Measuring human language proficiency

[R. A. Stegemann]

Bernard,

Why does the scale have to be magic? I decided that I had become
bilingual in French and German, when Germans could no longer tell what
part of the Benelux I was from and the French always wondered, if I
were not Swiss. Of course, in Europe my physiognomy played an important
role in my interlocutor's ability to place me. An advantage that I have
never had in East Asia.

What concerns me is when you write that "human language proficiency"
cannot "be measured with any degree of accuracy". What is your take on
comprehensive written and oral examinations like those offered by the
ILETS. Do these examinations not accurately measure one's command of
something one might call international English? Obviously they are not
perfect measures, but certainly they can provide a perspective
employers or schools with a fairly good idea of what their getting, can
they not?

Hamo

R. A. Stegemann
EARTH's Manager and HKLNA-Project Director
EARTH - East Asian Research and Translation in Hong Kong
http://homepage.mac.com/moogoonghwa/earth/
Tel/Fax: 852 2630 0349

On 29 Oct 2004, at 13:11, Bernard Spolsky wrote:

> Joe
> I agree, but as one who has spent a long time on language testing, I
> think
> you are over-optimistic in assuming that human language proficiency
> can be
> measured with any degree of accuracy.  Which is why I am uncomfortable
> with
> the notion that there is a point on some magic scale at which someone
> becomes "bilingual."
> Bernard
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 1532 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lgpolicy-list/attachments/20041101/a517bafc/attachment.bin>