Poles speaking English - examples

He's married to Anne Applebaum for god's sake. A famous author. Who writes in English.

He went to Oxford.

He lived outside Poland between 1981 and 2006, and what's more - has been a diplomat since then.

He probably doesn't even speak Polish at home.

Why is this debate happening?

A poster had said that his English was less fluent than another politician's.

It isn't.

It doesn't matter, which politician is more toxic and more harmful to Poland's interests that would be a fair contest.

Neither of those.

The toxic ones have been voted out.

tsk tsk, he that toxic that all the fish in the river died out.
-----


Unfortunately not, there are plenty that remain.

Ehehehehe!

How can you argue with this man?

His arguments are like sledgehammers.

This is the kind of wisdom that only comes with age.

Yes, I judge their fluency from teacher`s point of view, having the expectations towards an examinee at the oral exam in mind. I would definitely prefer to examine Trzaskowski than Sikorski who, while debunking the Russian ambassador`s lies in the UN, was speaking slowly, monotonously, in a dull voice with a lot of pausing.


Yes, it is . You have no idea what the requirements at the oral exam are. Amasing! :):)

Check it out:

Fluency of speech
2 points - there are no pauses in the statement OR there are pauses, which sometimes are unnatural, but do not interfere with the reception of the message

1 point - pauses in speech occur frequently and are unnatural; sometimes they disturb the reception of the message

0 points -
· pauses in speech occur very often and are unnatural; interfere with the reception of the message

Which oral exam?

I conduct them all the time and am qualified to do so(and have to renew that regularly by being tested).

The definition of fluency in discourse was given to you several posts above and it's telling that your criteria doesn't actually agree with what you originally said.

Telling too that three people who work in education, at least one of whom is a currently accredited examiner, disagree with your inaccurate assessment of Mr Sikorski's fluency in spoken English.


He was giving a speech to the UN assembly not taking an oral exam for school kids, and as you were told, the CEFR takes into account different functions of speech. I suspect your language exam from whatever source does not involve assessing a UN speech.

You disagree for attention sicking reasons so I feel obliged to disagree with your disagreement. :):):)


No, you don`t. :):):)

Feel free. It dunt mek thi reyt :-)

I do, all the time, coz I am Polish. :):):)

It's the national sport.

Another interview, this time for BBC:



Excellent fluency which I would like every examinee to be endowed with at the oral exam. :):):)

Which oral exam?

His fluency is fine however both his pronunciation and his catenation distract.

I dislike both of them but I must say that Sikorksi's English is better than that toxic dude's.
To be honest both are not that great but still, Sikorski comes on the top.

Impossible! :):):) You are biased, simple. :(:(:(:(

While talking about it, I had no idea that certain right wing PiS politician Dominik Tarczyński can speak English so fluently! With terrible accent and sick excitement, but at least more fluently than Sikorski. AmaSSing!!!!

Here he is discussing illegal migrants in Poland for Al Jazeera tv:

Wow, I am so positively surprised. :):):)

No.

He's giving an interview rather than a speech at the UN Assembly which is why you're confused.

And B2 pronunciation with distinct American influences which suggests he's spent time there.

Darling, if I wrote that he was discussing an issue for Al Jazeera TV, it was obvious he was doing an interview, wasn`t it??? :):):)


That`s irrelevant. It is his fluency which counts. :):):)

And obvious that he'd be speaking in a different register than that used while giving a speech at the UN Assembly, wouldn't he, Chucky Egg.


And Sikorski's is at a better level than his.

How about Chuckie??? :):):)

Out of context.

Chucky Egg is better.

Chuckie. :):):)

You're thinking of that doll in the horror film, aren't you...

As I say, context is everything...

What's good for an examination is not necessarily optimal in other contexts.

He speaks a bit too quickly and important details can get lost or aren't emphasized enough.

at 2.12 (more or less)

"our border with Ukraine is completely open to their produce, which is not checked, sometimes it's even contaminated, so that...."

It would be far more effective with some pauses

"our border with Ukraine is completely open to their produce --- which is not checked ----- sometimes it's even contaminated ---- so that...."

and he's following Polish stress patterns without good use of contrastive stress ('contaminated' needed more stress along with pause so that the information can sink in).

Sikorski is much better at contrastive stress (very important for native speakers but mostly left out of textbooks....).

Again, he's very good but speed is not the be all and end all of fluency (or effective language use in the real world).

I'm always telling students to slow down, a more deliberate pace, and natural use of filler words, allows for the formulation and expression of more interesting ideas.

Here is another proof of his ecstatic fluency - his speech to the EU Parliament. Simply amasing!:

YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO LECTURE US!!!! We`re gonna fight your leftist ideology until the final victory!

He disagrees because you're wrong. That's also why Maf and I disagree with you. As for 'the exam', as Jon says, which exam? Are you talking about Matura? Parroting rehearsed answers to familiar topics is not an assessment of language fluency.

You disagree because like many Polish people, a) you are a nit-picker who likes to argue for the sake of it b) you can't admit you're wrong about something c) you're too arrogant to take advice, doing yourself a great disservice in the process. Instead of welcoming the opportunity to learn and thereby be a better teacher, you have to prove that you're 'right'. You're not - and you never will be.

You're also behaving like one of your own students by deliberately trying to wind people up with your nonsense about Sikorski being less fluent than Tarczyński. Spring is here - where are those seed catalogues?

Do you all remember how I reported a week or two ago that pitbull Tarczyński replaced philosopher Legutko in PiS representation to the EU Parliament?

I said that Legutko had graduated from English Philology Department in 1970s. He speaks fluently, not so fast as Trzaskowski, though, but very clearly.

So clearly that I was surprised hearing sth strange, namely a grammar mistake. At the very beginning, at 0:20, he said: a politician now largely forgot instead of forgotten. Can you check it yourself and tell me if there is sth wrong or not?? The subtitles added to the video by the Parliament translators say correctly forgotten but I hear forgot.




:)::):)
Do you also use such lists of Polish people`s vices when arguing with your Polish husband ??? Do you carry such a list on you so when the brawl starts you just take it out and read??? hahahahaha

Amasing!!!


I can`t take "advice" from you personally coz I consider you a forum azhole and as such your "advice" is worthless. Ha!!! :):):)

It's not a surprise. And a simple slip at the most rather than a mistake as such. Perfectly normal when speaking a foreign language even if someone has a high skill level and not an unknown in someone's first language. And as slips go, it's an "intelligent error" that doesn't impede understanding. It's also grammatically a grey area; an educated native speaker of English might say this and it wouldn't be considered an error.

It's worth mentioning that someone who takes the American prescriptive approach to grammar may view this differently to someone who takes the more universal descriptive approach.


There aren't enough hours in the day.

No, it was a grammar mistake in Passive, whether we call it a slip or blip.... :):):) Unless we are singing Auld Lyng Sein but he wasn`t :):):)


Exactly, for example, in the fields where two rednecks are talking about their livestock or crops. Or singing ALS. :):):)


Exactly!! That is why I imagine Atch keeps several lists, numbered from 1 to 5 and when she needs to reproach her Polish husband by throwing his vices in his face, she just takes out a specific list and uses it. hahahaha