Do You Want To Learn a New Language?

[Kazimiera]

What do you think of this?

[Rudel]

Only makes sense for a native English speaker.

[Comte Arnau]

Only makes sense for a native English speaker.

Not even. Have you ever seen a native English speaker being proficient in a Romance language after 22 weeks?

[Abraxas]

Interesting there is no German between the "Easy languages". Spanish and French are relatively easy with good practice if you disregard phonetics and the more detailed verbal conjugations.

[Smaug]

Ha! A non-Romance speaking a Romance language in 23 weeks? That's something I'd like to see.

[Yaroslav]

I am almost fluent with Polish by now. Love language learning.

[Comte Arnau]

Interesting there is no German between the "Easy languages". Spanish and French are relatively easy with good practice if you disregard phonetics and the more detailed verbal conjugations.

Even the English speakers I've met who spoke fluent Spanish or French committed mistakes with the subjunctive. It's really very hard, almost impossible, for an English speaker to look native in Spanish or French.

But well, the same thing is said here about English, that it's an easy language, and then the few who really speak it at an almost native level have actually spent many years to achieve it. No language is really mastered after 22 weeks (unless it's a very close one). Perhaps Esperanto, but that's pretty much all.

[Abraxas]

Even the English speakers I've met who spoke fluent Spanish or French committed mistakes with the subjunctive. It's really very hard, almost impossible, for an English speaker to look native in Spanish or French.

But well, the same thing is said here about English, that it's an easy language, and then the few who really speak it at an almost native level have actually spent many years to achieve it. No language is really mastered after 22 weeks (unless it's a very close one). Perhaps Esperanto, but that's pretty much all.

True, real mastery of a foreign language is a true challenge. What I wrote was based on the observation of similar vocabulary, which eases the conceptualization. I'm certain at least half of the words I wrote in the previous sentences, have a close equivalent in French or other similar languages for example.

[Rudel]

Not even. Have you ever seen a native English speaker being proficient in a Romance language after 22 weeks?

I've seen some starting to speak English better, if that counts

Anyway, I think 22 weeks is actually quite a big time. For someone with method, a good "ear" (read natural language knack), and enough time per day spent on it, it looks like far enough to speak most any language at a functional/proficient level (now fluency is another thing. But there's a much bigger gap between being proficient and being fluent than knowing nothing and being proficient).
The only language that takes a long time to acquire is the first foreign one. After that, your brain should be set-up for more.

Interesting there is no German between the "Easy languages". Spanish and French are relatively easy with good practice if you disregard phonetics and the more detailed verbal conjugations.

German has many declensions, which is "hard" (nah, not really) from the standpoint of a language that hasn't.

If you don't get the phonetics of a language, you're not learning it to me. That's how many Asians do. They have top notch grammatical skills. Can't speak any language for shit.
Phonetics are the first thing that I always learn (but my brain is very "oral").

True, real mastery of a foreign language is a true challenge. What I wrote was based on the observation of similar vocabulary, which eases the conceptualization. I'm certain at least half of the words I wrote in the previous sentences, have a close equivalent in French or other similar languages for example.

"Half" seems fair. Eye-balling it, I'd say Latin origins take half or less of the words, while having a much higher letter-count.

[Comte Arnau]

I think 22 weeks is actually quite a big time. For someone with method, a good "ear" (read natural language knack), and enough time per day spent on it, it looks like far enough to speak most any language at a functional/proficient level (now fluency is another thing. But there's a much bigger gap between being proficient and being fluent than knowing nothing and being proficient).

There are people with a special ability for languages, no doubt. People who really can speak a language at a functional level in just a couple of months. But they're certainly not the average Joe.

You make a difference between proficient and fluent. I do too, but the other way round. One can be fluent commiting a lot of mistakes -extrovert people tend to be this type, they prefer to be fluent rather than accurate. I understand proficiency as the stage between advanced knowledge and mastery. A "C1" or "C2" in the European Framework of Reference for Language levels, so to speak.

But anyway, the most realistic thing in the OP chart are the five key points for learning it: distance, complexity, time spent, resources and motivation. Although age and, as you say, knowing other languages already, could be included just as well. If one maintains a steady pace, yes, 22 weeks are a lot of time.

The only language that takes a long time to acquire is the first foreign one. After that, your brain should be set-up for more.

True, although it depends on the language. But yes, and that's why, after knowing three or four, learning a new European language seems a bit boring and you begin to prefer something more challenging.