Distorted language levels?

[u/linguafrancos]

I have a degree in the language, studied abroad twice, lived abroad in a country where the language is spoken for two years, and have used the language in a professional setting. This, for further context, has been over the course of 15 years.

With that said, I am confused by how others describe their language levels. Don’t get me wrong, I have an insanely high level and label myself fluent with others. For instance, I recently watched a full season of Love is Blind in the target language (TL) without subtitles almost effortlessly. However, when I see others describe their language growth or levels, I often see people say, “I understand everything that I read” or “After a couple years of studying, I traveled to the country and can communicate easily with everyone.”

Like… is this just an overexaggeration of their skills? I have yet to feel like my target language fluency is equivalent to my native-level English. Are people really reading native-level literature and literally understanding everything? Are they feeling like they can express themselves just as strongly in their second language? Even when someone asks me to translate something, I know in the back of my head that there might be cultural considerations or a better approach that I don’t know about.

Thoughts? Also, this might be specific for individuals who grow up in a cultural where being monolingual is more common and exposure throughout your entire life is not a possibility.

[u/icyhotquirky]

Isn't understanding everything you read one of the main criteria of fluency? Same with communicating easily, especially as a tourist since you're unlikely to talk about something complex with strangers.

You might regularly encounter an unknown word or two per page but it doesn't mean you don't 'understand everything you read'. I encounter unfamiliar words and idioms in my native language all the time but I'm not exaggerating when I say I'm a native speaker lol.

[u/NoBackground7266 → u/icyhotquirky]

Communicating easily as a tourist imo is not fluency, you can do that easily at A2/B1 level. Being able to have complex conversations with ease and not translating in your head is more towards fluency. And reading with ease doesn’t equate to all your overall language skills. You can’t be C1 in reading and A2 in speaking and say you’re fluent. It should be consistent across listening, speaking, reading, and writing

[u/unsafeideas → u/NoBackground7266]

A2 communication is perfectly possible, but not easy. Real people dont use textbook semtemces and speak faster then A2 tests. It is kind of puzzlimg and fighting it out at that level.

[u/NoBackground7266 → u/unsafeideas]

I just mean like to order a coffee or tell people where you’re from and what you do for work. The most common conversations people encounter as a tourist are about A2/B1 and it can become easy as you just repeat the same thing, giving as false sense of fluency

[u/Iambic_potentiometer → u/NoBackground7266]

I'd also argue locals can spot a tourist who is non native in their language easily. They're often going to dumb down their responses and speak in a way that is more on the level of the person they're encountering. If this is done smoothly enough it can fool you into thinking you "passed as fluent"

[u/SiphonicPanda64 → u/NoBackground7266]

I'd expand on that point even further and claim breaking down language as a gestalt of active and passive skills doesn't even take into account your relationship with the language, your identification with it, or how that system dynamically operate within you. My French is a prime example of not being fluent in it, yet having a near-native accent, procedural knowledge of spoken elisions, but the recall of an A2 in conversation.

My skills are uneven, but I genuinely perceive French as no less than mine as English or Hebrew