Linguistic Proficiency: Why the Word ‘Fluent’ is the Bane of Discussion

by Lewis Wells

We are proud of our language, but this brick wall holds behind a world of other languages, 

which we’re too comfortable in ignoring.

From teenagers to adults, our obsession and ease of using “fluent” to define linguistic competence is weak and unrepresentative of our full potential.

All the time I’m thinking about how the UK could be lagging behind in multilingualism and interest in languages so badly, compared with our European neighbours and Commonwealth partners, as primary examples.

The justifications for this are clear: a country where learning languages is not necessary, given we inherit the de-facto international language of the world, dominating politics, music, arts & more, thus our capacity to communicate with our fellow British people is not infringed upon, perhaps even strengthened, with most being capable of handling the one English language. Secondly, our perceptions fostered through youth that countries such as Germany are ‘enemies’ which transpires through education to provide an enemy subject, which is “too hard”. Thirdly, the viewpoint shared by many that STEM subjects are the future, that being Scientific and Mathematic fields that lead young people to the “jobs of the future”, engineers and astronauts and so forth.

Part of changing British outlook on languages, a complex cultural dilemma that will take generations to foster, is eliminating the small blocks that form our dumbing down of the potential for languages and the distancing as if learning to a high level is somewhat out of reach.

I don’t dispute that but I take offense to the relatively minor patches of attention given to the field of MFL which can foster greater diversity in a person, by means of them standing out in a field of STEM-ers (maybe?) and which can foster an individual to equally great employment success.

What I have discussed here is truthful but not wholly responsible. I’d like to touch on something I came across ever since I started learning languages, the notion that linguistic acquisition is either inherited or non-acquirable unless one has structured multilingual upbringing or a system unattainable by the many. You impress the many with your teenage knowledge of Arabic because your mother was born in the Middle East but you know full well that the astounded enquirer is capable of his/her own learning of the language and perhaps, given some effort and interest, able to ‘beat’ yourself at your first/second language.

Research already tells us how little multilinguals from childhood view their language — hence their downplaying of its value in conversation, unwillingness in using it, non-usage in a future career. Young people like to describe young multilinguals as ‘fluent’. It’s one of those words we’ve all come across and can all apply, I’d say, to the same area, the one I’m discussing. But do we all know what ‘fluent’ constitutes? I perceive that young people without other languages view ‘fluent’ as an unachievable destiny, hence their curiosity, but moreover the capacity to handle and use the language, no holds barred. Therefore, daily application, using this abroad and a firm stranglehold on the language.

I find this ever so problematic. Well, is there no in between? Do we range from Nothing to Fluent? Can fluent signify conversational grasping of a language or mere flawless usage?

The word ‘fluent’ is problematic for one key reason. I assume fluency to be the ability to speak the language in the family domain and in the country of its usage, without significant issues. I perceive there being a variety of views in many young people, that subsequently become adults and continue to adopt this term and perceive its distant concept and impossible task.

Pupils who have come to the UK from abroad are now studying their languages in this country in greater numbers than British pupils are studying German.

Speaking a language, perhaps only conversationally, shouldn’t be what excites you about someone with a second language. This is exactly why pupils who have come to the UK from abroad are now studying their languages in this country in greater numbers than British pupils are studying German. We don’t understand the multi-faceted benefits that languages provide nor even attempt to understand them. Our failure to see the benefits can be attributed to our mundane exam boards of languages perhaps and our failure to try can be attributed to the lack of cultural necessity for learning languages in the first place.

Orange for Multilingual, Blue for Monolingual. The numbers are more upsetting than the graph…

On a professional scale, we give letters and numbers, such as B1 and C3, to our language acquisition. Yawn. How useful for government offices and immigration control but pointless and non-interpretable for our youth and many adults, who desperately need to learn languages. (The Year is 2019, Hello?). Below, my blueprint for a purposeful way of conveying one’s capacity for a language:

The various skills one can learn: To read, to listen, to interpret, to translate, to understand, to speak, to communicate, to write, to sing. I exhaust not all the options and understand their inter-communicated nature.

Why not apply an adjective? Are you new, confident, developing, firm, lacking, native? For how long have you been training this skill?

Wait! Skills are one thing, their applications are another..

Literature, Letters, Signs, Travel, Gastronomy, Religion, Science, Philosophy, Sport, Music, Love, Fashion, Politics.

Scenario 1: Are you fluent (fluent provoking connotations that the language has been instilled through master-level devotion and inherited phenomenon). Yes, I am. 

Alternatively, as most common among those that have no idea what that means = Well, no, but yes, what do you mean? *bangs head on table*

Scenario 2: Are you fluent? Well, I don’t know what that means, but I can tell you about French philosophy and German music and I’m able to travel using the metro in Spain with virtually no problems.

With Scenario 2, we turn a seemingly one-sided, out of reach and mundane skill into an exciting prospect.

I’m not crusading against the use of fluent here, although I am. My deep objective is to open young pupils in the UK, as well as young adults and everyone else, to the benefits of learning a language and the plethora of opportunities available. Part of changing British outlook on languages, a complex cultural dilemma that will take generations to foster, is eliminating the small blocks that form our dumbing down of the potential for languages and their distancing as if learning to a high level is somewhat out of reach. Can you believe that seems the case, currently? I can, hence I write.

With a language one cannot just speak with someone in said country, yet discover the culture of an entire population. For a few years now I’ve despised the closed-mindedness that our very increasing population displays — this matter does include itself. So the next time someone asks you if you’re fluent, instead of running as fast as you can away from them, or providing a closed answer, I expect you to be reading this entire article to them. In lieu of that option, engage with their understanding of what they are asking. Fluent, come again? In tandem, give them your profile of language capacity and both ensure they never use the damned word again and promise they will try with a language themselves. The last one there is a stretch, I’m aware.

Lewis Wells is a Student Affiliate of the Chartered Institute of Linguists.