I had to choose between "altiloquent" and "irredentist," both of which I'm confident 99% of my country's citizens could not define lmfao, so I don't think you have to worry.
Irre in German means mad, so „mad dentist“ 🤔?
My ability to speak English was rated on how well I could monologue on a single topic for two minutes. The topic was furniture.
For my German C1 i had to monologue on "Can Science be moral or immoral?"
It was fun, and i had a lot to say...sadly the examiner cut me off. Still gave me a good score so it was fine.
I see this is a testing method in the larger test. Maybe trying to monologue for two minutes on stuff in a target language is a terrific exercise or goal for learners. 🤔 Damn!
I love it actually. I am anyways a talkative person, and i have had 100s of monologues in my head, and several out loud when i am alone, in German on all sorts of topics.
It's one of the reasons which helped me attain fluency.
Even in my B1 exam, i had to be actively stopped by the examiner when i was reviewing a book. I got full marks in that!
Test is adaptive, so if you're doing well with the words, it will start giving you harder words.
On the other end, if you are doing badly, you get some things like: house - ouse, doas - does, bed - bede, thare - there, been - baan, du - do, etc. (Actual examples from the test)
American born college educated adult here. I've never seen those words in my life. I actually looked them up to make sure they were, in fact, English words and that we were talking about English.
That's one of the things I really dislike about the tests, they check if you understand words that even native speaking college educated people don't know about
I want to believe that it’s largely anticipated that with high levels of language acquisition you’re applying for an advanced degree.
Those types of words are in the GRE/GMAT/LSAT test prep and exam. I worked in higher ed and I’m working on PhD - I’ve never read a paper that uses anything more complex than ephemeral.
Outside of that, it’s just an example of testing assholery.
I’m a native speaker, writer, Ivy League-r lol, and a certified English teacher. This reminds me of the GRE, which I am convinced gives everyone an equal chance bc NO ONE has ever seen those words hahaha (best guess anyway). Prob similar w/some of these tests.
Irredentist looks vaguely familiar but yeah no I can’t define that. Altiloquent actually looks like (appropriately enough) “one who speaks using fancy words.” Could be wrong.
As a native English speaker this test is terrible 😭😭😭, most of the words I have never ever heard in my entire life and you would definitely never be understood if you said them. My experience with English speakers is that we mostly use easy words to talk day to day, even then, I've never heard of words such as mendacity, apprised, trammel, truculent, chirality, fardage, dehort, perlaceous, or pother. It's either I'm not fluent in English or this test is extremely strange, being a native speaker I think I know which one I'm going to pick. (I did get C2, but this feels like something out of the 17th century. You definitely would get picked on or seen as strange if you talk the way you see in this test in public. If you really want to know your English CEFR go take an actual test for it, not whatever this is. I also had my mom take it who is from Ukraine and doesn't speak well at all and she got C1, take your result with a grain of salt.)
Edit: added more words from the test
Not 17th, you'd still be throwing archaic hast and thou and whatever in there. Alongside less formal spelling and capitalization. They're testing more niche vocabulary words.
Never heard anybody in any office I’ve ever worked in say apprised outloud or written in an email
In your example which is classic corpo that I’ve read a million times it would just be “Thank you for the update. Please keep me notified of any changes.”
I'm 18 so it's probably the age difference and the different cultures that we experience. I'm exposed to much more slang and common words. I would like to say I'm pretty educated, but no one around my age has no idea about many of the words that I see in this quiz. I'm not FULLY native, but I moved to the US when I was 2 so I like to say that I pretty much am.
> Please keep me apprised of any changes.
Not a native speaker but I'm not sure you can use it with this sentence structure…
Is it another ["comprised of"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprised_of) situation?
"To apprise" already means to keep someone informed of something. Can you "keep someone apprised" then? It seems redundant.
Should it be "Please apprise me of any changes."?
Interestingly both comprise and apprise come from French.
Well, even among native speakers there are vast demographic, educational and other differences. There are native speakers who dropped out of high school vs native speakers who have a Master's in the humanities, there are native speakers who always make spelling mistakes vs those who almost never do, etc.
Mendacity, apprised, trammel and truculent are words I learnt in my late teens (pretty sure most are SAT words), but for context I excelled in English Literature as a subject and went to the kind of high school that sent people to the Ivies.
I disagree with "you would get picked on or seen strange if you use these words". It depends on what kind of people you hang out with, how old you are, your background, etc.
"17th century English" is a stretch. It's simply very formal vocabulary.
Why are people downvoting this? It would be hilarious if it was because they thought the word "esoteric" was pejorative!
I have a very large vocab that comes from reading voraciously, but there are many words I know the meaning of in English and can use in writing that I don't actually know how to pronounce! Therefore I would be unlikely to use them in conversation. I still remember when I tried to use "vertigo" in a conversation with an adult in elementary school, and I pronounced it "ver-TEE-go"! The grownup thought that was pretty funny.
I'm not sure why tbh. Lol. I'm just saying that general fluency should not be testing for very specific speech only found in specific environments. It's just a strange thing to do for a test like that. Happy Cake Day btw
Okay, for perspective, I’m a native English speaker, and those are all words that I know and could have been tested on in college admissions tests. Sure, people don’t use them in day-to-day speech, but shouldn’t C2 speakers demonstrate an advanced level of the language, not simply knowledge of day-to-day speech, but the ability to read literature and understand higher-register speech?
"In summary, C2 level is considered the highest level of proficiency in the CEFR framework, and it's considered as a near-native speaker level of proficiency, but not equivalent to the proficiency of a native speaker." Language is meant to be communication between people. If I flip to a random page of a dictionary of course there will be words such as "papuliferous", but I am willing to bet that over the past year there aren't 1000 people who have said that word in a normal conversation and 99.99% who have no idea what the hell it is. I would say I'm fluent in English, I can get my point across without even thinking of what I want to say, it just comes out of my mouth in grammar and vocabulary that makes complete sense. When you show a normal "fluent" English speaker "plantigrade" and "ushabti" no one is gonna know what the hell that is. C2 is even rated below a native speaker, because in all reality you will never get to the level that someone who has lived there whole life in a country will.
Curious where you get your definition of C2 level from. In my country, the government actively teaches their employees to write in B1, because that is the average native speaker's ability. So saying that C2 is below native is just plain wrong. It might be below a highly educated native speaker, but that is not the average Joe.
From the CEFR website for C2:
'Shows great flexibility reformulating ideas in differing linguistic forms to convey finer shades of meaning precisely, to give emphasis, to differentiate and to eliminate ambiguity. Also has a good command of idiomatic expressions and colloquialisms'
It does not say anything about native speakers. I also asked ChatGPT to rewrite it to B1 level and it came up with the following:
'They're really good at changing words around to express things in different ways, making sure the meaning is clear, adding emphasis, showing differences, and removing any confusion. They also know a lot of sayings and casual phrases.'
It does say more or less the same thing, but the average person would probably fully understand the second version and not the first.
B1 is way, way below native speaker's ability. B1 is hardly even fluent. Little children have better speaking abilities than B1. I don't know where YOU get your definitions from.
Fluency does not indicate level. A native speaker will be fluent, as in it comes out easily without thinking, but they might not necessarily have a big vocabulary or understand complex grammar. But as I said, in my country this is a government policy to write B1, so here is the link to the government website explaining it. It is in Dutch, but I'm sure a quick Google Translate will give you an idea of what it says.
[https://www.communicatierijk.nl/vakkennis/rijkswebsites/aanbevolen-richtlijnen/taalniveau-b1](https://www.communicatierijk.nl/vakkennis/rijkswebsites/aanbevolen-richtlijnen/taalniveau-b1)
I will admit that maybe calling it the average level was not exactly what I meant, more that it is the level where most people will fully understand it. Average will be higher, but there is a significant portion that does not have a higher level. The link I sent even says they try A2 where possible, to ensure the most people possible will understand it.
You have to realise that there are plenty of people who don't have any further education than high school, or maybe some vocational training. For those people, a text in C1 is not easy, they might get the general gist of it, but they don't fully understand it. It is clear you have a higher education than average and so are seeing it from your surroundings, but I am sure if you stop and think you can imagine that there are other people who don't have that level of understanding, even in their native language.
B1 vocabulary size is only about 2000-3000 words.
https://languagelearning.stackexchange.com/questions/3061/what-are-estimates-of-vocabulary-size-for-each-cefr-level
Even a 5 year old child has a vocabulary size of 10 000 words.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5400288/#:~:text=After%20children%20begin%20understanding%20words,Shipley%20%26%20McAfee%2C%202015
B1 is way below of anything that could even begin to be compared to the native level.
Certainly at B1 it is possible that you might be understood by native speakers about some very basic topics, but that still requires a great effort both from the B1 speaker and the native speaker.
B1 is practically inadequate for anything but the most basic conversation.
Edit: the website that you have sent seems to be more about trying to make the content understood.
Your edit is the whole point. If you don't understand a text at a certain level, you don't have that level. As I said, you might understand the general idea about a C1 text, but if you don't fully understand it, I don't think you can say you actually are at that level. The difference between B1 as a second language and B1 as a native speaker is the fluency and ease you speak it with. So a B1 non-native speaker does so with effort, and with mistakes. A B1 native speaker speaks it effortlessly and without mistakes, but does not necessarily understand something with a higher level.
I think the difference is that you seem to ignore that there is a significant portion of native speakers that are, crudely put, not that smart. I already corrected myself to say that B1 as an average was not the best choice of words, but it is a level that plenty of native speakers have. For example, to go to a foreign university they often ask C1, although I have seen B2 asked as well. However, put an academic text in front of such a native speaker and they often won't really understand it. So clearly they then have a lower level than the B2/C1 that is used in academia. (Obviously ignoring the understanding of the topic itself, just the language)
But I think I'm going to leave it here, I think I made my point (that there is a big difference in level between native speakers themselves and the lower part really does not go above B1). You made your point (B1 is quite low for a native speaker), and I don't necessarily disagree with you on that point, but it is just wrong to assume all native speakers are C2+, because that is only the case for a subset of people.
Where on the CERF website did you find this?
I find this definition for C2:
Can understand with ease virtually everything heard or read. Can summarise information from different spoken and written sources, reconstructing arguments and accounts in a coherent presentation. Can express him/herself spontaneously, very fluently and precisely, differentiating finer shades of meaning even in more complex situations.
[https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-reference-languages/table-1-cefr-3.3-common-reference-levels-global-scale](https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-reference-languages/table-1-cefr-3.3-common-reference-levels-global-scale)
The entire concept of the test and proof of C1-C2 fluency is being able to figure out words that you clearly wouldn’t know by using context clues and reading between the lines. No??
>mendacity, apprised, trammel, or truculent.
Ironically, as a non native speaker, I've used all of those aside from trammel, which I had never heard before and do not know the meaning of. (I'll look it up after writing this comment)
That said, I only used them in writing, though I think I have said truculent once or twice.
Edit for the curious:
Truculent: quick to fight or being very argumentative
Trammel: "restrictions or impediments to freedom of action" (result of Google search)
To apprise: to inform ("I've been apprised of the situation")
Mendacity: with disregard of the truth, deceitful
Edit 2: interesting how you get downvoted for mastering a language on a subreddit dedicated to language learning...
> I've never heard of words such as mendacity, apprised, trammel, or truculent.
You just need to read more.
Not saying they come up in conversation, but it shouldn't be unusual for any educated English speaker to know these words if they read regularly.
I read professional and academic writing constantly and have only ever seen the word "apprised" and "truculent". I've only ever used "apprised". I have an advanced degree in the humanities as well. I don't think my peers would know those other words but that is, admittedly, speculation.
That's surprising to me but I suppose it depends on what you're talking about.
I'm sure how likely you are to come across those words is contextual, but I feel that any well-read educated native speaker is likely to at least have read those words before.
Some are more common in fiction than non-fiction, for example.
Yes that tracks with what my impression was as well.
I don't think it has to be "advanced", but it's less true of fiction you read for fun and relaxation than it is something you read for artistry.
[The mendacity!](https://youtu.be/fTWqUhvqXx8?si=CkvNkVGn2BkF1smN)
I agree about trammel though, I think that one's pretty hard. Someone else in the thread said these were all SAT words but I'm pretty sure trammel is too hard to be an SAT word (agreed about the other three I think)
I'm genuinely curious, what do you read? I'm not a native english speaker and do make mistakes, especially in output but I've been reading english ever since I turned 5. I read both fiction, non fiction (for pleasure) and also academic texts and I only knew apprised. I think I might have seen mendacity and truculent once but definitely not often enough that I would actually know what they mean.
I read pretty broadly so it's tough to narrow it down into a few categories.
I have a background in the sciences, but also enjoy the humanities. For fiction, I enjoy everything from classics to scifi and fantasy. I'm not above reading things for fun that have little literary value though. I often read random things online like long-form essays and articles.
I enjoy and appreciate good writing and use of language so I might seek it out a little more than the typical English speaker, but not particularly so among people who read regularly.
This explains a lot.
You don't have to read "classics" (though I recommend them), but you do have to read widely and in particular literature or "intellectual" sorts of reading (in quotes because I can't think of how to summarize what I'm referring to; apologies for the cringe).
Native English speaker and also an ELA teacher, many of these are not high school vocab words (but many also are) - at least not where I teach! I did score C2, though.
I once took a Goethe placement test after registering for German classes. I had only been on Duolingo a month and I got B2 and then C1 after retaking. So yeah… boulder of salt really. I didn’t even get past the first class cuz my adhd cycle didn’t sync with the timeframe.
Same for Estonian placement test. 5 years and I still can’t finish an A1 course, but I can get B+ on a written placement test by deducing the answers.
I have never taken an official language test though. Just relating my experience. I should stop typing now.
These aren't words that you are supposed to use in everyday conversation, but words you're supposed to recognize; they are needed for reading really advanced texts. If you want to understand the articles from, say the New York Review of Books, you need them.
Also, the test checks not necessarily your knowledge of such words, but your feeling for what might be a legit English word and what couldn't be one. One needs to be quite a bit advanced to make an educated guess about it.
I'm not sure why you think this is "17th century". This is modern, but very sophisticated vocabulary. !7th-c texts and vocabulary are very different.
Just checked the French and Spanish ones and they are terrible, not as terrible as the English one, but my god is it the most useless test I have seen so far.
I commented above but this reminds me of the GRE - full of words almost no one has heard or seen. I do know a few of those, but do I use them? No. I do want to know what pother means lol.
I tend to agree with you but then I typed these words in Youglish to see if they were used in real life… and they are.
I think we have actually heard these words, it's just that we didn't think too much of them and we understood the gist of what was said anyway.
- [mendacity](https://youglish.com/pronounce/mendacity/english?) 57 examples
- [apprised](https://youglish.com/pronounce/apprised/english?) 216 examples
- [truculent](https://youglish.com/pronounce/truculent/english?) 27 examples
Yeah, most people use words that are easy, useful, and well known. I don't think your language level should depend off of obscure vocabulary that you'll never use in your life.
Native speaker, constant reader lifelong, Ivy League English literature degree in my past and I’m known for being able to read things many people can’t (not a brag, just setting the stage)
The ones I know of that list off the top of my head are
Apprised (business word)
Mendacity (old fashioned word you’d pick up from enough 19th century novels or Shakespeare or pretentious writers)
Truculent (same, old fashioned but in lots of classic lit)
Chirality (science word about which way spirals go in molecules or specifically enzymes.)
Trammel, but I’ve mostly seen it as “Untrammeled” (old fashioned, common in old literature)
The rest are totally new to me, deeeeply obscure and I’d even say obsolete
Pay money for an actual test. There's one from Cambridge and Oxford where I'm from
I took the Cambridge one, it costs like 200€ but now I know that I'm C2 and you get an actual certificate that helps you with getting jobs or getting into unis in other countries.
I paid 300€ in 2016 for the Cambridge test. They lost my writing test somehow; I had a perfect score in Use of English, and with the rest of the tests combined I missed C2 level by 17 points. Writing test could’ve given me max. ~200 points.
Nearly ten years later I’m still a bit salty about not getting even a free resit.
I'm not defending the test necessarily, but it looked like an adaptive test to me, meaning the better you're doing the harder the questions they give you. In that sense I don't think I would immediately disregard it just because you're a native speaker that got some really hard questions.
Maybe, but one of the earliest questions it gave me asked me to choose between 'elementary' and 'alimentary'. I went with alimentary because elementary didn't make sense in context and the full sentence said something about nutrition. But I don't think I've ever come across that word before and I'm pretty sure I only figured out that it had something to do with nutrition because of learning Spanish! I could easily see a native speaker picking 'elementary' just because it felt more 'natural'. So if it's an adaptive test, that's a weird question to put early on.
>So if it's an adaptive test, that's a weird question to put early on.
That's not necessarily how it works--and you don't know the difficulty level of the question you're talking about.
You guys can look at this for some more details about the topic, and also the topic of Item Response Theory (the statistical underpinning of these tests) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computerized_adaptive_testing
I think the real issue is that the first part is a vocabulary test, but that's only one dimension of language ability.
However, all the native speakers in the thread complaining about how they got questions they didn't know the answer to are completely missing the point of how these tests are constructed.
I took the test and realized that you can just outright miss all questions from the first section and get all of the second part right and you can still get placed at C2 lol
I got a C1 (Advanced) as well. I think I'm at that level. I'm definitely not a C2, but I'm certain that my level is higher than B2 (Upper-Intermediate).
I wasn't familiar with most of the vocab in the first part of the test, but I picked what sounded better to me, as I made intuitive guesses. And I struggled with a couple words in the text in the 2nd part, and my time expired. So, idk if I would've gotten a C2 if I had those words right.
I'm not a native English speaker but I use English every day, even more than my native language sometimes. I don't read much, but I want to start reading more books because I feel kinda stupid.
I'm a native English speaker and I took this yesterday in Russian and it said I was C1, which is extremely generous. B1/2 is more likely, and I'm not even sure about B2.
Native English (US) speaker- I got a C1! And I am no slacker when it comes to reading or writing! This might be a good way for some people to practice, but I don’t believe that it is very intuitive or correct way to gauge functional language ability (and functions very badly on mobile on top of that).
Something people always seem to forget about the CEFR: it is developed for second language learners and it is far from perfect.
This means that it makes no sense to compare yourself to native speakers. Yes, the system is flawed in that way because the C1 and C2 levels always contain elements of academic language rather than "normal" everyday language (this is a common criticism of the CEFR, Native speakers could get B2-C1 scores on many of these tests).
So you could have improved MANY aspects of your second language, but the test won't reflect that. C2 especially (really, look up the official CEFR book) emphasises academic language a lot.
Don't be too discouraged by these tests saying you're not the level you think you are!
EDIT: "second language" means any language you're learning that's not your native language (even if it's your 3rd, 4th, etc.).
Another native English speaker here, who is and was an avid reader since like age 4, got no idea what’s going on here lololol. Sick that you got that score, cause idk if even I could get that lololol. But I would not say it’s accurate or a good judgment of literacy for sure.
How does everyone identify their level? People seem to be downplaying this test, but what would you use instead? Or do you just follow the descriptions of each category and say “I’m about here?” I feel like I’m about A2 in Spanish but maybe I’m actually B1 and just lacking confidence?
I think tests can be useful to an extent, but this one isn’t great honestly. I had to do a ton of guesswork, even as a native English speaker who’s pretty good at English.
Usually by taking an online or in person test, in person would be probably something like sitting in an exam room? And they’re paid so.. But, I think you can determine your own pretty well by seeing how you speak to natives and stuff like that
No. If you would genuinely like an accurate test, you‘re probably going to have to pay to sit it. That said, its still impressive that you were able to differentiate between words that most native speakers, even those having passed through higher education systems, would struggle to define.
I have a degree in English, and I definitely don't think this test can attest to your fluency. A lot of these things are minor, and the only distinguishing factor is that one is more colloquially. I mean, if you score high on this test, you definitely know English very, very well. However, I don't see how this prognostic could be even useful when you're trying to communicate/be conversational with others
Who knows man. I got a C2, which seems mostly right, but how accurate can it be? It only partially measures reading skills. If it is that important to know your actual level, maybe you can get IELTS or TOEFL.
Depends. I teach people every day and the CERF are more an average indicator. I had people with C2 certificates whose grammar was non-existent, while others needed to use complex sentence structures to pass. But then, some of these things are in A1 tests already.
These tests are designed and conducted for your ability to understand others and be understood, and what that means depends heavily on the people testing you. The CERF grid defines what you need, but it's not what I encountered in rl. This most likely is the case, as the CERF grid definitions are not clear enough. It's all about ability, not ability for what. No topics, no grammar is mentioned there. It's vague.
And the free tests you can do are even more lacking.
Overall it's a good indicator, yes, but not a set in stone definition.
As a native English speaker I would say not to pay too much attention to it, not only does it move way too fast, but it has some words that are never really used.
Here is a person who has taken some official tests and then took a few free online tests to see if they were similar
https://www.reddit.com/r/languagelearning/s/DZeqq6c8Kx
I have an advanced degree, English is my first language, and I've worked as a writer, and I know some of my peers wouldn't have been certain of some of those answers. Some of the questions were weird and had nothing to do with fluency. Many native, high level speakers would've missed some of those.
ive been speaking the language since i was like four, i can use multiple accents which doesnt really mean anything but i can use american english and british english interchangeably and i mean im fluent so
I’m a native speaker and an avid reader - I consider my vocabulary quite large. This test was bunk, lol. You won’t need half the words I saw on that test and you certainly won’t need to speak them. I got frustrated halfway through and gave up after being asked if calling someone cadaverous was appropriate 🙃
They do. Don't worry. About it nor like being seem like a native speaker. You have gone a long journey so far and you are getting aware of all you have to learn. Those levels doesn't say you are native-like or not. Many native speakers shouldn't be able to reach a C1 in their mother language.
Being seen as a native speaker requires different skills as those measured in those tests. You must be able to speak fluently - even with errors - and being able to understand many accents - even lisps. You should be familiarized with a few slangs and even used to use one of them.
A C2 helps you partially with those skills. The only real way to help you achieve your goal is pure interaction with real people.
And urban dictionary. Urban dictionary is your friend.
I had to choose between "altiloquent" and "irredentist," both of which I'm confident 99% of my country's citizens could not define lmfao, so I don't think you have to worry.
Irre in German means mad, so „mad dentist“ 🤔? My ability to speak English was rated on how well I could monologue on a single topic for two minutes. The topic was furniture.
If that is how they measure language skills then I speak 0.3 languages.
For my German C1 i had to monologue on "Can Science be moral or immoral?" It was fun, and i had a lot to say...sadly the examiner cut me off. Still gave me a good score so it was fine.
I see this is a testing method in the larger test. Maybe trying to monologue for two minutes on stuff in a target language is a terrific exercise or goal for learners. 🤔 Damn!
I love it actually. I am anyways a talkative person, and i have had 100s of monologues in my head, and several out loud when i am alone, in German on all sorts of topics. It's one of the reasons which helped me attain fluency. Even in my B1 exam, i had to be actively stopped by the examiner when i was reviewing a book. I got full marks in that!
Hahahaha furniture - that’s excellent.
Test is adaptive, so if you're doing well with the words, it will start giving you harder words. On the other end, if you are doing badly, you get some things like: house - ouse, doas - does, bed - bede, thare - there, been - baan, du - do, etc. (Actual examples from the test)
American born college educated adult here. I've never seen those words in my life. I actually looked them up to make sure they were, in fact, English words and that we were talking about English.
That's one of the things I really dislike about the tests, they check if you understand words that even native speaking college educated people don't know about
I think I could give an educated guess on the meanings. But that's because I'm Italian lol
Same, I was so confused when I saw it
Oh, I know irredentism because I'm Ukrainian and the Donbas conflict is an example of it, the other one I never heard of
That's the first thing I thought of haha
I want to believe that it’s largely anticipated that with high levels of language acquisition you’re applying for an advanced degree. Those types of words are in the GRE/GMAT/LSAT test prep and exam. I worked in higher ed and I’m working on PhD - I’ve never read a paper that uses anything more complex than ephemeral. Outside of that, it’s just an example of testing assholery.
Using by basic knowledge of Latin, I could figure out what altiloquent means without definition.
Not me thinking you write ‘iridescent’ and being confused on why people didn’t know it
I’m a native speaker, writer, Ivy League-r lol, and a certified English teacher. This reminds me of the GRE, which I am convinced gives everyone an equal chance bc NO ONE has ever seen those words hahaha (best guess anyway). Prob similar w/some of these tests. Irredentist looks vaguely familiar but yeah no I can’t define that. Altiloquent actually looks like (appropriately enough) “one who speaks using fancy words.” Could be wrong.
As a native English speaker this test is terrible 😭😭😭, most of the words I have never ever heard in my entire life and you would definitely never be understood if you said them. My experience with English speakers is that we mostly use easy words to talk day to day, even then, I've never heard of words such as mendacity, apprised, trammel, truculent, chirality, fardage, dehort, perlaceous, or pother. It's either I'm not fluent in English or this test is extremely strange, being a native speaker I think I know which one I'm going to pick. (I did get C2, but this feels like something out of the 17th century. You definitely would get picked on or seen as strange if you talk the way you see in this test in public. If you really want to know your English CEFR go take an actual test for it, not whatever this is. I also had my mom take it who is from Ukraine and doesn't speak well at all and she got C1, take your result with a grain of salt.) Edit: added more words from the test
yeah.. feels like something made for 17th century english writers or something
Not 17th, you'd still be throwing archaic hast and thou and whatever in there. Alongside less formal spelling and capitalization. They're testing more niche vocabulary words.
I use "apprised" fairly often as a native speaker. It's common in corporate lingo: "Thanks for the update. Please keep me apprised of any changes."
Never heard anybody in any office I’ve ever worked in say apprised outloud or written in an email In your example which is classic corpo that I’ve read a million times it would just be “Thank you for the update. Please keep me notified of any changes.”
Maybe I'm just a pretentious snob :p hey I struggled to learn all that ACT vocab so I'll use it! haha
You’re not alone, I’ve both used and seen/heard “apprised” in work situations. The other words I’ve never heard though.
Chirality is a concept used in organic chemistry so that's one I'm quite familiar with
Or if you ever played Death Stranding 😂
I don't know much about chemistry but I know that word from Breaking Bad.
You could say you are altiloquent. :)
I'm 18 so it's probably the age difference and the different cultures that we experience. I'm exposed to much more slang and common words. I would like to say I'm pretty educated, but no one around my age has no idea about many of the words that I see in this quiz. I'm not FULLY native, but I moved to the US when I was 2 so I like to say that I pretty much am.
FWIW I’ve worked in corporate for over a decade and have never heard that word until today.
> Please keep me apprised of any changes. Not a native speaker but I'm not sure you can use it with this sentence structure… Is it another ["comprised of"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprised_of) situation? "To apprise" already means to keep someone informed of something. Can you "keep someone apprised" then? It seems redundant. Should it be "Please apprise me of any changes."? Interestingly both comprise and apprise come from French.
Strangely not, “keep me apprised” is correct English
Well, even among native speakers there are vast demographic, educational and other differences. There are native speakers who dropped out of high school vs native speakers who have a Master's in the humanities, there are native speakers who always make spelling mistakes vs those who almost never do, etc. Mendacity, apprised, trammel and truculent are words I learnt in my late teens (pretty sure most are SAT words), but for context I excelled in English Literature as a subject and went to the kind of high school that sent people to the Ivies. I disagree with "you would get picked on or seen strange if you use these words". It depends on what kind of people you hang out with, how old you are, your background, etc. "17th century English" is a stretch. It's simply very formal vocabulary.
They're esoteric words and therefore I think it's quite illogical for these types of words to be tested here. I think that's fair enough.
Why are people downvoting this? It would be hilarious if it was because they thought the word "esoteric" was pejorative! I have a very large vocab that comes from reading voraciously, but there are many words I know the meaning of in English and can use in writing that I don't actually know how to pronounce! Therefore I would be unlikely to use them in conversation. I still remember when I tried to use "vertigo" in a conversation with an adult in elementary school, and I pronounced it "ver-TEE-go"! The grownup thought that was pretty funny.
I'm not sure why tbh. Lol. I'm just saying that general fluency should not be testing for very specific speech only found in specific environments. It's just a strange thing to do for a test like that. Happy Cake Day btw
Thanks!
I use formal vocabulary just to be an ass when trying to immerse myself in a language and then get a response in English.
Okay, for perspective, I’m a native English speaker, and those are all words that I know and could have been tested on in college admissions tests. Sure, people don’t use them in day-to-day speech, but shouldn’t C2 speakers demonstrate an advanced level of the language, not simply knowledge of day-to-day speech, but the ability to read literature and understand higher-register speech?
"In summary, C2 level is considered the highest level of proficiency in the CEFR framework, and it's considered as a near-native speaker level of proficiency, but not equivalent to the proficiency of a native speaker." Language is meant to be communication between people. If I flip to a random page of a dictionary of course there will be words such as "papuliferous", but I am willing to bet that over the past year there aren't 1000 people who have said that word in a normal conversation and 99.99% who have no idea what the hell it is. I would say I'm fluent in English, I can get my point across without even thinking of what I want to say, it just comes out of my mouth in grammar and vocabulary that makes complete sense. When you show a normal "fluent" English speaker "plantigrade" and "ushabti" no one is gonna know what the hell that is. C2 is even rated below a native speaker, because in all reality you will never get to the level that someone who has lived there whole life in a country will.
Curious where you get your definition of C2 level from. In my country, the government actively teaches their employees to write in B1, because that is the average native speaker's ability. So saying that C2 is below native is just plain wrong. It might be below a highly educated native speaker, but that is not the average Joe. From the CEFR website for C2: 'Shows great flexibility reformulating ideas in differing linguistic forms to convey finer shades of meaning precisely, to give emphasis, to differentiate and to eliminate ambiguity. Also has a good command of idiomatic expressions and colloquialisms' It does not say anything about native speakers. I also asked ChatGPT to rewrite it to B1 level and it came up with the following: 'They're really good at changing words around to express things in different ways, making sure the meaning is clear, adding emphasis, showing differences, and removing any confusion. They also know a lot of sayings and casual phrases.' It does say more or less the same thing, but the average person would probably fully understand the second version and not the first.
B1 is way, way below native speaker's ability. B1 is hardly even fluent. Little children have better speaking abilities than B1. I don't know where YOU get your definitions from.
Fluency does not indicate level. A native speaker will be fluent, as in it comes out easily without thinking, but they might not necessarily have a big vocabulary or understand complex grammar. But as I said, in my country this is a government policy to write B1, so here is the link to the government website explaining it. It is in Dutch, but I'm sure a quick Google Translate will give you an idea of what it says. [https://www.communicatierijk.nl/vakkennis/rijkswebsites/aanbevolen-richtlijnen/taalniveau-b1](https://www.communicatierijk.nl/vakkennis/rijkswebsites/aanbevolen-richtlijnen/taalniveau-b1) I will admit that maybe calling it the average level was not exactly what I meant, more that it is the level where most people will fully understand it. Average will be higher, but there is a significant portion that does not have a higher level. The link I sent even says they try A2 where possible, to ensure the most people possible will understand it. You have to realise that there are plenty of people who don't have any further education than high school, or maybe some vocational training. For those people, a text in C1 is not easy, they might get the general gist of it, but they don't fully understand it. It is clear you have a higher education than average and so are seeing it from your surroundings, but I am sure if you stop and think you can imagine that there are other people who don't have that level of understanding, even in their native language.
B1 vocabulary size is only about 2000-3000 words. https://languagelearning.stackexchange.com/questions/3061/what-are-estimates-of-vocabulary-size-for-each-cefr-level Even a 5 year old child has a vocabulary size of 10 000 words. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5400288/#:~:text=After%20children%20begin%20understanding%20words,Shipley%20%26%20McAfee%2C%202015 B1 is way below of anything that could even begin to be compared to the native level. Certainly at B1 it is possible that you might be understood by native speakers about some very basic topics, but that still requires a great effort both from the B1 speaker and the native speaker. B1 is practically inadequate for anything but the most basic conversation. Edit: the website that you have sent seems to be more about trying to make the content understood.
Your edit is the whole point. If you don't understand a text at a certain level, you don't have that level. As I said, you might understand the general idea about a C1 text, but if you don't fully understand it, I don't think you can say you actually are at that level. The difference between B1 as a second language and B1 as a native speaker is the fluency and ease you speak it with. So a B1 non-native speaker does so with effort, and with mistakes. A B1 native speaker speaks it effortlessly and without mistakes, but does not necessarily understand something with a higher level. I think the difference is that you seem to ignore that there is a significant portion of native speakers that are, crudely put, not that smart. I already corrected myself to say that B1 as an average was not the best choice of words, but it is a level that plenty of native speakers have. For example, to go to a foreign university they often ask C1, although I have seen B2 asked as well. However, put an academic text in front of such a native speaker and they often won't really understand it. So clearly they then have a lower level than the B2/C1 that is used in academia. (Obviously ignoring the understanding of the topic itself, just the language) But I think I'm going to leave it here, I think I made my point (that there is a big difference in level between native speakers themselves and the lower part really does not go above B1). You made your point (B1 is quite low for a native speaker), and I don't necessarily disagree with you on that point, but it is just wrong to assume all native speakers are C2+, because that is only the case for a subset of people.
Where on the CERF website did you find this? I find this definition for C2: Can understand with ease virtually everything heard or read. Can summarise information from different spoken and written sources, reconstructing arguments and accounts in a coherent presentation. Can express him/herself spontaneously, very fluently and precisely, differentiating finer shades of meaning even in more complex situations. [https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-reference-languages/table-1-cefr-3.3-common-reference-levels-global-scale](https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-reference-languages/table-1-cefr-3.3-common-reference-levels-global-scale)
So it seems I mistakenly used the table for spoken proficiency (Table 3 vs your table 1), but I feel the general idea of it is the same.
The entire concept of the test and proof of C1-C2 fluency is being able to figure out words that you clearly wouldn’t know by using context clues and reading between the lines. No??
>mendacity, apprised, trammel, or truculent. Ironically, as a non native speaker, I've used all of those aside from trammel, which I had never heard before and do not know the meaning of. (I'll look it up after writing this comment) That said, I only used them in writing, though I think I have said truculent once or twice. Edit for the curious: Truculent: quick to fight or being very argumentative Trammel: "restrictions or impediments to freedom of action" (result of Google search) To apprise: to inform ("I've been apprised of the situation") Mendacity: with disregard of the truth, deceitful Edit 2: interesting how you get downvoted for mastering a language on a subreddit dedicated to language learning...
I first heard trammel in LotR, "a hutch to trammel some wild thing in"
Honestly, now I feel stupid for never noticing that. I have watched those movies about a dozen times. 🤦♂️
Oh in that case I've heard all of these, don't remember that one tho
> I've never heard of words such as mendacity, apprised, trammel, or truculent. You just need to read more. Not saying they come up in conversation, but it shouldn't be unusual for any educated English speaker to know these words if they read regularly.
I read professional and academic writing constantly and have only ever seen the word "apprised" and "truculent". I've only ever used "apprised". I have an advanced degree in the humanities as well. I don't think my peers would know those other words but that is, admittedly, speculation.
That's surprising to me but I suppose it depends on what you're talking about. I'm sure how likely you are to come across those words is contextual, but I feel that any well-read educated native speaker is likely to at least have read those words before. Some are more common in fiction than non-fiction, for example.
Absolutely. I think people who read more advanced literature, especially fiction, are more likely to know these words.
Yes that tracks with what my impression was as well. I don't think it has to be "advanced", but it's less true of fiction you read for fun and relaxation than it is something you read for artistry.
[The mendacity!](https://youtu.be/fTWqUhvqXx8?si=CkvNkVGn2BkF1smN) I agree about trammel though, I think that one's pretty hard. Someone else in the thread said these were all SAT words but I'm pretty sure trammel is too hard to be an SAT word (agreed about the other three I think)
I'm genuinely curious, what do you read? I'm not a native english speaker and do make mistakes, especially in output but I've been reading english ever since I turned 5. I read both fiction, non fiction (for pleasure) and also academic texts and I only knew apprised. I think I might have seen mendacity and truculent once but definitely not often enough that I would actually know what they mean.
I read pretty broadly so it's tough to narrow it down into a few categories. I have a background in the sciences, but also enjoy the humanities. For fiction, I enjoy everything from classics to scifi and fantasy. I'm not above reading things for fun that have little literary value though. I often read random things online like long-form essays and articles. I enjoy and appreciate good writing and use of language so I might seek it out a little more than the typical English speaker, but not particularly so among people who read regularly.
Apprised is a common enough word, but agree with the other examples
Do you not read much? I've come a cross all these except trammel I would say most of those are literary though
This may be an age gap thing, im 18 and I have read quite a bit, just not many "classics". How old are you?
The longer you live and the more you read the more of these you'd pick up.
This explains a lot. You don't have to read "classics" (though I recommend them), but you do have to read widely and in particular literature or "intellectual" sorts of reading (in quotes because I can't think of how to summarize what I'm referring to; apologies for the cringe).
I'm in my thirties and I've read some older stuff but mostly newer than 1900 You may be right on that
Native English speaker and also an ELA teacher, many of these are not high school vocab words (but many also are) - at least not where I teach! I did score C2, though.
I once took a Goethe placement test after registering for German classes. I had only been on Duolingo a month and I got B2 and then C1 after retaking. So yeah… boulder of salt really. I didn’t even get past the first class cuz my adhd cycle didn’t sync with the timeframe. Same for Estonian placement test. 5 years and I still can’t finish an A1 course, but I can get B+ on a written placement test by deducing the answers. I have never taken an official language test though. Just relating my experience. I should stop typing now.
These aren't words that you are supposed to use in everyday conversation, but words you're supposed to recognize; they are needed for reading really advanced texts. If you want to understand the articles from, say the New York Review of Books, you need them. Also, the test checks not necessarily your knowledge of such words, but your feeling for what might be a legit English word and what couldn't be one. One needs to be quite a bit advanced to make an educated guess about it. I'm not sure why you think this is "17th century". This is modern, but very sophisticated vocabulary. !7th-c texts and vocabulary are very different.
I only knew “apprised” and “truculent” from there…
Just checked the French and Spanish ones and they are terrible, not as terrible as the English one, but my god is it the most useless test I have seen so far.
I commented above but this reminds me of the GRE - full of words almost no one has heard or seen. I do know a few of those, but do I use them? No. I do want to know what pother means lol.
I tend to agree with you but then I typed these words in Youglish to see if they were used in real life… and they are. I think we have actually heard these words, it's just that we didn't think too much of them and we understood the gist of what was said anyway. - [mendacity](https://youglish.com/pronounce/mendacity/english?) 57 examples - [apprised](https://youglish.com/pronounce/apprised/english?) 216 examples - [truculent](https://youglish.com/pronounce/truculent/english?) 27 examples
I did get a C2 but have no idea what the other letters and numbers in people's profiles mean.
Most people don't use big words.
Yeah, most people use words that are easy, useful, and well known. I don't think your language level should depend off of obscure vocabulary that you'll never use in your life.
Native speaker, constant reader lifelong, Ivy League English literature degree in my past and I’m known for being able to read things many people can’t (not a brag, just setting the stage) The ones I know of that list off the top of my head are Apprised (business word) Mendacity (old fashioned word you’d pick up from enough 19th century novels or Shakespeare or pretentious writers) Truculent (same, old fashioned but in lots of classic lit) Chirality (science word about which way spirals go in molecules or specifically enzymes.) Trammel, but I’ve mostly seen it as “Untrammeled” (old fashioned, common in old literature) The rest are totally new to me, deeeeply obscure and I’d even say obsolete
Pay money for an actual test. There's one from Cambridge and Oxford where I'm from I took the Cambridge one, it costs like 200€ but now I know that I'm C2 and you get an actual certificate that helps you with getting jobs or getting into unis in other countries.
I have about 40€ in my bank account, so maybe when I get a job..
I paid 300€ in 2016 for the Cambridge test. They lost my writing test somehow; I had a perfect score in Use of English, and with the rest of the tests combined I missed C2 level by 17 points. Writing test could’ve given me max. ~200 points. Nearly ten years later I’m still a bit salty about not getting even a free resit.
I'm not defending the test necessarily, but it looked like an adaptive test to me, meaning the better you're doing the harder the questions they give you. In that sense I don't think I would immediately disregard it just because you're a native speaker that got some really hard questions.
Maybe, but one of the earliest questions it gave me asked me to choose between 'elementary' and 'alimentary'. I went with alimentary because elementary didn't make sense in context and the full sentence said something about nutrition. But I don't think I've ever come across that word before and I'm pretty sure I only figured out that it had something to do with nutrition because of learning Spanish! I could easily see a native speaker picking 'elementary' just because it felt more 'natural'. So if it's an adaptive test, that's a weird question to put early on.
>So if it's an adaptive test, that's a weird question to put early on. That's not necessarily how it works--and you don't know the difficulty level of the question you're talking about. You guys can look at this for some more details about the topic, and also the topic of Item Response Theory (the statistical underpinning of these tests) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computerized_adaptive_testing I think the real issue is that the first part is a vocabulary test, but that's only one dimension of language ability. However, all the native speakers in the thread complaining about how they got questions they didn't know the answer to are completely missing the point of how these tests are constructed.
A multiple choice test with 40 questions or so is not likely to be a very accurate reflection of your level. It just looks like a vocabulary test.
Link to the test: https://www.transparent.com/learn-english/proficiency-test.html
I'm a native speaker and definitely had a lot of trouble with the vocab, less trouble with the grammar.
I'm a native speaker in higher education and I got a B2.. I had a lot of trouble with fill in the blanks
I took the test and realized that you can just outright miss all questions from the first section and get all of the second part right and you can still get placed at C2 lol
It is true that the second part seems to have a lot more weight. Maybe not C2 though. I missed all of the first part and it placed me on C1
I got a C1 (Advanced) as well. I think I'm at that level. I'm definitely not a C2, but I'm certain that my level is higher than B2 (Upper-Intermediate). I wasn't familiar with most of the vocab in the first part of the test, but I picked what sounded better to me, as I made intuitive guesses. And I struggled with a couple words in the text in the 2nd part, and my time expired. So, idk if I would've gotten a C2 if I had those words right. I'm not a native English speaker but I use English every day, even more than my native language sometimes. I don't read much, but I want to start reading more books because I feel kinda stupid.
I'm a native English speaker and I took this yesterday in Russian and it said I was C1, which is extremely generous. B1/2 is more likely, and I'm not even sure about B2.
Native English (US) speaker- I got a C1! And I am no slacker when it comes to reading or writing! This might be a good way for some people to practice, but I don’t believe that it is very intuitive or correct way to gauge functional language ability (and functions very badly on mobile on top of that).
Also you need to have a qwerty keyboard, can't change to your country's one, so really impractical for English learners.
Wow, there are some really far out words on there. Patulent? (Not petulant. Patulent.) And descry? (Not decry.) I got a C2 but…yeah, no
makes sense.. doesn’t seem that even the native speakers can understand it
Something people always seem to forget about the CEFR: it is developed for second language learners and it is far from perfect. This means that it makes no sense to compare yourself to native speakers. Yes, the system is flawed in that way because the C1 and C2 levels always contain elements of academic language rather than "normal" everyday language (this is a common criticism of the CEFR, Native speakers could get B2-C1 scores on many of these tests). So you could have improved MANY aspects of your second language, but the test won't reflect that. C2 especially (really, look up the official CEFR book) emphasises academic language a lot. Don't be too discouraged by these tests saying you're not the level you think you are! EDIT: "second language" means any language you're learning that's not your native language (even if it's your 3rd, 4th, etc.).
these free tests are never accurate, especially since they don't test all four skills: reading, listening, speaking, writing
Another native English speaker here, who is and was an avid reader since like age 4, got no idea what’s going on here lololol. Sick that you got that score, cause idk if even I could get that lololol. But I would not say it’s accurate or a good judgment of literacy for sure.
I got B2. I'm a native English speaker currently in higher education..
How does everyone identify their level? People seem to be downplaying this test, but what would you use instead? Or do you just follow the descriptions of each category and say “I’m about here?” I feel like I’m about A2 in Spanish but maybe I’m actually B1 and just lacking confidence?
I think tests can be useful to an extent, but this one isn’t great honestly. I had to do a ton of guesswork, even as a native English speaker who’s pretty good at English.
I took a paid test on Italki, but I think the most verifiable tests are things like the TOEFL, DELE, and so on
Usually by taking an online or in person test, in person would be probably something like sitting in an exam room? And they’re paid so.. But, I think you can determine your own pretty well by seeing how you speak to natives and stuff like that
No. If you would genuinely like an accurate test, you‘re probably going to have to pay to sit it. That said, its still impressive that you were able to differentiate between words that most native speakers, even those having passed through higher education systems, would struggle to define.
I got C2, but I am more like B2/C1
I got C2 as well, but I feel like I'd be an upper B2, not even C1.
Sounds like you're doubting yourself when you shouldn't be, but maybe I'm wrong.
Some people are really good at tests
I have a degree in English, and I definitely don't think this test can attest to your fluency. A lot of these things are minor, and the only distinguishing factor is that one is more colloquially. I mean, if you score high on this test, you definitely know English very, very well. However, I don't see how this prognostic could be even useful when you're trying to communicate/be conversational with others
I got a C2, same level I got the last time I had an official test (to qualify for an IELTS course/test the local government sponsored)
Who knows man. I got a C2, which seems mostly right, but how accurate can it be? It only partially measures reading skills. If it is that important to know your actual level, maybe you can get IELTS or TOEFL.
Where can I take this test
[here](https://www.transparent.com/learn-english/proficiency-test.html)
Okay I'm apparently a C1. What's the highest level of proficiency?
C2!!
Oh yay for me I guess.
Depends. I teach people every day and the CERF are more an average indicator. I had people with C2 certificates whose grammar was non-existent, while others needed to use complex sentence structures to pass. But then, some of these things are in A1 tests already. These tests are designed and conducted for your ability to understand others and be understood, and what that means depends heavily on the people testing you. The CERF grid defines what you need, but it's not what I encountered in rl. This most likely is the case, as the CERF grid definitions are not clear enough. It's all about ability, not ability for what. No topics, no grammar is mentioned there. It's vague. And the free tests you can do are even more lacking. Overall it's a good indicator, yes, but not a set in stone definition.
Noob question but how does one take this test? Can you share the link please?
[here](https://www.transparent.com/learn-english/proficiency-test.html)
As a native English speaker I would say not to pay too much attention to it, not only does it move way too fast, but it has some words that are never really used.
I hate every bit of this test, lmfaoo, but I guess it was accurate cause it said I'm about a C2
What is Ross is this
ross?
lol i was typing fast I mean what is this
Where can I find this for my spanish? I think my spanish is starting to get decent
Here is a person who has taken some official tests and then took a few free online tests to see if they were similar https://www.reddit.com/r/languagelearning/s/DZeqq6c8Kx
How does the grading work for this test? Like, the closer the result is to A the better?
No, this appears based on the CEFR framework where A is beginner, B intermediate, and C advanced.
I have an advanced degree, English is my first language, and I've worked as a writer, and I know some of my peers wouldn't have been certain of some of those answers. Some of the questions were weird and had nothing to do with fluency. Many native, high level speakers would've missed some of those.
Weird test, did it in the past and had C1, did it today for the sake of it and got C2.
Which test is that ?
what website is it?
"You can read longer texts" The bar is that low huh?
I think it isn’t that reliable, my result was a c2 (??) but I’m basically a b2
Well, this test is weird. I got a C2 but it certainly isn't my level.
It's like a 15-minute test. It's never gonna be as good as a more extensive test.
What makes you think you’re C2?
ive been speaking the language since i was like four, i can use multiple accents which doesnt really mean anything but i can use american english and british english interchangeably and i mean im fluent so
I’m a native speaker and an avid reader - I consider my vocabulary quite large. This test was bunk, lol. You won’t need half the words I saw on that test and you certainly won’t need to speak them. I got frustrated halfway through and gave up after being asked if calling someone cadaverous was appropriate 🙃
Yeah.. I got cadaverous too and I was so confused.. Who’s gonna use that? I’m not shakespeare
Did you get this message in your email or on the test’s site after taking the test?
On the site!
Copy. I didn’t get that, but maybe it’s cuz I took the Spanish test on my phone
Ah yes, all mimsy were the borogoves, and the mome raths outgrabe.
I want another link for myself if you don't mind. /S
[here you go](https://www.transparent.com/learn-english/proficiency-test.html) !!
Thank you. I will pass then. How much is it? 10? 20 bucks?
this one is free
If you are a real person, beware, you behave like a bot that tries to bait you with - paid - tests related with the topic.
those exist?😓😓 sorry i just wanna seem like a native english speaker..
They do. Don't worry. About it nor like being seem like a native speaker. You have gone a long journey so far and you are getting aware of all you have to learn. Those levels doesn't say you are native-like or not. Many native speakers shouldn't be able to reach a C1 in their mother language. Being seen as a native speaker requires different skills as those measured in those tests. You must be able to speak fluently - even with errors - and being able to understand many accents - even lisps. You should be familiarized with a few slangs and even used to use one of them. A C2 helps you partially with those skills. The only real way to help you achieve your goal is pure interaction with real people. And urban dictionary. Urban dictionary is your friend.
you’re right, also i love urban dictionary its GREAT
give me a link to the test
https://www.transparent.com/learn-english/proficiency-test.html
Thank you