Content edited
steve - “My goal in studying a language is roughly C1.”
I agree with Steve, except my goals would (or will) change if and when I move to the country, especially if I already have a C1 level in the language before arriving. However, that would not include “being mistaken for a native”, as mentioned by Steve, but in the long term, I would like to have a native like level if living in the country [like many non-natives who have moved to Australia seem to have (after many, many years)].
JayB - “I think some people perhaps tend to underestimate just how high C1 actually is!”
2tmp011007 - “I guess it’s the same the other way round”
I agree with our Colombian friend (although I would have disagreed prior to receiving my results!)
To give you some perspective, if you know foreigners who have moved to your English speaking country and have taken an IELTS test, a C1 exam (at least the French one) equates to approximately 6.5 on the IELTS test, which is functional but far from perfect. For example, my Polish friend who had done a C2 exam many years before arriving here had to do the IELTS test (don’t ask why!), and she scored 9.
@IMY “It works for me.” - Me too 
The Pareto principle is akin to the algorithm for reverse bias voltage across a bipolar junction transistor: if you can use it to your advantage, great; if you can’t, then its not much use to you.
@JayB: What does seem totally wide of the mark, however, is the notion that 80% of full native ability in a language would equate to any kind of strong functional usage. As I pointed out earlier, 80% of native ability in terms of passive comprehension is absolutely nowhere at all! If a person is only understanding 80% of the words in regular non-specialist texts, then he or she will not be able to read extensively - and will not even be anywhere remotely close to being able to do so.
If we accept that an educated native speaker has a vocabulary of, say, 20,000 words, then 80% would be 16,000 words - which is more than enough to understand regular non-specialist texts. Where the native speaker will beat you is in rarer words, idiomatic expressions, and cultural references. For example, I was listening to some Czech comedy (Ceska Soda) recently, but missed many of the jokes because they referred to old TV commercials. 80%, then, will take you to a very high level of competence but requires native speakers to make allowances for you not being a native speaker. Filling in the 20%, with idiomatic and cultural references that natives have spent a life-time absorbing is a very steep mountain indeed. You can see this for yourselves if you sit among native speakers in a pub, when they are a bit drunk, and in full-flow conversation. Even at C1 level in Czech I end up lost in just a few minutes, until they remember I am there, and start to pull the language back a bit.
Content edited
@Splog: “…If we accept that an educated native speaker has a vocabulary of, say, 20,000 words, then 80% would be 16,000 words”
Yes, but you seem not to be taking into account word-frequency. Words do not occur in texts completely at random with equal frequency, rather it is the case that some occur with very much higher frequency than others.
I’m quoting from memory here, but I believe that the first 1000 most frequently occurring words (which in English would include things like “the”, “and”, “you”, “in”, “go”, etc, etc) already account for about 70% of any average ‘normal’ text.
If you know the first 5000 most frequently occurring words then (again quoting from memory) you could expect to understand more than 90% of any average non-specialist text - but perhaps still not quite enough to start extensive reading!
However a person knowing 16000 words would at the very least already be on the threshold of C2, in my opinion. (The remaining 4000 words would tend to be rare, obscure, semi-specialist in nature, etc. They would include things which many native speakers of the language would not know.)
A person knowing 16000 words would surely understand more than 99.5% of any ordinary text, I believe.
One thing I’ve been wondering about when moving to Norway in August is how I can go about absorbing the kind of cultural references that often get thrown around. Without a doubt that will be the toughest thing to internalise. I suppose I’ll have to put up with picking up what I can from old films and TV programmes and just absorb things from then on. Would be great if we could get a “Cultural Reference Bible for Bewildered Foreigners”.
I’m thinking, you make things too complicated. Of course there are things you might not know, but this leads to interesting conversations. You can always ask “Wait, what is ‘xxx’” and most likely get an explanation and often enough an invitation like “come over at friday and we’ll watch that movie together”
Of course, it’s good if you already have a clue about what’s going on in that country, but as you have to read texts, watch movies and read texts in your target language for language study anyway, you are bound to know at least the basics about the culture in that particular country (and I would assume, you also already had an interest in that country before you even started out with studying the language). You won’t be completely clueless.
Cultural adaption requires an open mind, but not necessarily a lot of study.
I agree with Fingerhut - I really can’t see that idioms and cultural references are such a big problem.
If you are at C1 level (i.e. if you have 96/97% of native comprehension) then you should be able to “get” most things from the wider context. If you don’t, you will be well equiped to ask a native speaker for an explanation.
Content edited
@Imy: “…my number one problem with my Dutch right now is the understanding and production of idioms. Not a big problem? You’ve got to be dreaming. haha”
I’m sorry that you’re having problems with Dutch idioms, Imyirtseshem.
But as to “dreaming”…well no, actually. I am speaking from direct personal experience of going from zero to a strong C1 level in German within the space of about 4 years when I was in my twenties.
(BTW I am not just estimating myself as C1 - I hold a serious formal qualification at that level.)
Content edited
Well okay.
(But still, when you say things like: “you must be dreaming, haha”, this does tend to imply that you think I don’t really know what I’m talking about. This is the only reason why I mentioned formal qualifications.)
I’m sorry, but I would like understand this site. I am confuse. I need some help.
Thank you
Despite what Steve says, he does practice the 80/20 principle—albeit in a different way.
One of the unfortunate things about the formulation “80/20” is that the numbers add up to 100. This proportion suggests that you are leaving work undone if you follow this principle. But that is not what it means.
Steve has convinced most of us that input based learning is very effective, particularly in the beginning stages of language learning. Input is far more effective for making progress in a new language than studying grammar, doing exercises, memorizing dialogues, and attending class.
Does that mean we should slack off? (May it never be!) Rather, it means that you can spent more time (all that time you would been slogging through grammar exercise) reading and listening to your target language (or cycling, or hanging out with friends, or learning a 3rd language).
Ultimately, it is about choosing the most effective method. You can use the 80/20 principle to get an average result with little effort, but you can also use it to get extraordinary results from an average amount of effort. It is about getting more out of your investment–more progress and more enjoyment!