Language skill

[Dagrill]

I'm going by what it says on my character sheet.

Hi,

In MTU my humans know skin clour is a result of environment, so any racism is directed at other species - Vargr are all perceived as Pirates, Aslan as
land grabbing warriors, Zhodani as mid controlling freaks and Solomani as a bunch of Nazi's (OK ythat's the Vilani perception)

Regards

David

 

[Darkwing]

Alright, here's my CrImp 0.02:
Based on extensive travel and meeting folks all over the world, speaking some Russian, Japanese, and German, and having used phrasebooks and guides for many other languages, this is what I figure.
Language 0 ought to mean you know how to say "hi, bye, please, thanks, how much, and where's the loo?", and maybe "do ya speak galanglic?". Make 'em roleplay it.
"I ask a native where the starport is"
"He stares at you blankly"
"but I have his language at 0"
"so USE it"
"um, starportu doku-desuka?"

Now, I have seen natives all over ignore ugly Americans jabbering English at them, especially the unpleasant boors who figure that saying slo-o-o-w-ly and more LOUDLY will magically translate it. I've seen them happily admit to knowing English when asked haltingly and poorly, but in their native language. And I've seen them speaking English to one such person, and snubbing another who stumbled into the conversation while they being helpful.
"yes, the bookstore is 2 blocks down, turn right and - nyet, ya nyeh gaveryu angleeski. Now, don't forget to look for the McDonalds. Shto ti gav'reely, durok?"

The folks being dissed usually got angry, and thought the local owed it to them to speak English to them, too, which just confirmed that the local was right to blow them off.

I've also seen people hide behind the language barrier to be nasty. When I worked Room Service, Siemens had a conference at our hotel. Last day, EVERYONE thought they'd save time by ordering breakfast in their room instead of the restaurant, making it take forever to get their meals. One room, the guest complained at length about it to his wife in German, while being polite in English. When I had it all set up, and he signed the bill, I clicked my heels and said "Vielen danken, mein herr", just to let him know he hadn't been as clever as he thought. He went quite pale...

I use that sort of experience in my games. It frustrates some players, who think that taking a language slot means they have auto-translate ability, and especially the ones who think Linguistics skill is a built-in Universal Translator in real-time. Smarter players appreciate the extra layer of roleplaying, and have also used it to advantage: carry a phrasebook and stumble over words like you have a skill of 0, and listen for unguarded things being said...

Timelords runs 1-20, gives a skill of 14 for free in your native language, and if the combined total of the 2 speakers equals 20, you have a good, complex conversation with no translation difficulties. If the total is at least 14, you get simple ideas across. Anything less, and both sides must roll each sentence to see if they got the gist. So converting the idea, say in MgT that the average native has 3, really eloquent speakers have 4 (Safire, anyone?), and a combined total of 6 means no roll needed. A combined total of 4 means no roll for simple ideas, and a combined total of 3 means roll every sentence. A native with 3 and tourist with 0 have to roll. A genius with 4 and that tourist can manage. If they each have at least 2 in the same other language, add 1 to their chances - so a Czech with English 0 and German 2 talking to an American with English 3 and German 2 can act as if they have a combined total of 4, and only roll for complex ideas, because they can occasionally rephrase in German anything not making sense in English. Similarly, having a phrasebook adds a +1, but the bonuses should not stack.

Now, the Trade description of Language 0, I think makes sense as written if renamed "Trade Patois (region)" 0, making it a specific, regional pidgin. Since it's borrowed from several local languages, you should be able to get across the very basic ideas to anyone from all those places. Let Trade Patois of 1 or higher also default to the equivalent of 0 in each of the languages reflected in the patois.

So a time-traveler to 17th-century New Orleans who picks up the local patois at 0 or 1 should be able to get across to a Mexican, a Frenchman, or a Creole slave that he wants to find a place to pee, or to buy something, but isn't going to be able to discuss politics with any of them with any luck at all.

 

[BytePro]

Good post!

Just to point out the mechanics need a caveat - each speaker must have at least one common language at skill-0. (Otherwise the Ganglic-6 MgT character can talk in tongues... :devil

As to getting players to roleplay speaking another fictional language - I lead by example so they can get a gist of the 'style'. ('Eek-squawk-eek-eek-squawk-eek .. Hello?' or 'Ack .. You have suitable coin?').

Most of the time my players just don't speak a common tongue with aliens. (Holds out card and shakes it while speaking slowly ... 'C o r b i n .. D a l l a s')

 

[Fritz_Brown]

I had a similar problem with language in 2300. There wasn't any real structure for languages except the number you received automatically, and that each level in Linguistics was another language. (The levels go to 10 by default for skills in 2300.) As you can see, there's no relative skill, merely that you know the language. RoleMaster (or RollMaster, if you prefer) has a decent level description for languages that runs 1-11, so I thought I might adapt that (it also separates written and spoken language, but I combined them for simplicity, though the descriptions are verbal only). Here's what I came up with as a descriptive:

0 - Allows recognition of the language when spoken.
1 - Allows user to communicate and understand very basic concepts in the form of single words or very short phrases (e.g., eat, danger, room, money, cost, enemy, bathroom, pain, etc.).
2 - User can distinguish between major dialects. Allows user to communicate moderately basic concepts in the form of phrases. User can get the tone/context of the language when spoken at a normal rate, but no more. He can, however, understand basic phrases spoken at a slow pace.
3 - User may converse on very simple subjects, using whole sentences instead of broken phrases. User can understand everyday conversation when spoken slowly.
4 - Allows user to converse freely in everyday conversation of an average nature (e.g., market talk, peasant discussions, conversation with guards, etc.). Rapid and/or sophisticated speech is still troublesome.
5 - The normal speaking level of the native population, the common man. Subtle or particularly sophisticated concepts still prove troublesome. User cannot understand dialects or archaic speech out of the norm. User can converse freely on the same level.
6 - True fluency. Allows understanding of, and conversation with, the most learned of native speakers. Sophisticated folk may still brand you as an “outlander,” however, any archaic or unusual concepts will still prove troublesome.
7 - Fluency plus the ability to recognize the regional and cultural origin of all speech (although such speech will still prove troublesome to speak or understand).
8 - Absolute fluency in chosen dialect plus simple understanding and speaking ability in closely related dialects.
9 - Absolute fluency of the chosen language and all closely related dialects. Extremely archaic and complex concepts may prove troublesome.
10 - As for Rank 9, unless the GM’s world system calls for extremely complex languages and/or dialects.

The "fluency" vice "native population" is the difference between "uneducated" and "educated" in most of the western world, today. (And, I wouldn't say those are perfect descriptions.)

Since levels for each language don't exist in 2300, I parsed them out this way:
Background languages were calculated as 2 + Eloquence bonus (0-5) + Education bonus (0-5) + Linguistics skill - the order in which the language was learned (1st=1, 2d=2, 3rd=3, etc.).
Career languages were the same, except they started as 1+....

This gave you a conceivable range of 1 to 21 for your primary language, with anything over 9 being esoteric (scientific terms, old dialects, etc - much like actually being able to read Beowulf in the original without notes). Someone with a Linguistics of 10 and very erudite could learn their final languages up to a level of 10 or so. To have a 1 in your native language, the character had to be a total dud - I was thinking of Hodor from Game Of Thrones when I set that as the bottom level. It also makes each language progressively a little harder to learn well (as in RL). It set an average person's native language at 5-6, with an erudite character from 7-8. My character - being average eloquence, but decently educated, and with a Linguistics of 0, and 2 each languages from background and career - had 4 languages, with ranks from 7 down to 2. (He's limited to asking things like "Where's the dang bathroom?" and cursing in that last language. )

Icosahedron, I think your layout works pretty well, though I don't know about negative skill levels. I think a Spaniard with English-3 could pass as a native, too, though. However, he might be required to make a task roll in some situations (surprise, stress, just the right question, etc.) to not slip up.

I agree with you about being a stranger in a strange land, Darkwing. I never had a problem with a German speaking English with me - as long as I tried in German first. Parisians... not so much, as it pertained to French. Italians? I've had some funny incidents trying to speak Italian. As far as phrasebooks, be careful that the book itself isn't offensive. (I was in Bosnia, and a Serb got upset because my Berlitz book said "Serbo-Croatian". There are very few differences - almost entirely in some word choices - but he insisted they were two totally separate languages.)

BytePro - +1 for dragging Corbin Dallas into the conversation. And, yes, it's most fun if you can really play it out, but some people feel really uncomfortable trying that.

 

[Cryton]

0 - Allows recognition of the language when spoken.
1 - Allows user to communicate and understand very basic concepts in the form of single words or very short phrases (e.g., eat, danger, room, money, cost, enemy, bathroom, pain, etc.).
2 - User can distinguish between major dialects. Allows user to communicate moderately basic concepts in the form of phrases. User can get the tone/context of the language when spoken at a normal rate, but no more. He can, however, understand basic phrases spoken at a slow pace.
3 - User may converse on very simple subjects, using whole sentences instead of broken phrases. User can understand everyday conversation when spoken slowly.
4 - Allows user to converse freely in everyday conversation of an average nature (e.g., market talk, peasant discussions, conversation with guards, etc.). Rapid and/or sophisticated speech is still troublesome.
5 - The normal speaking level of the native population, the common man. Subtle or particularly sophisticated concepts still prove troublesome. User cannot understand dialects or archaic speech out of the norm. User can converse freely on the same level.
6 - True fluency. Allows understanding of, and conversation with, the most learned of native speakers. Sophisticated folk may still brand you as an “outlander,” however, any archaic or unusual concepts will still prove troublesome.
7 - Fluency plus the ability to recognize the regional and cultural origin of all speech (although such speech will still prove troublesome to speak or understand).
8 - Absolute fluency in chosen dialect plus simple understanding and speaking ability in closely related dialects.
9 - Absolute fluency of the chosen language and all closely related dialects. Extremely archaic and complex concepts may prove troublesome.
10 - As for Rank 9, unless the GM’s world system calls for extremely complex languages and/or dialects.

Those are some great descriptions for skill levels. I would halve the level, rounding up to use them in MgT with no other modifications.

 

[CosmicGamer]

Language 0 ought to mean you know how to say "hi, bye, please, thanks, how much, and where's the loo?", and maybe "do ya speak galanglic?". Make 'em roleplay it.
"I ask a native where the starport is"
"He stares at you blankly"
"but I have his language at 0"
"so USE it"
"um, starportu doku-desuka?"

How can a player role play to this degree a level of skill that is beyond them?

Even zero is higher than the players language capability of a completely made up language they have never heard even a single word of before.

 

[BytePro]

...it's most fun if you can really play it out, but some people feel really uncomfortable trying that.

Yep - I use it sparingly and certainly don't demand that Players must. I usually use it like in the movies where the subtitles appear for the first couple of phrases then revert to English. Aside from the immersion and humor aspects, it helps Players maintain separation of in-character knowledge vs meta-game knowledge.

How can a player role play to this degree a level of skill that is beyond them?

Can't speak for Darkwing, but I do encourage my Players to 'make stuff up', but certainly don't require it. In this respect, roleplaying language skill is no different than roleplaying things like M-Drive skill or even broker skill (for most).

It helps to give Players something to work with (without going overboard). For languages I use exaggerated noises and gibberish that are easily mimicked (or at least humorously attempted ) - like the adults talking in Charlie Brown. Things like tongue clicks (like bushmen); lip smacks with fast mumbo-jumbo; falsetto pursed lip 'whistling'; clipped grunts; etc. I do not try to actually make words or a language, myself. (Though Players sometimes get into doing this...)

Above all, I don't 'correct' Players, unless absolutely necessary. Rather, I try to work with what their imagination comes up with and integrate it into the game.

Its been my experience that even the most reserved Player will get into 'in character' with patient motivation. Much like drawing a Player into non-combat gaming. Interjecting humor helps. For some, seeing good roleplay (or bad, but given obvious effort) get better results or automatically 'succeed', helps.

 

[CosmicGamer]

Can't speak for Darkwing, but I do encourage my Players to 'make stuff up', but certainly don't require it. In this respect, roleplaying language skill is no different than roleplaying things like M-Drive skill or even broker skill (for most).

We tend to say things more like
"I'm adjusting the maneuver drive to maximize thrust."
vs
"I'm adjusting the trilateral distribution manifold to optimize the heat exchange energy pyramid."

But I get what your saying.

With role playing language though, if you spout some gibberish won't the character always come across as incompetent since no players will know that "gib er ish" means "what's that cost"? Do you roll before you role play and only speak gibberish if the roll fails?

 

[BytePro]

Good points, I should have been more clear.

We tend to say things more like
"I'm adjusting the maneuver drive to maximize thrust."
vs
"I'm adjusting the trilateral distribution manifold to optimize the heat exchange energy pyramid."

There's still plenty of meta-game communication in my games, but we do manage about 70% in character. To be sure, the '...trilateral distribution...' might be the result of a roleplayed in-character response to another character (and I'd try very hard not to flinch!).

The first example also would work in-game just fine - RP doesn't have to be extremely colorful. But, if it was a meta-game statement about what a PC was attempting, I encourage Players to distinguish that using third person, ala "Roger tries to boost the M-Drive." (Player usually has dice in hand for such...)

The more colorful statement would probably need some meta-game discussion to make it clear what was intended (boosting PP output vs just M-Drive?, etc.). At the table (in F2F games), I generally have no problem mixing meta-game intent into in-character chatter - always being willing to ask a Player what they mean to do with their character if there is an ambiguity, or adjust things if I misunderstood. Likewise, I will revert to Ref voice and explain when asked or if I just feel its prudent...

...
With role playing language though, if you spout some gibberish won't the character always come across as incompetent since no players will know that "gib er ish" means "what's that cost"? Do you roll before you role play and only speak gibberish if the roll fails?

Ah, no - if no one had a way of understanding the NPC, I would only use gibberish to introduce that fact to the Players. If the NPC is aware of the issue, I might also do a 'Speak no I you air code...' or some such, in-character.

Normally, I just give the gibberish for color and state what is understood - i.e. "Gib 'er Eesh? .. What cost that?", with the first part 'in character' and the later in my narrator, referee voice. I also tend to do this for only the first few interactions, then switch to English or broken English (ala movies as mentioned above). Players still are expected to separate character knowledge from what they are hearing, though I do not mind when Players make some use of what they hear as long as its in character. I'd rather have the group involved - I don't like to isolate Players (i.e. - avoid splitting the party, etc.).

However, to address your specific example... the gibberish would be accompanied with information to make things playable, like - "The regal creature gestures a flipper at your mapbox while using another to pull out what looks to be a large amount of local currency from a dorsal pouch .. and several glowing, ruby looking stones..."

I never used MgT's language skill checks, but I probably wouldn't roll unless it was written or something very specific (like the meaning of a word important to the adventure). Instead I would adjust 'the translation' for the skill of the PC. Letting the dice determine that a phrase was gibberish wouldn't amount to much other than a bunch more rolls when the Player wanted to understand - so I think that would be pointless simulation.

 

[Icosahedron]

Icosahedron, I think your layout works pretty well, though I don't know about negative skill levels. I think a Spaniard with English-3 could pass as a native, too, though. However, he might be required to make a task roll in some situations (surprise, stress, just the right question, etc.) to not slip up.

Thanks.
You don't think that -2 and -1 work as simply a few choice words?

Yes, level 3 is native proficiency. When I said that:

A Spaniard with Level 4 English could perhaps pass as a native Englishman, Scotsman or American at will. (I would strictly limit the number of successful dialects, though.)

I meant that a Spaniard taught English 3 in London might speak like a native Cockney, or if taught in Dallas would have a Texan drawl, but he would need English 4 to be taught in New Orleans and pass as a native in Scotland.

 

[Darkwing]

How can a player role play to this degree a level of skill that is beyond them?

Even zero is higher than the players language capability of a completely made up language they have never heard even a single word of before.

Depends on the game. I often use a real language as a stand-in, and then I have phrasebooks out for players. Also, the alien supplements have word generation tables, and I have had players use that to try to say Vargr words, for example.

 

[McPerth]

Even zero is higher than the players language capability of a completely made up language they have never heard even a single word of before.

That's why I think Language skill should be used as Trade skill (as the fitst post in this thread says): having level on one language doesn't mean he has 0 level in all of them.

 

[BytePro]

...I often use a real language as a stand-in, and then I have phrasebooks out for players.

Cool idea!

Thanks, I think I'll try that with Players who are already familiar with some other language (probably too disruptive otherwise). For skill-0 or 1, gibberish still for higher...

 

[lego zhodani]

I use deception or acting if players are trying to change accent and pass themselves off as others.

Some people can fake a Scottish, Welsh, Texan or what ever accent, certainly for a short passing conversation without having a high language skill.

 

[Icosahedron]

I use deception or acting if players are trying to change accent and pass themselves off as others.

Some people can fake a Scottish, Welsh, Texan or what ever accent, certainly for a short passing conversation without having a high language skill.

Yes, that seems a better explanation for mimicry. Thanks.

 

[Darkwing]

On the topic of sources of language phrasebooks and such, college bookstores offer cheatsheets for most courses, so a 1 or 2 sheet cheatsheet with commonly useful info is sold. Most languages will be available through any decent college book store.

 

[Fox's Master]

On Language

As a member of the Interagency Language Roundtable (ILR), the gradations may assist you in building a suitable system for the game. The ILR Scale serves as a system for measuring the language proficiency of an individual, on a scale of 0 to 5. Proficiency level of 0 equates to no knowledge of a language, while the proficiency level of 5 equates to a highly educated foreigner or native speaker. Proficiency levels in excess of a whole number, but not reaching the next whole number are represented with the 'plus' sign, for example, a linguist who speaks at a near native level might be represented as having a 4+ level proficiency. Bear in mind that this scale is presented for the spoken word ~ an individual may possess a 4 in Speaking, but only a 2 in writing or a 3 in reading. Language, as it is measures is comprised of four distinct elements: Reading, Listening (both passive modalities), Speaking, and Writing (both active modalities). Additionally, the ILR has recently released a scale for functional skills including translation and interpretation, as well. Being bilingual does not make you competent in the myriad tasks of a fully-qualified linguist. Here are the levels from 0 to 5:

ILR Level 1 – Elementary Proficiency

This is the first and essential level of the scale, often called S-1 or Level 1. The following describes the traits of an ILR Level 1 individual:

• 
  can fulfill traveling needs and conduct themselves in a polite manner

• able to use questions and answers for simple topics within a limited level of experience

• able to understand basic questions and speech, which allows for guides, such as slower speech or repetition, to aid understanding

• has only a vocabulary large enough to communicate the most basic of needs; also makes frequent punctuation and grammatical mistakes in writing of the language

The majority of individuals classified as S-1 are able to perform most basic functions using the language. This includes buying goods, reading the time, ordering simple meals and asking for minimal directions.

ILR Level 2 – Limited Working Proficiency

Limited working proficiency is the second level in the scale. This level is sometimes referred to as S-2 or level 2. A person at this level is described as follows:

• able to satisfy routine social demands and limited work requirements

• can handle with confidence most basic social situations including introductions and casual conversations about current events, work, family, and autobiographical information

• can handle limited work requirements, needing help in handling any complications or difficulties; can get the gist of most conversations on non-technical subjects (i.e. topics which require no specialized knowledge), and has a speaking vocabulary sufficient to respond simply with some circumlocutions

• has an accent which, though often quite faulty, is intelligible

• can usually handle elementary constructions quite accurately but does not have thorough or confident control of the grammar

ILR Level 3 – Professional Working Proficiency

Professional working proficiency is the third level in the scale. This level is sometimes referred to as S-3 or Level 3. S-3 is what is usually used to measure how many people in the world know a given language. A person at this level is described as follows:

• able to speak the language with sufficient structural accuracy and vocabulary to participate effectively in most conversations on practical, social, and professional topics

• can discuss particular interests and special fields of competence with reasonable ease
  • has comprehension which is quite complete for a normal rate of speech
    • has a general vocabulary which is broad enough that he or she rarely has to grope for a word
    • has an accent which may be obviously foreign; has a good control of grammar; and whose errors virtually never interfere with understanding and rarely disturb the native speaker.
    
    ILR Level 4 – Full Professional Proficiency
    
    Full professional proficiency is the fourth level in the scale. This level is sometimes referred to as S-4 or level 4. A person at this level is described as follows:
    
    • able to use the language fluently and accurately on all levels and as normally pertinent to professional needs.
    • can understand and participate in any conversations within the range of own personal and professional experience with a high degree of fluency and precision of vocabulary
    • would rarely be taken for a native speaker, but can respond appropriately even in unfamiliar grounds or situations
    • makes only quite rare and minute errors of pronunciation and grammar
      • can handle informal interpreting of the language.
      
      ILR Level 5 – Native or Bilingual Proficiency
      
      Native or bilingual proficiency is the fifth level in the scale. This level is sometimes referred to as S-5 or level 5. A person at this level is described as follows:
      
      • has a speaking proficiency equivalent to that of an educated native speaker
      • has complete fluency in the language, such that speech on all levels is fully accepted by educated native speakers in all of its features, including breadth of vocabulary and idiom, colloquialisms, and pertinent cultural references.
      
      Unlike Aramis and others who have a remarkable knowledge base about everything in the universe or at least purport to have such knowledge, I've been in the language arena for the past two decades. I'm fortunate, as a member of both the FBI and the Department of defense to have both an avocation and a vocation in language.

 

[McPerth]

So I guess the skill level plus one will be the equivalent to the level you talk about (in each language separately), do you agree?

In any case, the main issue I was discussing when opening the thread whas the possibility to treat language skill as trade skill in that learning one does not give you level 0 in all the rest of them (while I agree exception might be done for same family languages, that could be treated as each family a separate regular cascade skill).

 

[aramis]

So I guess the skill level plus one will be the equivalent to the level you talk about (in each language separately), do you agree?

In any case, the main issue I was discussing when opening the thread whas the possibility to treat language skill as trade skill i nthat learning one does not give you level 0 in all the rest of them (while I agree exception might be done for same family languages, that could be treated as each family a separate regular cascade skill).

Looking at those levels, and noting that level 4+ is pretty rare in skill terms, and level 3 is axiomatically defined as a professional skill level... it would seem to be a good fit, but it makes level 0 in a language somewhat more fluent than I'd care for. I'd instead use 2x level as the ILR or DLI level equivalent. (DLI uses a very similar scale.)

 

[Fox's Master]

Language Info

Actually, Aramis, DLI uses the ILR, as do most of the USG entities. Prior to 1985, DLI possesed no normative scale for language skill ~ thus, the top third of the class received a '3' ~ the middle third received a '2' ~ and the lowest third received a '1' ~ not exactly the best way to calibrate the skill-sets of our linguists (which coincidentally does not have the same title among the Services or the Intelligence Community). DLI tests, for the most part, the passive modalities of Reading and Listening which is scored only to Level '3'.