Speaking Without Reading

[sabaijai]

The terms of the poll, 'any accuracy/fluency', are a bit vague. Plenty of foreigners learn to speak Thai with some accuracy on certain words or phrases without learning to read. On the other hand I've never met a foreigner whom I would consider fluent in Thai who wasn't also able to read Thai fairly well.

This brings us back to the old Thai Language forum debate on what defines 'fluency'. I don't see how an adult learner can achieve a proficiency of, for example, 4 or 5 on a scale of 5, without learning to read. From the perspective that 4+ is fluent, I'd say the answer is 'no'.

A proficiency level of 2 or 3 seems possible without reading, and if you call that fluent then the answer is 'yes'.

[HarryHerb]

In answer to the poll question, well of course you can speak Thai fluently without being able to read it - there are numerous examples of people who can, be they native speakers, luuk kreung, or Thai-as-second-language foreigners, some of whom have posted here.

In answer to a slightly different (related) question, 'can you be considered fluent in the Thai language without being able to read?', then the reply would be 'no'.

Many people can read a language but not speak it and vice versa, but the only true fluency and understanding comes from being able to do both (+ probably write it as well). Even if you can converse for hours on end, if you can't read a simple street sign or a menu then you can't call yourself fluent in the language in general. That's not snobbery, simply fact.