36
Do you have to be fluent in these languages to be a polyglot, or am I considered one? (self.asklemmy)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml
37 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I can confidently say that I speak Portuguese, Spanish, and English to varying degrees. However, at a beginner level, I know Norwegian, Italian, and Polish. I also am probably at a very beginner level in Russian and French, both of which I’m learning and getting better at. I’m conversing with French people.

My fiancé says I’m a polyglot, but I don’t know if I’m just trilingual or not.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 1 year ago (4 children)

op would be conversational with a significant part of the world, and they're not to blame for colonialism. just by learning spanish, english and portuguese they would be able to talk to anyone south of rio grande in the u.s., and talk to some former british colonies in africa and asia. put some russian and french and you would be left with just perhaps middle east, east and southeast asia.

knowing that and learning some arabic and chinese (throw in some language of some east or southeast asian country if they want) and there's not much left, but to discuss how colonialism brought the world to this situation.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] -5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Most countries speak English so no need for all the fluff in that case. Spanish and French are the next most relevant. The rest is very much euro-centric.

    My biggest gripe is that all Euro languages have a shared Latin and Greek origin so OP's not really branching out to entirely different language systems.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    What do you mean by all Euro languges having a shared Latin and Greek origin?

    I'm no expert/linguist, but I thought Germanic, Slavic, Romance (Latin) and Uralic were completely separate branches of the Indo-European language tree, having very little to do with eachother.

    Cheers

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago

    I was moreso referring to their alphabet and pronounciations but a lot of them such as German have a hefty amount of Latin terms which got incorporated. I doubt many Germans these days would understand original Germanic.

    They do have their own roots but you get a head start in Europe by pronouncing Latin words in whatever regional accent is availble. Polish and Norwegian likely less but OP is still at a beginner level for those.

    But for example adding Japanese, Chinese or Arabic adds a whole new alphabet and experience where there is virtually no Latin base to start from

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    i understand your side, but that's up to op. personally for me i was thinking about learning a native local language, perhaps tupi or nheengatu, and one from the african diaspora such as yoruba, kimbundu or kikongo. but that's on me, and that's on op too, regardless of what we think. it's not a particularly picky topic in my opinion.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent