have learned enough Spanish to get by in restaurants, bars, public transport and in emergencies. But I want to be able to speak Spanish, if not fluently, then competently and conversationally. I am going for 2 months during December 08 and January 09 next and I am determined to make the transition no matter how much practice it takes. But I would really be grateful for some advice on a good language course. I am over 60 and confident enough to make mistakes and laugh about it, and I don't want to discuss politics religion or philosophy at Malaga university with the academic staff, but it would be nice to ask Pedro our waiter how his health and wife are instead of just asking for 'Dos copas de vino tinto por favor Senor', and not get stuck when he responds with a rundown of that year's vintage wines. Thanks. 81.145.241.244 (talk) 15:58, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I have taught myself Spanish to the level of fluency that you want to achieve, and have done so primarily by focusing on understanding Spanish. I would recommend listening to Spanish podcasts about a subject that you're familiar with, even if you understand only a fraction of what's being said. That way, you will gradually pick up vocabulary, grammar, and idiomatic expressions, and learn how to break the stream of sound into words and sentences. Radio Nacional de España has many podcasts to choose from, if you follow this link, you can take your pick, and download the audio as mp3 files which you can play from your computer or an mp3 player. If you're at all interested in science, check out our articles about Vanguardia de la Ciencia and El Sueño de Arquímedes. The host, Ángel Rodríguez Lozano, does not speak too quickly, and the contents are top quality. I don't know whether Pedro your waiter is interested in science, but that's beside the point. If you are familiar with the subject matter, it will be a lot easier to understand what is being said. I have also listened to No es un día cualquiera (link) hosted by Pepa Fernández, a talk show that's running for the ninth year, and which offers six hours of listening every weekend. It is quite entertaining, with interviews, "tertulias" (discussions), etc.
In addition, you will of course need to read up on the grammar, especially the verbs. The book 501 Spanish verbs, fully conjugated is a must. When you have a solid knowledge of the grammar, you will begin to ask yourself questions such as "why did he use the subjunctive mood in that context?" when listening to the podcasts.
Finally, I would recommend reading Spanish books. Avoid the so-called "easy readers", they were of no help whatsoever to me when I started teaching myself Spanish. Instead, I would suggest non-fiction books or newspapers to begin with. If you would like to read fiction, buy books in Spanish that you previously have read in English (or any other language that you speak). In my experience, it is a lot easier to understand translations from English to Spanish, than books which were originally written in Spanish. Check out the book shops the next time you are there. For me, Agatha Christie was a good choice, in addition to popular science books. Good luck! --NorwegianBlue talk 19:35, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I found a New Penguin book of short stories in Spanish in parallel text - Spanish on the left page, the English translation on the right. ISBN 0-140-26541-4. Try reading out loud so that your ears can hear what your saying, sounds odd but I'm convinced it helps. Buena suerte y exito. Richard Avery (talk) 20:00, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I've tried reading parallel texts too, but at quite an early stage in the learning process, and it wasn't useful to me then. The reason, I think, was that the presence of the English text made me try to understand everything at once, which, at least then, was far too ambitious. I think you need to learn to think in Spanish when speaking Spanish, and reading in parallel, page by page, is not the way to go in my opinion. A better option is to buy a novel in both English and Spanish, read it in Spanish, and check out the English version only when you are really stuck. You do not need to understand every single word to enjoy a novel. I do agree with Richard's suggestion about reading out loud. If you are able to get hold of a Spanish audio book along with the text version, you might try listening to a paragraph, and reading it out loud while trying to imitate the original. Unfortunately, you will find few if any audio books in Spanish book shops. Maybe they are sold in specialized shops, I don't know. The next time I'm in Spain, I think I'll ask one of the ONCE lottery sellers about where blind people buy audio books. --NorwegianBlue talk 20:29, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Some more suggestions:
  • Buy DVDs of Spanish films with a lot of dialog. You can find a list of films with English Wikipedia articles here. Two suggestions: Volver and El Laberinto del Fauno (Pan's labyrinth). With the DVD, showing the Spanish subtitles while listening and watching might be a good idea. If Pedro likes going to the cinema, you'll have something to talk about.
  • Read Spanish Wikipedia articles. When you browse Wikipedia, you will find a group of boxes in the left margin, which in English are labelled "navigation", "interaction", "search", "toolbox", and "languages". If you find a link to "Español", this will bring you to the Spanish article. You can of course also go straight to the Spanish Wikipedia main page, the link is http://es.wikipedia.org
  • There is a project in the English wikipedia called "Spanish translation of the week", which translates good articles from the Spanish Wikipedia to English. I only recently became aware of it, but you might want to check out what's going on there. The link is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Spanish_Translation_of_the_Week
  • Read Spanish newspapers on the web. http://news.google.com might be a good place to start, follow the link "España" at the bottom of the page. Or you might want to go directly to http://www.elpais.com/ or one of the other major newspapers. --NorwegianBlue talk 21:34, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
You say that you want to learn to speak Spanish. If so, then I think that there is no substitute for conversation practice with a live partner. Speaking skills are different from reading or comprehension skills. I personally have strong reading and comprehension skills in Spanish but rather weaker speaking skills. You might try advertising for conversation exchange with a native speaker of Spanish wanting to learn English, you might look for a tutor for maybe ten conversation sessions, or you might sign up for a Spanish conversation class. If you are in London, you could try the Cervantes Institute. Marco polo (talk) 22:37, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
My point with putting such emphasis on comprehension, is that it is impossible to converse if you don't understand what the other part is saying. It is, however, quite possible to converse even though your speaking skills are weak. You just need to be, as the original questioner said, "confident enough to make mistakes and laugh about it". I agree that finding a conversation partner (or small group with a Spanish teacher) would be a very good investment. --NorwegianBlue talk 10:18, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
All you need is:
  • Vocabulary: Get some dictionaries, in paper (for mobility) and on-line (normally superior searching speed) and google for word lists.
  • Grammar (so that you can speak and understand the language better): Get good grammar books, but only look for those that compare Spanish with your native language, otherwise you'll be wasting your time with many things you already know. For example, if I wanted to learn French and I picked up a French grammar and not a compared one, I'd waste time with facts about the purpose of the articles, the genders and many other things that work the same way in French and in Spanish, whereas a comparative grammar focuses in the difficulties and differences of both languages.
  • The language in use: read the Spanish Wikipedia or get books in Spanish that aren't too hard.

And when you have more or less mastered all the above listen to the Spanish television or the Spanish radio. Of course every person learns differently, modify the above method to fit your needs. --Taraborn (talk) 09:27, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

All good answers. In my experience, the most important factors are determination and motivation (which often depends on the reasons for learning), access to materials and people who speak the language (much easier in the age of the internet), and time and energy available to concentrate on this goal. Personal aptitude (memory, intelligence, and innate ability) also comes into it, but this is not the be-all and end-all. Have a look at Wikihow's Teach Yourself a New Language. A relevant blog post summarises several methods, with a nod towards dual language texts. Podcasts to encourage solo learners are here. I recommend simplified readers (like basal readers, but for adults) -- but note above that they are not to everyone's taste. Advertise for a conversation exchange partner; this is one example, your local community college may have a paper or virtual notice board for free. Borrow a reasonably bright child of 6 or 8 years old; they are often happy to repeat words and phrases (numbers, colours, common nouns, etc.) for a long time before they lose interest, and may be keenly amused by adults willing to make a fool of themselves (mispronouncing and misremembering numbers, colours, common nouns, etc.). Keep target language radio or other audio on in the background as you go about your daily life so that your ear becomes attuned to the rhythm and sounds you need to recognise. Try several different strategies until you find what suits you. Don't give up! Have fun! Good luck! BrainyBabe (talk) 17:27, 10 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] British Accent and indian pronunciation

I am an Indian trying to understand British Accent for a u.k process call center in India . Even though we are following an English language , ours is non phonetic in aspirated sounds and counting of diphthongs.So in the areas of counting syllable my knowledge is limited to differentiate in to phonetic codes for pronunciation.As far as i have approached Indian teachers their pronunciation is somewhat similar to mine even though they learned English phonetics.They said it to be impossible for an Indian to master english in Oxford sense.So i request to get a link on internet to get the components such as

1.combined sounds in phonetics

2.classification of words based on how to count syllables for oxford pronunciation.

3.How the diphthongs are combined to get the complex sounds produced.

4.How can be the articulation end up for Indians —Preceding unsigned comment added by Twinkle.leelabhai (talk • contribs) 03:56, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't have a link for you, but I will say it's not impossible for an Indian to master the "Oxford pronunciation" (usually called Received Pronunciation or RP), though it is difficult once you're a teenager or older. It's also unnecessary to completely replace your Indian accent with RP; as long as you understand everything that's said to you in English, and your interlocutor understands everything you say to him, that's surely sufficient. —Angr 04:13, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
I imagine that acquiring the accent is a part of job training so that clients do not notice that s/he is calling from India. Although there are lots of people in the UK who speak Indian English, the marketing ploy asks that they try to mimic a more 'native' English accent. Perhaps the article on Indian English and Received Pronunciation will give you something to compare. Otherwise, the best practice you can have is through immersing yourself in UK English, by watching BBC, listening to BBC world, and talking to English people. Short of paying for a dialect coach, that is your best bet. Steewi (talk) 04:29, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
You can train a bit at home. Look for BBC podcasts [2] or other British native speaker audio sources. Listen carefully to when they breathe. Then play a sentence. Don't say the words, but hum at the same pitch and rhythm as the speaker and try to breathe at the same places as they did. Record your humming and train till you can match the phrase. Then say the words. You'll improve with training regularly. 71.236.23.111 (talk) 05:38, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
(Slightly off topic) You might find our Call centre article useful. Astronaut (talk) 09:17, 24 May 2008 (UTC)