I am from Hong Kong. People here tend to think of learning a new language as very difficult. Parents spend tonnes of money for the language education of their kids. Any kid who learns English quickly will be praised as adults think that this is very tough.
However, I've noticed that Anglos tend to talk about learning a new language as if it is very easy. You have sites like Fluent in 3 Months and similar webpages talking about how the author reached flunecy within less than a year. Similarly, I've seen Anglos posting online about how they became fluent in a new language in a short period of time. I've also met Language majors who became fluent in a new language within four years.
Why the attitude difference?
I want to make love to that dog
Coming from a small country in Europe, it's basically mandatory to learn English early if we are ever going to have a shot in the global world. My language is spoken by roughly 8 million people on earth. That's it. I'm sure Hong Kong alone have more than 8 million in their city that speak Cantonese/Mandarin, the prospects are simply better. It's not as important to learn a new language the more people on earth that speaks that language because you are already able to communicate with a lot of people.
It's just a different approach because of the culture.
Anglos valuate effectiveness and efficiency.
>>17125410
I'm not asking why people value English here. I am asking why locals here talk about learning a new language as difficult and why Anglos tend to talk about learning a new language as not that hard.
>>17125411
That doesn't explain why Anglos tend to think of learning languages as not that difficult.
>>17125400
It all depends on the languages honestly. You'll never see an Anglo speaking Mandarin fluently after 3 months.
>>17125400
>>17125415
Right on
Difference in the languages being learnt.
Learning English from speaking the Asian languages is hard.
While in Europe we learn other European languages which share common roots. which should be very easy.
>>17125429
But most of the Anglos I've seen who post about learning a new language learned them as adults. Isn't it technically harder for an adult to learn a language related to one you already speak than a kid to learn a completely unrelated language?
>>17125434
You'll always be able to tell how recently someone learned a language and how often they use.
English is a good first language as it pretty neutral as far as languages go, easy to swap between languages due to nonrestrictive rules and the fact its a bastardization of other European languages.
It will be easy for a child to learn, it what they're designed for.
You speak Mandarin of Cantonese? would it be difficult to learn the other or even Japanese or Korean? even Russian shouldn't be that large of step due to ease trade for millennium.
>>17125449
>It will be easy for a child to learn
So I dont understand why some Anglo adults speak of learning a new language during adulthood as "relatively easy". People here think that English is difficult even for little kids.
>>17125456
because english is very different from your language
In France everyone sees languages like Chinese or Japanese to be hardcore, but spanish, italian and english as easy
it's just that, really.
>>17125456
Also has to do with time and expectancy of use. As a child using one language that is spoken by everything you know, why would you want to learn another? At what age does using english become a real world skill in hong kong.
whereas when you're an adult learning a language is going be because you need to to continue work/ holiday, so there motivation behind it.
Also might be a difference in the expectation of fluency. Anglos have the meaning to be able to understand and communicate the general gist of more complex talks.
>>17125508
Almost all unis here teach their courses in English. Most employers will prefer someone who speaks English.
>>17125530
well that at least explains why parents spend so much money on getting their children to learn English. Tough breaks.
>>17125628
But it contradicts with the previous post. Tonnes of expats here do not speak Chinese and they still got selected for their jobs. In other words, languages are not needed for their survival.
>>17125633
the English language is. man the redcoats were brilliant forcing the rest of the world to learn my shoddy language.
move out of hong kong into a smaller village and I'm sure the jobs would prefer you speak chinese, like them rather than english.
I think the reasons behind the difference in attitude has been discussed and fulfilled?
also
>Tons - meaning, lots of, e.g. 'we had tons of fun'
>Tonnes - meaning weight, which hey if they're american expats sure.
bump for interest
>>17125400
>Why the attitude difference?
Different people have different ways of assessing language proficiency. You average Joe will understand fluency as being able to understand and reply orally. A university graduate will consider fluency in a much complex way which takes into account knowing the culture of a given language coupled with critical thinking, analytical skills, use of logic in utterances etc.
What? Anglos are the worst for learning languages. They barely know their own. If you want the best language learners, look at Scandinavians.
>>17125400
Western languages all evolved from a couple of ancient roots, and therefore have a lot in common, and English is one of the youngest of the languages and therefore has similarities with almost all others.
So it is far easier for, say, a French person to learn Spanish or an English speaker to learn German than it would be for any Westerner to learn Chinese or any Chinese to learn a Western language.
The simple answer is that it is much more of an accomplishment for you to learn a European/American language than it is for us.
>>17125400
>>17125400
I've noticed that a lot of Chinese people have what I would consider excellent English and say that they don't know English, whereas many of my fellow Americans have abysmal, borderline unintelligible Spanish and consider that they speak it.
I think it's a difference in standards, since anglos don't really learn foreign languages as much or value them as much.
>>17125660
I thought tonne was just British for ton.
I'm just a dumb American though.
First of all Chinese is so so different from any other language, it's probably the worst starting point. I would even argue that for learning Japanese European languages would be a better starting point.
Secondly, there is simply no exposure to foreign language in China, and the way English education works is terrible (eg just memorize this list of 5000 words, lol who cares you can't pronounce it).
>>17126115
>Western languages
Finnish is not an Indo-European language yet they still speak good English
>>17126115
What about toddlers though? Surely it is easier for a toddler to learn an unrelated language than an adult to learn a closely related language? Pretty much everyone on language forums say that things are more difficult for adults in this case.
>>17126141
>many of my fellow Americans have abysmal, borderline unintelligible Spanish and consider that they speak it
OP aquí y de acuerdo. Solo algunos gringos pueden hablar español bien.
