語言天才不存在

事後補充

最近發的關於語言天才的影片，發現主旨有一點被誤解。天分當然會影響學習的速度，這我不會否定。不過我特別強調「天才」這個字，而不是「天賦」，就是因為天才這個字給出的印象，是一個獨特的存在，就是學起來很輕鬆、快速，就達到流利、順暢，不需要長時間學習。

其實，我個人也不完全喜歡「hard work beats talent」這句話，因為有點太過美化現實，好像天分完全不存在一樣。「hard works beats talent when talent doesn't work hard」這個說法是我比較喜歡的。

然而，語言這個東西，就算多有天分，要達到流利的程度，還是得花幾百、幾千個小時下去的。並不太可能因為天分，就讓神奇地以驚人的速度學會。隨便去找任何一個語言學到很流利的人，我保證沒有一個是沒有投入大量時間就得到這個結果的。天分頂多給你一點點小小的優勢而已。

我用一個比喻來說：以數學來說，我想大家不會否定數學天分的確存在。你要成為世界頂尖的數學家，的確要天分+努力兩者並存才能達到。但是，要小學數學考得高分，大部分人只要肯花時間都可以做到，並不需要是什麼天才。

一般人會用「語言天才」、「有語言天分」形容的程度，我覺得就有點像小學數學一樣，是一般人花時間可以達到的。天賦當然可以幫你比較快達到，但是對很多人來說，只要花足夠時間都可以辦到。對於大部分的人，癥結點並不是天賦不夠，而是方法沒用對，或是根本沒投入時間而已。

當然，以統計上來說，假設我們把天賦前1%的人稱為「天才」，那邏輯上來說，這一群人是一定真實存在的。但我個人猜測，以語言來說，很大機率那些前1%的天賦的人後來並沒有被開發，很多可能只會說一種語言。然後真正最後外語能力在前1%的人，往往不是天賦前1%的人。

真的足以被稱為「天才」，我覺得條件是能做到大多數「普通天分的人」再怎麼努力都做不到的事情，又或是可以以一般人無法想像的速度精通，但是大部分「語言天才」這個詞被使用的時候，我覺得沒有符合這個情況

Some additional notes

From reading some of the comments on my recent video on "language geniuses", I noticed that many have missed the key message I was trying to get across in the video. I won't deny the fact that talent is indeed a factor in the speed at which one acquires languages and ultimate attainment. However the reason I put emphasis on the word "genius" instead of just talent, was because the "genius" gives a sense of uniqueness and implies outstanding outcomes with little effort, when this does not represent the reality in most cases.

First of all, I'd like to clarify that I do not subscribe to the saying "talent beats talent" as it over-glorifies and smells to me like over-optimism. In my opinion, "hard works beats talent when talent doesn't work hard" is a more accurate characterization of reality.

However, when it comes to language learning, hundreds, even thousands of hours of immersion is unavoidable in order to become fluent. It is unlikely to solely rely on talent to master a language in a speedy manner. Look at anyone who has learned a language to decent fluency. I can guarantee you all of them have put into enormous numbers of hours to get to where they are.

I'd like to use an analogy to illustrate my point. When it comes to learning math, there is no denying that talent does play a role. To become a top mathematician, both talent AND hard work are required. However, one does not need to have extraordinary talent to get good marks in elementary school math. Most people can achieve that with enough effort.

The level of mastery most people describe as a "language genius", in my opinion, is within the reach of most "average people" with enough effort. Does talent help you get there sooner? Yes. But for most people, the bottleneck isn't the lack of talent, but often their lack of knowledge of an efficient learning method, or just not enough commitment.

Statistically speaking, if we define the top 1% gifted population as geniuses, they obviously actually exist by definition. However, my personal guess is that most of those one percenters do not capitalize on their gift and end up being the top 1% fluent speakers of foreign languages.

What befit being called a genius, in my opinion, is those who can either achieve what "normies" can't with great effort, or those who can achieve mastery at a rate unimaginable by someone with average giftedness. In most of the cases where the term "language genius" is used, those conditions aren't met.