How long should it take me to speak Japanese fluently?

well i took 4 months for the launguge and 2 months for the hiragana and the katakana after that i went to japan for the summer holiday i could easly talk with people well my teacher said that i learend fast but after i came back i have to get back to study more i want to speak fluntly .
i was really happy cuz when i talk with japanese people and if i dont undrstand some word i tell thell can you speak english they say why cuz they think im a japanese so thats a good point mabye im reall good at pronuosing words. well im half japanese but i didnt grow there so im learning the languge now i have too > O < いきず ！！！！！

shou said:

well i took 4 months for the launguge and 2 months for the hiragana and the katakana after that i went to japan for the summer holiday i could easly talk with people well my teacher said that i learend fast but after i came back i have to get back to study more i want to speak fluntly .
i was really happy cuz when i talk with japanese people and if i dont undrstand some word i tell thell can you speak english they say why cuz they think im a japanese so thats a good point mabye im reall good at pronuosing words. well im half japanese but i didnt grow there so im learning the languge now i have too > O < 窶堋｢窶堋ｫ窶堋ｸﾂ ﾂ！ﾂ！ﾂ！ﾂ！ﾂ！

Click to expand...

After four months, I would venture to say that you either misinterpreted them or you already knew a lot of Japanese from your background. Pronouncing words is one thing, but stringing together sentences like it was your mother tongue is a whole different ball game. Or maybe they look at you name and presume you are Japanese?

Mike Cash said:

Thank you for using the word "proficient" instead of "fluent".

My goal when I started was "reasonable proficiency in 10 years".

Click to expand...

Why so picky about using fluency versus using proficiency? Is it about the words themselves, or are you sick of hearing people overstate their japanese language ability/brag about insincere compliments they received from Japanese? If its the latter, I understand, but if the former, it seems a little oversensitive given how the word fluency is usually used now. If I hear that someone is fluent in a language, one of the first things I would ask is how fluent? Its obviously a term that includes various degrees.

Of the current JTE's I teach with, I would only call one fluent in English. The rest can't make themselves understand clearly and efficiently, can't understand me when I talk fairly normal English, don't know how to ask for clarification, have accent problems that obscure the meaning of what they are trying to say, etc. The one fluent JTE lacks those negative qualities, can hold a normal conversation, tell jokes, look up and then use specific technical terms if need be, etc etc. She still has a strong accent, makes mistakes, has very poor writing, etc, but that just means she's not native level or highly fluent or technically fluent or professional level. I believe she lived in the US for 3.5 years after majoring in English, but then again she was married to a Japanese man at the time and didnt use it/study it as much in the US as most people would.

Anyway, as fluent and proficient are both fairly vague terms, and as many people are pretty awful at evaluating their own ability, I just don't understand the pickiness.

Bikaben:

I think Mike is trying to help you think in a more realistic way about Japan as a real place with real people, and about the real possibility of your moving there. I think, perhaps particularly on this forum, there are a lot of people who really really like/are obsessed with small elements of Japanese culture--martial arts/anime/manga etc, and in their minds Japan then becomes this big glorious ball of everything that embodies shiny kawaii goodness in the word.

Then those people apply to a program like JET to become a teacher. And then they get here, ready to enter a world of ninjas, samurai, etc, where everything is exotic and fun. And after they arrive, it really is: for a couple weeks. But then they realize they are living out in an apartment in the middle of nowhere, with very few people who speak English around them. And they're having trouble getting internet at home. And there's no anime on the normal television. And they have to stand in front of kids 'teaching,' when they themselves, and certainly the kids, would much rather be doing other things. There's a big different between what Japan seems like when you have never lived in Japan and what Japan is like when you're living there.

With that said, living here can be great. There are amazing experiences to be had, but you have to be pretty tough and determined to overcome the bad things, and flexible enough to adjust to the many unforeseen good and bad things that will come your way.

Thinking about Japan and your own plans and what is required for language study in a realistic way, as opposed to an idealized way, will only improve your quality of life once you get here. Unless you just want something to daydream about, and maybe a place to be a tourist for a couple weeks. If that's the case, go on, more power to you. But if you really want to live here and learn the language--start acting like it.


ETA: Some recent examples: (pretty relevant to the Japanese experience for foreigners I would say, at least those out in the country)

Negative: This weekend, a really weird trash-like statue-like object was placed outside my front door. I moved it, and creepily, the next day, it reappeared. Thinking about going to the police now and hoping nothing new has been put there (already threw away the first object).

Positive: Up in Aomori, went to see a large, famous festival in hirosaki city. Afterwards, I couldnt find my car, so I asked a person coming back from the festival for directions. Instead, she walked me the 25 minutes it took to where my car was, all the while explaining the history of the festival, and, to top it off, she gave my sister and I a couple of beers as goodbye presents after safely getting us to the car.

kidtokyo said:

Are those people you know also 14 years old? In which case, they started learning when they were 7 and 8? I don't think they had mastered English at that age..

Click to expand...

No. One's 18 or 19 and the other is 20 i think

FrustratedDave said:

After four months, I would venture to say that you either misinterpreted them or you already knew a lot of Japanese from your background. Pronouncing words is one thing, but stringing together sentences like it was your mother tongue is a whole different ball game. Or maybe they look at you name and presume you are Japanese?

Click to expand...

well i dont look japanese that much but i think i can pronounce cuz sense i was littel i used to see anime's and now i see dramas plus i read alot japanese songs lyrics i think that make me even better . but i think there's alot of small word that i need to now it'll help

Charles, I'm not just being picky....I'm choosing to be precise.

See Rule 13.

One can be proficient without being fluent, although proficiency normally does include fluency The problem is that one can be fluent without being proficient.

Keep in mind that the word "fluent" is related to the word "flow". I've known many people who were quite fluent, capable of generating seamless streams of speech....speaking fluently, in other words....that were basically just one horrid stream of errors of grammar and usage, often paying no attention whatsoever to verb tense, subject/verb agreement, preposition choice, etc.

Further, speech is not the only language skill. We also have to consider listening. One can not listen "fluently". But one can be proficient at understanding speech.

So, in itself, "fluent" is very often a meaningless term and even more often an entirely inaccurate and inappropriate term in the context in which it is being used.

shou said:

well i dont look japanese that much but i think i can pronounce cuz sense i was littel i used to see anime's and now i see dramas plus i read alot japanese songs lyrics i think that make me even better . but i think there's alot of small word that i need to now it'll help

Click to expand...

"I don't look Japanese that much", what does that mean? Are you Japanese by descent? And if your native tongue is Japanese I can see why people would think you were Japanese, but what you say and what is in your profile are very contradicting.

FRUSTRATEDDAVE< I DIDNT LEAVE THERE PLUS my mother dont speak japanese its a really hard story to tell

I know guys.I cant rush into things..I'm really set on this and it would be great if someone could assist me on Japanese lessons or..a website that'll help me.

I also plan to travel to Japan for 2 weeks this year while I study the language & culture to make sure that Japan is what I want.

Mike Cash said:

Charles, I'm not just being picky....I'm choosing to be precise.

See Rule 13.

One can be proficient without being fluent, although proficiency normally does include fluency The problem is that one can be fluent without being proficient.

Keep in mind that the word "fluent" is related to the word "flow". I've known many people who were quite fluent, capable of generating seamless streams of speech....speaking fluently, in other words....that were basically just one horrid stream of errors of grammar and usage, often paying no attention whatsoever to verb tense, subject/verb agreement, preposition choice, etc.

Further, speech is not the only language skill. We also have to consider listening. One can not listen "fluently". But one can be proficient at understanding speech.

So, in itself, "fluent" is very often a meaningless term and even more often an entirely inaccurate and inappropriate term in the context in which it is being used.

Click to expand...

You say you can be proficient without being fluent, or fluent without being proficient, so why are you guessing the OP wants to be one when he stated the other (although, I'll give you the fact that in this context, there's no reason to give the OP the benefit of the doubt about anything he has written)? Also, I'm not sure why you say that most people who are proficient are also fluent. Proficiency, like fluency, seems to be a scale (measuring mostly technical correctness/ability), and there are a lot of people in Japan (chinese/korean students in particular seem to have the stereotype because of the importance of achieving a high enough test score to keep study visas) who have reasonable proficiency without much fluency. If you're going to give proficiency some additional meaning, ie proficiency = a high level of proficiency that enables one to succeed in society, then of course that will make most of the people who fit the term reasonably fluent as well. But I thought that was what you didnt like about the term fluent: that, in addition to its one meaning, i.e. a measure of one's ability to flow in a language but particularly in speech, its has also gained another meaning, i.e. a very high general ability level in that language.

Anyway, both terms seems to overlap a lot to me. Both can be used a scale, one for fluidity, the other for correctness, and both have gained the additional meaning of just 'damned-good language skills' (although to my ear, according to this second meaning, a fluent person would be the more skilled).

BTW: I think if one's listening skills aren't up to snuff, it'll kill most conversations and preclude fluency. Listening skills alone won't get you there, but they're an integral part of being conversational, which in turn is necessary for fluency.

I think the blanket term "proficient in Japanese" would imply fluency. To me, saying someone is proficient in a language means they can speak and comprehend spoken utterances well, and can probably read and write well too.

Now if you say "proficient in written Japanese," that does not imply any fluency in the spoken language. Saying someone is "somewhat proficient in Japanese" would also not imply that they are fluent.

I think a lot of people are content to be fluent, not proficient, yakking away endlessly in poor grammar and wrong politeness levels. But proficiency should be the goal.

The words 'proficient' and 'fluent' are vague words in everyday context - you simply cannot pin down the inferences through these terms because people use them flexibly.

'Proficient' normally relates to all-roundedness, and so a person 'proficient' in a language is somewhat able in all four facets. The problem is, hearing someone being 'proficient' can mean anywhere from being at intermediate level to advanced level.

'Fluent' is technically limited only to speaking, but is often confused with all-roundedness. And 'fluent' can mean anywhere from being able to churn out spoken sentences quickly regardless of correctness, all the way to correct and articulate advanced level speaking.

Now adding to that, 'proficient' must also be distinguished from the word 'proficiency'. The word 'proficiency' is often tied in with standardized tests (like the JLPT, TOEIC, HSK etc.) and so it is a gauge as to the level you are at, often referring to the result prescribed by such tests (e.g. passing JLPT level x).

To shed more light on all this, we can use a common benchmark provided by employers - for instance, employment application forms.

In those forms, there are usually a number of tick boxes under the heading of 'language proficiency'. They typically range from 'native', 'fluent/advanced', 'good', 'fair', and 'basic', with qualifying descriptions for each category. 'Fluent/advanced' entails conversation involving business terminology and being able to read and write business documents - which is a step up from 'good' that entails all other conversation and being able to read newspapers and novels and write essays.

The term 'proficient' is not used in such a context, perhaps due to its rather vague nature. On the other hand, 'fluent' presumes speaking at an advanced level here.

So to indicate all-roundedness, it's probably best to just indicate the level (beginner-intermediate-advanced) rather that using the broad term 'proficient', whilst 'fluent' should strictly be used in reference to correct advanced level speaking.

I have no way to contact my Japanese friend anymore.But before he left for Japan,he told me I couldnt pronounce the kana right.Ra sounded like Dah for me.He was in the process of helping me,but sadly,I have no way to contact him.Can anyone help me with pronounciation?

the Japanese r is an alveolar tap/flap, which is distinct from, but sounds closer to an English d (alveolar plosive) than an English r (alveolar approximate). Look up the phonetic structure of Japanese and English for more information.

Alright.ありがとございます! Well I'm going to do this and hopefully by the time i go,I'll be set.It sounds like AhDEEGAHTOW?

Right?

I can't endorse that romanization; the Japanese r is distinct from a d. Vowels are are different too, long vowels are different from dipthongs (so とう is not the same as "toe")

You're better off studying kana and understanding the sounds that correspond to each character, instead of trying to equate them to what you know in English.

nice gaijin said:

I can't endorse that romanization; the Japanese r is distinct from a d. Vowels are are different too, long vowels are different from dipthongs (so とう is not the same as "toe")

You're better off studying kana and understanding the sounds that correspond to each character, instead of trying to equate them to what you know in English.

Click to expand...

I agree, buy some tapes that will help you with pronunciation.

Rather then a time based goal of becoming fluent in X years. I set a goal of understanding spoken Japanese to the point where I can listen to Japanese movies/programs once that goal is attained I might set about learning to read/write Japanese. Though, since I have no desire to live in Japan, reading or writing Japanese is not high on my list.

If learning to comprehend speech is your goal, you may be surprised to learn that studying writing/reading will actually go a long way toward advancing that goal.

i'm half japanese and even i can't still write good! dammit!
but im heading progress thanks to you guys and thanks because of my motivation to study! hai it feels very good if you complished something you really like to do

Mike Cash said:

If learning to comprehend speech is your goal, you may be surprised to learn that studying writing/reading will actually go a long way toward advancing that goal.

Click to expand...

I will give it a try then, but I think I will first try building up some vocab. I know hiragana and did try my hand at reading some words in hiragana . But, with my limited vocab, it wasn't helping me to learn anything which is why I dumped it.

Reading and writing is how you build up your vocab. The sooner you start, the quicker you'll learn when you're communicating. Even if you can listen and say all the sounds in Japanese, it's hard to have a conversation when you only understand what 30% of them mean.

depends on your commitment. by the look of things for you, you may even crack it before 2 years. although i don't understand your definition of fluency.
if you mean "hi how are you" sort of convo, thats simple. if you mean "fluent enough to read japanese newspaper and soaps" thats another.


kanji however XD...all different for everyone.