Language desk
< April 28	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 30 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

April 29

Am I dumb? English as a second language

I've been living in Canada since I was in grade 3. I'm now 22 in university. Though I lived here for over 10 years, I still have difficulty with English, both spoken and written. All the people I know who came to an English-speaking country at a young age like grade 3 or below now use English naturally and easily. But why am I an exception? I always have to do translations in my head (writing this right now, I'm doing translations) as if I were someone who just came to Canada. In fact, people sometimes ask me if I'm new to Canada, and if I tell them I've lived here for over 10 years, they get surprised. I hate myself. I want to be able to naturally use English. I have no friends and I can't make any friends because English is such a big barrier for me. I'm unable to dialogue like a normal English-speaking person and this puts me at a serious disadvantage in many occasions. Please help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.68.120.162 (talk • contribs) 03:29, 29 April 2010

Some people are better than others in learning new languages. It also depends how much you immerse yourself in the new language. Do you watch English language television or do you stick to the variety of multicultural channels we have offered here in Canada. Do you speak English with your friends, or do you mostly hang out with friends who speak your language? --Kvasir (talk) 03:30, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I speak my native language at home, and I have no English-speaking friends at all, as I said above. I watch English language television, of course, but I tend to miss many of what's said and my listening ability seems to have reached its limit, unable to improve. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.68.120.162 (talk • contribs) 03:38, 29 April 2010

Unfortunately, after 10 years it's a bit late to start making English-speaking friends. It would probably have been easy when you were in elementary school. But, it's not too late. I'm sure there are many foreign students at your university who have made great progress even if they have just come here to study. Find a club on your campus and join their activities, mingle, make new friends which will force yourself to speak English. The best place to start is probably around other new Canadians, where their English ability is similar to yours and you wouldn't feel as intimidated. Slowly you would improve your confidence and be able to converse comfortably with others. You'll find if you don't improve by the time you finish university, you'll be pigeon-hole into the sort of working environment where you still won't be speaking English, and that will unfortunately limit your career opportunity. --Kvasir (talk) 04:49, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If it's any consolation, you have better grammar than many native speakers. As for making friends, follow Kvasir's advice and join some English-speaking university clubs. --198.103.172.9 (talk) 13:45, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You might have a Specific language impairment, or suffer from Speech and language pathology. I have only experience with specific language impairment in children, and I don't know about adults, but if I were you, I would contact a speech therapist and ask for an assessment. If your problems with friends goes any deeper than being shy because of your language problems, I would ask for a neuropsychiatric evaluation. Sometimes language problems and social problems can co-occur in certain neuropsychiatric conditions.

By the way, if you've managed to get accepted at a university in spite of your language problems, you can't be stupid. My guess is that you have a high non-verbal intelligence. Lova Falk (talk) 15:13, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's perfectly possible to not acquire a second language well but still be intelligent and not have any language impairment; some people just don't have much talent for acquiring new languages. It's not even only a matter of how much effort you make to get exposure; for instance, I have a friend who is originally from Hong Kong but has been living here since he was quite young, and all through middle and high school he hung out pretty much exclusively with American friends (we're from a small, non-diverse town) but he still has a noticeable accent and his grammar is not perfect. That doesn't mean he's stupid and doesn't mean he was too lazy to try; some people just have more difficulty acquiring new languages than others do. rʨanaɢ (talk) 15:20, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[I am revising the section heading from "Am I dumb?" to "Am I dumb? English as a second language", to facilitate watchlist alerts and archive searches, and to apply search engine optimization. I am adding two "unsigned" templates, of which the first represents the fifth of five consecutive revisions without any intervening ones by any other editor. -- Wavelength (talk) 16:47, 29 April 2010 (UTC)][reply]

If you say what your first language is, I might be able to provide specific links to help you in learning English.

-- Wavelength (talk) 16:54, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Learning a foreign language is difficult for most people and can be a slow process. For example: I lived and worked in France for over 2 years and although my French improved a lot I am still far from fluent. I put this down to the environment I was in: the working environment was English, all of my work colleagues spoke English very well, and when not at work we all socialised together speaking English. The few times I did have to speak French was when shopping, ordering drinks in bars and dealing with officialdom, and even then the French people I was delaing with picked up on my strong English accent and "helpfully" tried to speak English.

I think if you were to immerse yourself in an English speaking environment, seek out English speaking friends, and don't take the easy option of continuing in your native language when people try to help by speaking it to you, then I think you'll find your English would improve immesurably. Astronaut (talk) 22:03, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On the question "Am I dumb", you only have writen a couple of small paragraphs here above, but just from reading them, I can assure you they are fully grammatical, they are explaining logically an issue with accurate level of details etc. So the answer is clearly: you are NOT dumb. However, it seems indeed you are one of these people who find spoken foreign languages very difficult to learn. It seems you are fully able to learn anything else, though, so I wouldn't be too hard on myself in your position. On the question of helping you, I second the club idea --Lgriot (talk) 00:52, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another option if you want to improve your English: Try to find a language partner whom you'll "teach" (or converse with in) your native language in exchange for her/him conversing with you in English. I don't know how it is in Canada, but in some countries there are even organizations helping students to find such partners. The advantage is that you'll have someone who's interested in improving your English; who's willing to cater to your needs (e.g., speaking slowly or repeating or waiting for your answers... if you wish); who will probably be fun to hang out with (and who already shares an interest with you, namely an interest in your native language), probably even connect you to further English-speaking friends... and besides, you'll realize that you actually have quite something to offer in return.

Because that's the other thing: How are your native language skills? If you still speak the language at home, they're probably quite good? While I understand your frustration about the second language (you have no idea!...), you may also want to re-think what you actually have achieved and can be proud of: Probably fluency in one language, plus very advanced skills in a second language. That's more than many other people ever achieve in their lives! And regarding translating: I've always been taught that it's "bad" to translate, and it's true that it doesn't work for myself at all. Yet I know someone who speaks English absolutely fluently (and yes, quickly), with a flawless American accent, and understands everything... and once he told me that he translates everything from and back into his native language! In other words: Try to appreciate that everyone's different, and if 99.9% of all people solve a problem one way, that doesn't mean that you're a failure if this doesn't work for you. Maybe you need a more creative strategy to "get there"... (BTW, do you know other people speaking your native language and acquiring English as a second language? Maybe even they can give you useful tips.)... or maybe, yes, getting fluent in foreign languages is simply not your individual strength. As others have pointed out, there are so many talents (incl. non-verbal talents) that you really needn't dispair if this one talent isn't one of yours.

Finally, I agree with those who've suggested also considering psychological/psychiatric support. Maybe your native culture and/or your current surroundings make you think that you need to be "crazy" before you seek such support... if that's true, try to get used to the thought slowly. :o) Maybe try to think about what psychology and psychiatry actually do: They help people with problems that you can't see "outside"/on their bodies, but which are very real nonetheless. And is it "crazy" if you can't see these problems? Not really: They are usually related to the fact that some neurons in our brains react differently than the neurons of others. (Our neurons all fire differently anyways. That's why we have different memories, different ideas, different talents, etc.--that's all in our brains!) So is that "crazy"? Or just natural science! Yeah, big deal! :o) So... looking for "psych" support does not mean that you are "weird" or anything, but rather that some people may have specialized in supporting people with concerns like yours, and that's probably more efficient asking them for help than figuring it out all by yourself. For example, you can ask at your university (probably even check it out online): Often you can get some psychological consultation for free, and they're usually very discrete. (They know what people think too :o)) So you could ask them for advice, and they will probably make some suggestions, maybe also offer that you can be tested for speech problems, etc. ... and then you can still decide if you want to follow them or not. So there's nothing to "lose" trying it out because you can always stop when you think this is not what you're looking for. ... ... ... Anyways, whatever you choose to do, don't forget to be proud that you do speak English as you do in addition to your native language and probably tons of other skills you have!! :o) --Ibn Battuta (talk) 21:04, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Russian

I opened a game room in a game I play online and a Russian player (whom I've played before) joined the room, said, "да ты монстр" and left. I understood this to mean "Yes, you're a monster", but checked on Google Translate just to make sure (as it was lacking a comma), and the translation given was "Do monster". Which one is correct and if the latter, what would 'do monster' mean? (Side question - "monster"!? It's a WW2 game...). --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 11:33, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would understand it as somethling like "Oh, you monster!" No idea why they would call you that, though. — Kpalion^(talk) 13:48, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could he have said "даты монстр"? That sort of means "dates are a monster" ('dates' here referring to the time things, not the edible things), but that makes even less sense ... -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 19:59, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers. I was wondering if it was some sort of idiom or something still in current use. I guess he was saying that he was scared of me (because I'm pretty high up on the leaderboard), but I thought it may be some sort of insult because he beat me last time I played him. Anyway, thanks, both of you. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 01:46, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My knowledge of Russian is indecently poor, but I did some searching right now. In advance, I apologise for uploading so much original research. I'm just trying to help. Google.ru gives as much as 127 results for "да ты монстр", only a couple of which have a comma between да and ты. About the comma itself, I can remember once reading a children's poem about Santa Claus by Agniya Barto in my Russian classes many years back in time. I found it halfway down this page. It contains the line "Да это наш сосед!", without a comma.

click on the "show" button to view it →

Here's the text (my bolding):

А старший брат
Твердит тайком:
- Да это наш сосед!
Как ты не видишь: нос похож!
И руки, и спина! -
Я отвечаю: - Ну и что ж!
А ты на бабушку похож,
Но ты же не она!

A mediocre translation by me.

And my elder brother
Claimed this:
- This is surely our neighbour!
Can't you see it: his nose looks like our neighbour's!
And his arms, and his back, too!
I answered to him: - So what?
You look like a granny,
But you're not one!

Analogously, да ты монстр could mean "You're surely a monster!".

About the meaning of the word монстр itself, ru:wikt:монстр doesn't help much, but ru:Монстр contains the following sentence:

Иносказательно как метафора может относиться к объекту физического или психологического доминирования со сверхъестественными силами (властителю, хищнику), а также реальному или вымышленному объекту природы или техническому устройству с выдающимися, в том числе надприродными качествами размера, силы, власти и т. п.

I can understand this, but I'm not sure how to translate it in English, since I'm just a learner of both English and Russian. Roughly, it tells that монстр could be a metaphor referring to something that dominates physically or psychologically by means of supernatural powers, and also to a real or invented natural object or technological device with outstanding/remarkable, or supernatural, size, strength, power, etc. Any corrections to this attempt of translation will be welcome!

Also, I googled монстр интернет сленг OR слэнг and found a page that is a glossary of the Russian language library of World of Warcraft. Here's that glossary. There монстр is given as a synonym of моб; моб is explained as "NPC, враждебно настроенный к персонажу" (NPC that is hostile to the character); and NPC is explained as "non-player character — персонаж, управляемый компьютером" (a character controlled by the computer).

I very much apologise for uploading such a lengthy amount of original research and I very much hope it would be of any help! --Магьосник (talk) 02:21, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, cheers. So, he was basically referring to me as being a hard player to beat? Makes sense. Cheers. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 15:30, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a word meaning "What there is and how much there is of it"?

Is there an English word used for expressing, or whose use encompasses, the idea of "what is present in (location, time period, etc.), and how much of it is present there"? Basically for "type and quantity" of something? I'm asking because for the Dinosaurs of the Morrison Formation article I'm considering renaming the tables' Abundance column, since it both includes how common a species is and what fossils represent them in the formation. Abyssal (talk) 16:43, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence? 86.21.204.137 (talk) 18:10, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's difficult to think of a catch-all term covering the information given in the three entries currently in that column. Might Characteristics work? Deor (talk) 18:49, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Population? --TammyMoet (talk) 18:59, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If it helps any, I've used "Presence" in other tables for a column detailing geographic location, stratigraphic position, and abundance. Abyssal (talk) 19:09, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quantity or inventory? Astronaut (talk) 21:47, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For the particular article you linked, I would use "occurrence". rʨanaɢ (talk) 23:49, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If it wasn't for an article, I would make up my own word for it and tell everyone I know about it and maybe it would spread. After all the English language is one of the most flexible languages in the world and definitions of words are based much more on usage than actual people sitting around in a room, deciding what certain words would mean and how they should be used, and saying that if their way isn't used then it is not propper and thus not permitted. This word could be anything along the lines of "whow" to something much more complex like "typuantity". Filosojia X Non(Philosophia X Known) 00:43, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

(In that case, you could try Frindle. rʨanaɢ (talk) 02:25, 30 April 2010 (UTC))[reply]

You could rename the column "Materials and quantity"; or you could split the column into two new columns, "Materials" and "Quantity", either similar to the other columns, or shown as subcolumns of the original column, renamed "Materials and quantity".

-- Wavelength (talk) 00:46, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

manifestation ? Bazza (talk) 13:26, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nepali translation help

Hi, any help at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Nepal#Nepali_translation_help would be highly appreciated. --Soman (talk) 20:29, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can use Category:User ne to find Wikipedians who speak Nepali. -- Wavelength (talk) 21:02, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

science

discoveries and histories —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.157.128.119 (talk) 20:46, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The science reference desk is that way. Xenon54 / talk / 20:49, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of discoveries. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:08, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]