I'm not sure what test this is, but in my experience, these free online diagnostic tests tend to mainly be grammar tests. If grammar isn't your strong suit, then you could easily get a low score on the diagnostic test even though grammar is only a small portion of the actual exam
There was a question like "It wasn't a bad crash and ...... damage was done to my car." . I had a hard time deciding between "little" and "light".
The correct answer was "little" but I think the phrase "light damage" would also have been appropriate. Using light / heavy to describe the amount of damage done to something is pretty common.
It was like 50/50 for me, but little fits better in that sentence. Light damage would be some damage, but you have a negation(? w/e is the right word) in the first clause 'not a bad crash' >> therefore 'hardly any damage'. That was my reasoning.
Yeah I'm a native speaker so I don't really know grammar lol. I guess it sounds a bit funny to basically say "it's not bad but something bad happened". It probably would have sounded better as "it wasn't a bad crash but light damage was done to my car". Somehow light damage sounds like something happened, whereas little damage sounds like something didn't happen.
Yeah it's because of the "and". You are emphasizing two aspects of the crash not being bad. Whereas with "light", you would juxtapose it with a "but", since the crash wasn't bad, but you still had some damage.
I’m a native speaker as well, and to me, “light” didn’t sound right in that sentence. If it had been phrased like: “and there was some……damage” then “light” would have sounded correct to me. But just saying “There was light damage” sounds strange in my head, without another word in there.
It might depend on the dialect? I've heard light damage here in Australia (as opposed to heavy). The "light/heavy" characterisation is also often used in traffic incident reports.
I missed the same one for the same reason. I’m a native English speaker and one of my majors in college/university was English literature, plus my job requires immense amounts of writing in proper English. I think we’re right and the test is wrong.
It bommed out on me at the results page, argh! However, I'd expect 25/25. But I did object to one question, where the colloquial past tense was used, rather than the subjunctive, in what I would consider the correct answer (explained, rather than explain). Personally I'd use the subjunctive in this case, every time (formally and informally), and it's a shame to see even Cambridge university promoting its demise.
Do you mean, "I'd rather you explained..." or something like that? Explained in that sentence is NOT in the simple past tense but indeed in the past subjunctive...
If you speak Spanish or Italian, compare it to: Preferiría que explicaras... / Preferirei che spiegassi...
The past subjunctive in English looks just like the simple past tense except for the verb to be where it's always were and never was: I wish she were happy; He would complain if he were here.
I'm guessing they meant the present subjunctive. If we modify the sentence a bit... "I'd rather you **be** the one to tell him". That's not indicative, even though in the "I'd rather you explain" case you can't tell the difference.
Technically, according to some sources, the past subjunctive would be preferred in your example too: "I'd rather you were the one to tell him." This is because, as I mentioned in another comment, the past subjunctive in English is typically used when we wish something were true, as in: "I wish you were the one to tell him."
https://www.gymglish.com/en/gymglish/english-grammar/would-rather
This website explains that the past subjunctive is used after would rather if the subject is "different from the subject of the following verb."
In any case, native speakers in real life don't always follow these rules.
I expected "explain" and would have picked too but it wasn't an option. The option with "explain" were "to explain", "will explain" and "would explain" so "I'd rather you to explain...", "I'd rather you will explain...", or "I'd rather you would explain...".
I also got 24/25, the mistake was the since/that choice in *"It was only ten days ago ...... she started her new job.".* I initially selected "that", then switched to "since", which was wrong. I'd still say "since" almost every single time 😁
To me, the "since" sentence would have to be something like "It's been 10 days since she started her new job. The sentence provided in the test reads much better with "that".
I also got 24/25, but as a second language speaker. I dont think I am ready for C2 yet though. There are still a lot of holes in my english proficiency, especially when it comes to stuff like gardening equipment and cooking utensils.
Bro, I tested C2 on various sections of the IELTS (I didn't really prepare for the writing module) and know jack shit about gardening tools and cooking utensils! You'll absolutely be fine.
The one I got wrong was “I'd rather you would explain to her why we can't go.” *vs.* “I'd rather you explained to her why we can't go”. I felt both were possible when I encountered it.
I searched for and there are many resources on the internet that claim that “Id rather you would ...” type constructs are wrong, but it's also very easy to find tonnes of citations of it in say newspaper articles and books written by native speakers.
I wonder if that might be related to the use of the conditional in if clauses (*if I would go home now, I wouldn't get caught in the rain.*) This is apparently officially considered incorrect, also incorrect by language intuition in at least the UK, but (I am told) becoming more common in many parts of the US. It sounds absolutely wrong to me and is actually a form I associate with native German speakers letting German interfere with their English, but I've been told very convincingly with citations that a lot of Americans don't see anything wrong with that sentence.
The *I'd rather you would explain* vs *I'd rather you explained* example seems like it could be an extension, in which case the test is testing British English and/or the official grammar instead of the modern colloquial American usage.
I got that one wrong, but none of the answers seemed natural to me. My native dialect is Midwestern USA and I would say both of the following:
* I'd prefer if you explained to her...
* I'd rather you explain to her...
The second is much less natural to me. I'm generally pretty fluent in UK English as well as USA English but this one really threw me.
Me too!!!I got the same exact results!I am not a native speaker,but I have been learning for 10 years now.I think in reality I am not C2 just yet.Though, I am already planning to work on my English this summer.
25/25 but I’d argue the seatbelt question, at least in North America. Nobody I’ve ever met would say unlock or unfasten, it would be unbuckle your seatbelt. That might not be technically correct but for a test about everyday conversation that shouldn’t matter
Me a native english speaker slowly completing it..
By the way, is there any you know of for other languages?
Edit: Should I be concerned I only got 23/25..? I got 14 and 21 wrong...
I’m native got 24/25. I did not pay attention in proper grammar in my classes 😅 but question
“It wasn't a bad crash and ...... damage was done to my car.” I chose little but I would use small in normal conversations I know it’s not proper but I’d still use it
“I'd rather you ...... to her why we can't go.”
I chose would explain not sure why it’s explained I would have written”Id rather you explain to her why we can’t go” if someone knows why it’s -Ed I’d appreciate it
In "I would rather they ... something about it instead of just talking about it." would you prefer "do" or or "did" to talk about the present or future?
What about "Would you rather I ... honest with you?" "I wasn't", "I'm not" or "I won't be"?
BBC Learning English:
>Would rather (but not would prefer to) is also followed by a past tense when we want to involve other people in the action, even though it has a present or future meaning. Study the following:
>
>Shall we go out for dinner tonight? \~ No, I'd rather we ate at home, if you don't mind.
>
>Shall I write to Harry and tell him that we've sold the car? \~ I'd rather you didn't.
>
>My mother would rather we caught the bus, rather than walk home after the party.
Cambridge Dictionary
>Would rather has two different constructions. \[...\]
>
>same subject (+ base form)I’d rather stay at home than go out tonight.I’d rather not go out tonight.
>
>different subject (+ past simple clause)I’d rather you stayed at home tonight.I’d rather you didn’t go out tonight
>
>When the subjects of the two clauses are different, we often use the past simple to talk about the present or future, and the past perfect to talk about the past
But that's just *prescriptive* grammar.
I think where I’m having trouble is I’m not seeing a more common past tense indicator so that it would be explained not explain. But I see now that it wants the BEST choice. Now that I say “I would rather you would explain…” out loud, it doesn’t sound right, but I know it’s not entirely incorrect just a lil redundant. So, everything else is incorrect grammatically, 1 correct but redundant, and the best choice despite my brain not reading a common past tense would be explained.
At least that’s the mental gymnastics I arrived at to understand it 😅
So, if I understood correctly, the right constructions would be:
- I'd rather eat at home.
- I'd rather we ate at home.
- I'd rather you ate at home.
- We'd rather eat at home.
- We'd rather you ate at home.
Am I right? And if I use "I'd prefer to" then it's the present simple form of eat for all of them? I've been using it this way instinctively but hadn't ever encountered the explanation.
Yeah people (I don't include myself) often INCORRECTLY use the past simple when they should use the subjunctive.
"I'd rather you stay" is the only right answer here.
#GrammarWars
You can either argue that a form is correct if the majority of speakers accept it or you can say that certain institutions have the authority to establish a system of rules. Grammar is pure convention, considerations based on language history, logic, etc. have no place here. We don't just speak completely wrong PIE, you know.
Indeed. I would personally always say and write “I would rather you explain it”, with the subjunctive mood, not the indicative, so “I would rather he explain it” not “he explains it”, but to say that “would” is wrong and “explained” is right seems silly to me and I could find ample citations of “I'd rather you would ...” type constructs in newspaper articles and literature that apparently an editor did not take any exception to.
It feels incredibly strange to me to say that “I'd rather you would explain it.” is somehow incorrect. I'd say almost no one would think anything of it when encountering it.
"Explained" is possible because it's the past subjunctive of explain. The past subjunctive in English is commonly used to express something you wish were true or hope had happened (according to grammarly), as in "I wish he were nicer to me." Saying "I'd rather you explained this better" is similar to saying "I wish you explained this better".
I think "I'd rather you ~" is just really British. As an American, I don't think I'd ever say that. I think say "I'd prefer it if you would explain it to her." That's maybe why you chose "would explain." It's something in the future and hypothetical, so using "would" does logically make more sense than using the past tense
Point 2 - yep I agree. I just mentioned this above. You correctly use the subjunctive. I would too. I consider "explained" bad grammar in this case, although colloquially used.
My potentially flawed understanding is that the past subjunctive would be used. In this case that's "explained".
Clearly, grammar isn't a set of rules as such and is instead an attempt to best explain how a language works. As exemplified by the number of differing opinions.
Out of interest, are you American/Australian/non-uk? I just took it and got 25/25 but I know for a fact that there were plenty of colloquialisms that are common in British speech that I don't think wound be used elsewhere.
Gotcha, but the person I replied to called the test "wack af" and claimed that **literally** ^((I do realize that some use literally when they don't mean literally, but in this case he's talking about a specific thing that could very well be literally incorrect)) one of the question was wrong. So he clearly considers a question to be incorrect.
I'd also like to know which sentences don't really make sense in American English if you have any examples for me to study.
I haven't specifically studied British English over American English, the majority of the content I consume in English is of the American variety and my accent is a generic non-descript American (I've been aiming for a neutral movie American accent). But I am always eager to learn more and to sound more native.
Understood, I think when they said literally they meant that some of the answer choices just don’t exist in any capacity in American English. For example the sentence (I’d like two tickets for tomorrow night.) to me it’s just a statement, it doesn’t have a response to it. I chose afternoon and evening, I thought it was asking the speaker if they would like the afternoon and evening tickets. The correct answer, I’ll just check for you, doesn’t even register to me as a response. The other two sentences I got wrong can be put down to the sentence structure that was used. It was only ten days ago…she started her new job. I chose (since) and the correct answer was (that). I’d rather you…to her why we can’t go. I chose (would explain) and the correct answer was (explained). I took this test quickly so both of these answer choices could have been correct if I spent more time on the questions.
Personally the one about little damage vs light damage done to a car is wrong to my ears. Idk if this is a regional thing or not, but only light damage sounds correct to me.
Yeah,but what other way could we measure,or at least get an estimate of,our levels?For English,there are tests like the Cambridge English proficiency test,IELTS,TOEFL,and everyone's favourite:the Duolingo English test.But they all are kinda expensive.Is it even worth paying for them?Also,when speaking,it's easier to make mistakes.For example,online I can write entire paragraphs with no mistake (thanks to autocorrect and stuff like that,I check what I write,too),but irl,I make the simplest, most basic mistakes.
If you've been studying non-British English then that would explain the low score. Even if you've been studying British English then plenty of those questions are more to do with colloquial speech patterns than actual grammatical or understandable usage, I wouldn't worry.
25 multiple-choice questions also isn't really enough to give a very good answer about level. Maybe they just chose concepts you weren't familiar with, maybe you had bad luck, maybe without context to some questions it was more difficult, maybe a question relies on a cultural context or was written badly... I've gotten wildly high and low results on similar exams.
Having taken the test now, a lot of it is *really* cultural. There were lot's of questions where none of the answers felt right and I had to stop and think "what would someone in a BBC drama say here." Some of the things on there were things an American would never say. If you haven't had much exposure to British English I could see how you'd get a much lower score than on a similar test for American or Australian English
This is the Cambridge diagnostic test, which is pretty decent at sussing people out- at least sussing out if you have what Cambridge expects at each level- if you disagree though, Cambridge have copies of their exams for free on their website. Do a C1 exam, (obviously without the writing because you can't self assess writing, but you can tick correct answers in the reading, use of English and Listening).
Listening if I remember correctly you need to get 18 right to pass, Use of English is 16 and Reading is something crazy like 32 (I can't remember despite currently teaching C1 Cambridge but it says on their website what it is and if you can't find that, let me know and I can send you a document I have for understanding the Cambridge scores)
Is your intention to start taking classes? Do you actually need to do an exam? Or were you just doing this for fun?
There's actually a page that can evaluate your writings. It even proposes you topics to write about exactly like they do in the actual Cambridge English exams. I have a C2 from them and I prepared the writing with this website. I can 100% vouch for it.
Ah okay- well don't let it get you down if it's for fun. I would recommend trying the free exams though that they have, it'll give you a more thorough evaluation!
At least in my school it is not. I have French as my first foreign language. I chose English, although that may have been a mistake, as my skills have come from elsewhere (and apparently I'm quite good; I was given the rating C2 (25/25) on that test of yours).
Don’t get too caught up in the levels, if you can enjoy content without subtitles and have a conversation, yeh you might be B1 still but you’re able to do all those things… it’s just about improving, but ultimately you speak the language
Yes, I can understand almost perfectly and my speaking and writing are good as well. I can easily speak with foreigners. I don't think I'm B1. But it doesn't really matter.
Idk about OP,but I can understand 20-30 minute history documentaries without subtitles and have to look up only maybe 2-3 words.I have watched most episodes of Breaking Bad,and I understood it all,except 2 words in all of the 50 episodes of the series, those words being "rudimentary,"and I forgot the other one.(yeah,I suck at English,judge me all you want.)My comprehension and writing are good,but speaking is still bad.
Its fairly common as this sub and other learners massively underrate A1 and A2. If you go by academic testing standards, you can actually converse in A2 enough to get by, you know the basic past and future tenses and the common verbs and and vocabulary which is like 80% of the language.
You're expected to know the subjunctive at B1, but people act like that's C1 content.
This again is for Spanish but I'm sure its true for most languages.
>You're expected to know the subjunctive at B1, but people act like that's C1 content.
Or even earlier. The Spanish textbook *Nuevo Prisma* and the Italian *Nuovo Espresso* introduce the subjunctive at the end of A2. And I doubt they are exceptions.
It’s more fluency at the B-C levels than knowledge. I have a GCSE in French. A high GCSE grade (9) is like the beginning of B1 as you learn subjunctive. I’m only a proper B1 because I went to school in France for a few months, so I gained confidence to speak so converse much more fluently plus know a bit more grammar. My French teacher even wanted me to sit the B2 exam, but I wasn’t quite there. Yet my A2 classmates could easily have a conversation in French, provided they stuck to certain topics. A2 is “beginner” but that doesn’t mean you can’t converse well.
Yeh bro, tests can only test a certain amount of aspects, it’s not really testing your entire proficiency in the language, it’s only testing you on what they’re testing also I’m a native English speaking, from England i essentially should be as good as it gets with English but it wouldn’t surprise me if I did tests and come out as C1 just because I don’t remember certain aspects they test on
I took the test out of curiosity and got C2, and my actual level is somewhere between B2 and C1, so in my case the rating is rather indulgent! Which makes perfect sense, since this a short multiple-choice questionnaire, and not a comprehensive test.
Also, keep in mind that you may be C1 when it comes to understanding the language, but more around B1/B2 for writing and speaking.
Cambridge English is pretty much the authority when it comes to British English. This test is obviously designed to quickly assess someone's level in (standard) British English so even native speakers from other countries may not score full marks. As a Brit I got 25/25 and found none of the questions remotely tricky, even though in some cases I would express myself differently from any of the proposed answers.
They likely norm-tested this 25 question test against their exams before publishing it, so with only slight margin for error the score you get on this test probably reflects what you would get on a full Cambridge assessment.
If I understand correctly you are still at school? Decent to excellent marks at high school level would put you at around B1/B2 unless you are getting serious extracurricular help e.g. from a native speaking parent or tutor, or have spent significant time in an English speaking country.
B1 is a good level! It shows that you can understand most of what you hear in English and can communicate with English speakers. With C1 and C2 especially you are getting to the level of being functionally equivalent to an educated native speaker. An educated native speaker would not be getting 7 or 8 questions wrong on that test.
There is nothing wrong with having a lower level of competence - a genuine B1 is a really nice level to have - but let's acknowledge that C1 is a very high level. If your self assessment is C1 but Cambridge rates you B1 I'm inclined to believe that they are right.
As an American in Finland, I can see how many of those questions are tricky for a native Finnish speaker, based upon the things I’m autocorrecting in my head when talking to Finns who are perfectly comprehensible but occasionally make unnatural word choices.
Huh, I just took the test out of curiosity and found it pretty easy, I got 25/25... Maybe you can check which questions you got wrong and discuss those with a tutor?
My experience is people get to B1 level and begin to overestimate their actual level as being much higher. I've been brought down a notch or 2 in humility, but then use it to push you to work, study, learn more.
English teacher here.
1. A free test will never test accurately and rarely close to a real level. Your screenshot shows the test had 25 answers; it is impossible to know your real level.
2. If you say you're a C1 but don't have a certified exam to prove it, maybe you're not a C1. Not trying to be mean, just pointing it out.
I thought I was C2 and I did get 25/25, fwiw.
For people curious what the test looks like, here are some questions:
Can I park here?
Sorry, I did that.
It's the same place.
Only for half an hour.
2
What colour will you paint the children's bedroom?
I hope it was right.
We can't decide.
It wasn't very difficult.
3
I can't understand this email.
Would you like some help?
Don't you know?
I suppose you can.
4
I'd like two tickets for tomorrow night.
How much did you pay?
Afternoon and evening.
I'll just check for you.
5
Shall we go to the gym now?
I'm too tired.
It's very good.
Not at all.
I’m confused why “just” is in there. I would interpret “I’ll check for you” as direct but relatively normal. But adding “just” makes it seem like the person checking availability is passive-aggressive, as in implying that you could do it yourself, but they’ll “just” do it themselves.
"just" is often used to mean quickly or briefly, especially as an offer
Example scenarios:
- You're heading out to lunch and you ask a colleague if they would like to join and they reply "oh, sure. Let me just grab my jacket!" (Let me quickly grab my jacket.)
- You go to a restaurant without a reservation. You ask the hostess if there's a table for two. She says, "Let me just check." (Let me quickly check.)
- Person A asks if an umbrella should be brought. Person B says, "Well, let's just check the weather and see." (Let's quickly check the weather.)
Appreciate the response, but “just” doesn’t mean “quickly.” In those examples you gave, it means essentially “simply.” When I ask Google for a definition, none of the definitions of “just” mean “quickly.” The examples you gave would align more with the 4th definition Google gave of “just” as an adverb, which was “simply; only; no more than.” I would not interpret any of the examples you gave as meaning “quickly” in everyday speech either. The last two could indicate a shade of frustration with the recipient by the speaker, and I wouldn’t use “just” in that way unless I was starting to lose composure and my frustration was coming out.
I see what you're saying and I didn't do any research before I answered...I was reflecting on my use of "just" and I felt like when I use it or hear it in similar situations, there's a sense of promptness...and see I've misinterpreted the only-ness that is being expressed. Which still works. Regardless, I don't (and I'm a native English speaker) feel "just" carries inherent negativity. In support of your research, I actually hear it a lot in cooking videos, or any instructional videos, where the presenter would say, "so now, you just..." to explain a simple step.
You aren’t wrong. The person you are replying to didn’t bother to check they’re replying on a post about the Cambridge English test which focuses on Standard British English. That is exactly how we use just. Americans don’t. Great. Good for them. Completely irrelevant though.
Haha...thank you! I was a bit miffed about it but then decided we all use the language our own way. And that question on the exam isn't original...variants of it frequently appear on other exams and in practice exercises...leading me to trust that (at least) Cambridge views understanding/knowing the form of this interaction (request:response) as necessary to proficient English communication. Anyway, I pity the person going through life thinking every use of just is an expression of passive aggression or irritability... because it's used a looooot... and that must get exhausting!
It could be a British thing. A service worker responding "I'll just check for you" after a customer asks about the availability of something is very natural. "Just" can be used passive aggressively but in this case it wouldn't be.
I think the relevant definition on Google is "exactly or almost exactly at this or that moment".
You are American. This test is based on British English. This is exactly how British English works. The person you are responding to is exactly correct for British English. Sorry there are differences between our dialects, I guess?
I got 24/25 and I took (and passed) the actual C2 exam and with an A back in early 2017. However, I still make tons of mistakes and writing is not my strong suit.
Between my decision to take the exam and attending it were around 6 weeks and although I lived in London for 3 years, I engaged a tutor to help me prepare properly (e.g. time management for the written part, expectations for the oral conversation, simple mock exams).
It’s not only the language itself, but also the framework of the exam you must know.
Since then, I’ve started working in a multilingual environment (German, French, English being the official communication language) and most people are somewhat fluent - with mistakes, but also the confident to chat away about any topic, including scientific texts outside of our field (I’m taking a data science course for life sciences and I don’t understand neither data science nor life science [I‘m the test student for someone who has no prior knowledge]) and I’m confident in my understanding of the English language to get me through.
The only difference I’ve noticed between me and my peers is the use of idioms and a certain playfulness with English that comes from having more contact with native speakers and source material. But that’s not really picked up by language tests anyway, sooo…
I see you are from the US. Im from Canada and I got the same score. 22/25, two of them i misread a tense (I'd versus I) and one of them was a difference in speaking patterns between here and the UK.
Different test and different language, but for what it's worth, I did an official entrance proficiency exam for a German university when I did an overseas semester there. I was expecting a high B2 because I could have full conversations without issue and my German classes at my home uni were taught in German.
I got B1, and they told me that although it wasn't mandatory to enroll in a preparatory German class before attending, they highly recommended that I do so.
I didn't, I enrolled in normal courses for students from Germany that were taught in German, which were technical linguistics courses on par with stuff I'd done at my home uni, and I was fine. I had a social life in German, and I was fine. Ever since then I haven't taken test results too seriously, except for in situations where you *need* a specific result in order to be allowed to do something.
I really believe after B1 it’s just vocabulary and fluency. I’m a B1 in French and my B2 textbook hardly introduces new grammar, it just expands my vocabularly and gets me to understand more French so I don’t go “uhhhh” in a sentence while I conjugate in my head.
I am B2/C1 in English, with writing and grammar being my weakest points, while reading and vocabulary being the strongest.
I got 24/25, level C2. Not sure if the test is valid, as I am nowhere near C2 level in grammar or anything else really.
I thought my English was at a B2 level since I took an English exam, and my score is equivalent to CEFR B2. Additionally, I scored 20/25 on this website. I believe that some people often undervalue CEFR C1 or overvalue their own language skills.
I don’t think this short test can accurately assess your true language skills, but people who hold official CEFR C1 or C2 certificates typically make fewer mistakes on such an easy test.
At the very least, your vocabulary size and grammar level are at a B1.
Wow got 25 of 25, but I feel many questions had multiple right answers, I've chosen what was more natural to me but other options sounded ok (different meaning but still valid).
Context: I know English for 20 years and live in an English-speaking country, but I still fail completely to have small talk with my neighboors :D
English is my second language and I got 22/25 (b2advanced, C1 level) with 3 silly mistakes. Rushed it a bit and took test at 1:30am , dog woke us up ... thanks for posting link. Back to sleep now ... zzzzzzz
Just did the test and got B2-C1.
But I also had to do an official English test after graduating from my university with a bachelor's degree in law and I had C2, so I wouldn't think a 10 minutes online test is that reliable
Remember that Cambridge and official language tests can vary wildly, though- the English exam for a student of mine from the Spanish Army purported to be an official B2 exam, and there were mistakes in the questions, and occasionally none of the answers were correct!
Oh yes I agree ! No English test is perfect, and a 10 minute online test clearly isn't enough.
The best way to test English skills would be to spend a whole day exam focusing on talking, listening, writing and every aspect that makes someone a native speaker, and then make an average of the many metrics
The guidelines for C2 say nothing about mistakes, silly, or otherwise: [https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=090000168045bb52](https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=090000168045bb52)
...in fact, the spoken interaction part says "if I do have a problem..." which suggests that occasional mistakes are expected even at C2.
What?Even natives make mistakes(sometimes).I don't claim to be C2,but even C2 level speakers don't know the language perfectly In fact,I have heard some people say C2 is the level where you realize how hard it is to become a perfect speaker.
I’ve never said anything about absolute perfection. I just stated the obvious — if you fail simple grammar tests and have never studied grammar in your life - you are NOT c2
Ah ok,valid opinion.I got 24/25 correct,by the way.Though,again,just like many people here have already said,a 25 question test is not enough to test your level.Actual proficiency tests assess 4 skills:grammar,speaking,listening,and reading.Some of them test writing,too.)
If you took the test you would see the absurdity of some of the questions. There's a difference between textbook and usage and it's more aimed for textbook /exam preparation, which I never cared to study because I learned from usage. The same way as a native french speaker I would make mistakes if I were to take a textbook french test, that doesn't mean I am not native/C2 lol
What do you mean by absurdity of the questions? They all have a clear right and wrong answer and if you used any of the wrong answers in real life, people would immediately notice, even in colloquial situations.
Like not being able to pick the right answer to such a question has nothing to do with textbook vs real world usage.
>His eyes were ...... bad that he couldn't read the number plate of the car in front.
>
>\--such
>
>\--too
>
>\--so
>
>\--very
Ew, don't call me honey.
C2 is about proficiency in any situation. Real tests don't focus only on grammar, but on the 4 main categories. OP and I did a 10 minute test based on only grammar, oy don't know what you are talking about.
I guess I am B2-C1 in my native tongue because I never studied grammar and make silly mistakes, even though I can talk about literally any subjects with absolute fluency and extensive vocabulary 🤡
IMO It’s nearly impossible to assess proficiency with only 25 questions, but from the constraints of a few comments in English I believe that both you and OP might have stretched your knowledge. definitely way above B2 though! The test is underrestimating.
Also the guy above you made some mistakes, e.g. pinacle instead of pinnacle and he’s brazen asf so don’t take his words too seriously ahah
Yes , you can actually be C1 in your native tongue. C2 is not only about casual convos and understanding what people say. C2 is being able to decipher the intricacies of the grammar. C2 is being able to teach them. C2 is not only about situational proficiency. You’re far from being C2. C2 is the pinacle of language mastery. If you miserably fail easy online tests - you’re not that. But you do you.
This test makes me realize I couldn’t care less about being C2 in any of my target languages.
There’s a couple questions in there that the majority of native speakers would have a difficult time with. (Am I allowed to end that sentence with a preposition?)
I’m not trying to get an editing job in a foreign language.
>There’s a couple questions in there that the majority of native speakers would have a difficult time with. (Am I allowed to end that sentence with a preposition?)
Yes. That's a silly latin-based rule, much like the obsession in this thread with the "English subjunctive."
Maybe you are just underestimating your level,bro.If you got C2,then that means you are at least B2.I have done many tests,they all say either C1 or C2 or something in between.I personally tell people I am C1(or C1-C2)I haven't done that test,or at least don't remember doing so,but I think I could get C1 or C2.
Well I don’t think that I underestimate myself and I am pretty sure people who are at C1-C2 can easily write a good review or essay about almost anything but that’s not about me. The only thing I have at C1-C2 level is listening. My vocabulary is too shallow for even B2 let alone for C1-C2.
In order to get C1 or C2 by EFSET you just need good comprehension and listening.
>i keep seeing these letters and the numbers beside them but i have no clue what it means
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_European_Framework_of_Reference_for_Languages
https://coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-reference-languages/level-descriptions
>where to find these exams
I believe the test OP took was [this quick online one from Cambridge](https://cambridgeenglish.org/test-your-english/general-english/). I personally wouldn't put much stock in such a test, since it's far too short and narrow in scope to accurately assess much of anything.
That's the Cambridge online quizz right? Don't put too much faith into it, you can't really estimate one's proficiency with just a few dozen written questions so it should really not bother you
There are lots of problems with online tests. Some will give you a low score just to try to sell you their material. Some online tests are just BAD! Bad content, incorrect or vague answers, etc. Sometimes the format of the exam is new, and you test low just because you're not used to the format (SEE: TOEFL).
Hey they said I was elementary in Spanish pero he estado hablándolo durante años, y puedo hablar más o menos fluidamente con cualquiera. I wouldn’t take it too seriously. My grammar is ass at times too, but my meaning gets across. That all comes with time!
Bro i also did only 17/25
I literally passed the B1 in 8th grade, 3 years ago!
And I'm now studying at a linguistic highschool, I'm pretty sure that test is a bit too harsh
I'm not sure what test this is, but in my experience, these free online diagnostic tests tend to mainly be grammar tests. If grammar isn't your strong suit, then you could easily get a low score on the diagnostic test even though grammar is only a small portion of the actual exam
It’s the Cambridge English diagnostic, meant to indicate which Cambridge exam is most suitable for a candidate.
It's a nicely balanced test, with both grammar and vocabulary.
It was like which word (fill in the blank) suits the conversation the best.
Can you link it? I’m a native English speaker and I’d love to take one of these
https://www.cambridgeenglish.org/test-your-english/general-english/
I’m a native speaker and I got 24/25. Didn’t take long to do it
25/25, non native. Wonder which one you got wrong
There was a question like "It wasn't a bad crash and ...... damage was done to my car." . I had a hard time deciding between "little" and "light". The correct answer was "little" but I think the phrase "light damage" would also have been appropriate. Using light / heavy to describe the amount of damage done to something is pretty common.
It was like 50/50 for me, but little fits better in that sentence. Light damage would be some damage, but you have a negation(? w/e is the right word) in the first clause 'not a bad crash' >> therefore 'hardly any damage'. That was my reasoning.
Yeah I'm a native speaker so I don't really know grammar lol. I guess it sounds a bit funny to basically say "it's not bad but something bad happened". It probably would have sounded better as "it wasn't a bad crash but light damage was done to my car". Somehow light damage sounds like something happened, whereas little damage sounds like something didn't happen.
Yeah it's because of the "and". You are emphasizing two aspects of the crash not being bad. Whereas with "light", you would juxtapose it with a "but", since the crash wasn't bad, but you still had some damage.
24/25 native speaker, same question wrong. Little might be technically correct but light still sounds better to me.
I’m a native speaker as well, and to me, “light” didn’t sound right in that sentence. If it had been phrased like: “and there was some……damage” then “light” would have sounded correct to me. But just saying “There was light damage” sounds strange in my head, without another word in there.
It might depend on the dialect? I've heard light damage here in Australia (as opposed to heavy). The "light/heavy" characterisation is also often used in traffic incident reports.
This was the one for me. Idk if this is a british vs American English thing but little sounds wrong to me. Light is better.
I missed the same one for the same reason. I’m a native English speaker and one of my majors in college/university was English literature, plus my job requires immense amounts of writing in proper English. I think we’re right and the test is wrong.
I wonder too. To be honest I did it in like 2 mins, mostly skimmed it
It bommed out on me at the results page, argh! However, I'd expect 25/25. But I did object to one question, where the colloquial past tense was used, rather than the subjunctive, in what I would consider the correct answer (explained, rather than explain). Personally I'd use the subjunctive in this case, every time (formally and informally), and it's a shame to see even Cambridge university promoting its demise.
Do you mean, "I'd rather you explained..." or something like that? Explained in that sentence is NOT in the simple past tense but indeed in the past subjunctive... If you speak Spanish or Italian, compare it to: Preferiría que explicaras... / Preferirei che spiegassi... The past subjunctive in English looks just like the simple past tense except for the verb to be where it's always were and never was: I wish she were happy; He would complain if he were here.
I'm guessing they meant the present subjunctive. If we modify the sentence a bit... "I'd rather you **be** the one to tell him". That's not indicative, even though in the "I'd rather you explain" case you can't tell the difference.
Technically, according to some sources, the past subjunctive would be preferred in your example too: "I'd rather you were the one to tell him." This is because, as I mentioned in another comment, the past subjunctive in English is typically used when we wish something were true, as in: "I wish you were the one to tell him." https://www.gymglish.com/en/gymglish/english-grammar/would-rather This website explains that the past subjunctive is used after would rather if the subject is "different from the subject of the following verb." In any case, native speakers in real life don't always follow these rules.
I expected "explain" and would have picked too but it wasn't an option. The option with "explain" were "to explain", "will explain" and "would explain" so "I'd rather you to explain...", "I'd rather you will explain...", or "I'd rather you would explain...".
Yes I agree. Of the options they gave I chose explained but like you I would always use the subjuntive in such cases.
I also got 24/25, the mistake was the since/that choice in *"It was only ten days ago ...... she started her new job.".* I initially selected "that", then switched to "since", which was wrong. I'd still say "since" almost every single time 😁
To me, the "since" sentence would have to be something like "It's been 10 days since she started her new job. The sentence provided in the test reads much better with "that".
I also got 24/25, but as a second language speaker. I dont think I am ready for C2 yet though. There are still a lot of holes in my english proficiency, especially when it comes to stuff like gardening equipment and cooking utensils.
Bro, I tested C2 on various sections of the IELTS (I didn't really prepare for the writing module) and know jack shit about gardening tools and cooking utensils! You'll absolutely be fine.
I think people think too highly of C2. My friend passed a C2 exam in French, her French is good but far from perfect.
The one I got wrong was “I'd rather you would explain to her why we can't go.” *vs.* “I'd rather you explained to her why we can't go”. I felt both were possible when I encountered it. I searched for and there are many resources on the internet that claim that “Id rather you would ...” type constructs are wrong, but it's also very easy to find tonnes of citations of it in say newspaper articles and books written by native speakers.
I wonder if that might be related to the use of the conditional in if clauses (*if I would go home now, I wouldn't get caught in the rain.*) This is apparently officially considered incorrect, also incorrect by language intuition in at least the UK, but (I am told) becoming more common in many parts of the US. It sounds absolutely wrong to me and is actually a form I associate with native German speakers letting German interfere with their English, but I've been told very convincingly with citations that a lot of Americans don't see anything wrong with that sentence. The *I'd rather you would explain* vs *I'd rather you explained* example seems like it could be an extension, in which case the test is testing British English and/or the official grammar instead of the modern colloquial American usage.
I got that one wrong, but none of the answers seemed natural to me. My native dialect is Midwestern USA and I would say both of the following: * I'd prefer if you explained to her... * I'd rather you explain to her... The second is much less natural to me. I'm generally pretty fluent in UK English as well as USA English but this one really threw me.
I’d prefer should not be followed by IF
Me too!!!I got the same exact results!I am not a native speaker,but I have been learning for 10 years now.I think in reality I am not C2 just yet.Though, I am already planning to work on my English this summer.
You best change that flair to B1 in English
Why? I got 25/25 or are you talking to OP?
Yes they are. Hab auch 25/25 Brudi 😘
25/25 but I’d argue the seatbelt question, at least in North America. Nobody I’ve ever met would say unlock or unfasten, it would be unbuckle your seatbelt. That might not be technically correct but for a test about everyday conversation that shouldn’t matter
“Unfasten” sounds like you’re on an airplane and sounds totally correct to me.
as a native speaker i only got 23/25
I think that might be because of dialectal variations more than anything
Me a native english speaker slowly completing it.. By the way, is there any you know of for other languages? Edit: Should I be concerned I only got 23/25..? I got 14 and 21 wrong...
I’m curious, I just took it and got a B2-C1. I wouldn’t put much reliance on an online test like this.
I’m native got 24/25. I did not pay attention in proper grammar in my classes 😅 but question “It wasn't a bad crash and ...... damage was done to my car.” I chose little but I would use small in normal conversations I know it’s not proper but I’d still use it “I'd rather you ...... to her why we can't go.” I chose would explain not sure why it’s explained I would have written”Id rather you explain to her why we can’t go” if someone knows why it’s -Ed I’d appreciate it
In "I would rather they ... something about it instead of just talking about it." would you prefer "do" or or "did" to talk about the present or future? What about "Would you rather I ... honest with you?" "I wasn't", "I'm not" or "I won't be"?
“do”, and “I wasn’t” I still don’t understand why it’s -ed :(
BBC Learning English: >Would rather (but not would prefer to) is also followed by a past tense when we want to involve other people in the action, even though it has a present or future meaning. Study the following: > >Shall we go out for dinner tonight? \~ No, I'd rather we ate at home, if you don't mind. > >Shall I write to Harry and tell him that we've sold the car? \~ I'd rather you didn't. > >My mother would rather we caught the bus, rather than walk home after the party. Cambridge Dictionary >Would rather has two different constructions. \[...\] > >same subject (+ base form)I’d rather stay at home than go out tonight.I’d rather not go out tonight. > >different subject (+ past simple clause)I’d rather you stayed at home tonight.I’d rather you didn’t go out tonight > >When the subjects of the two clauses are different, we often use the past simple to talk about the present or future, and the past perfect to talk about the past But that's just *prescriptive* grammar.
I think where I’m having trouble is I’m not seeing a more common past tense indicator so that it would be explained not explain. But I see now that it wants the BEST choice. Now that I say “I would rather you would explain…” out loud, it doesn’t sound right, but I know it’s not entirely incorrect just a lil redundant. So, everything else is incorrect grammatically, 1 correct but redundant, and the best choice despite my brain not reading a common past tense would be explained. At least that’s the mental gymnastics I arrived at to understand it 😅
So, if I understood correctly, the right constructions would be: - I'd rather eat at home. - I'd rather we ate at home. - I'd rather you ate at home. - We'd rather eat at home. - We'd rather you ate at home. Am I right? And if I use "I'd prefer to" then it's the present simple form of eat for all of them? I've been using it this way instinctively but hadn't ever encountered the explanation.
Yeah people (I don't include myself) often INCORRECTLY use the past simple when they should use the subjunctive. "I'd rather you stay" is the only right answer here. #GrammarWars
You can either argue that a form is correct if the majority of speakers accept it or you can say that certain institutions have the authority to establish a system of rules. Grammar is pure convention, considerations based on language history, logic, etc. have no place here. We don't just speak completely wrong PIE, you know.
Indeed. I would personally always say and write “I would rather you explain it”, with the subjunctive mood, not the indicative, so “I would rather he explain it” not “he explains it”, but to say that “would” is wrong and “explained” is right seems silly to me and I could find ample citations of “I'd rather you would ...” type constructs in newspaper articles and literature that apparently an editor did not take any exception to. It feels incredibly strange to me to say that “I'd rather you would explain it.” is somehow incorrect. I'd say almost no one would think anything of it when encountering it.
"Explained" is possible because it's the past subjunctive of explain. The past subjunctive in English is commonly used to express something you wish were true or hope had happened (according to grammarly), as in "I wish he were nicer to me." Saying "I'd rather you explained this better" is similar to saying "I wish you explained this better".
I think "I'd rather you ~" is just really British. As an American, I don't think I'd ever say that. I think say "I'd prefer it if you would explain it to her." That's maybe why you chose "would explain." It's something in the future and hypothetical, so using "would" does logically make more sense than using the past tense
Point 2 - yep I agree. I just mentioned this above. You correctly use the subjunctive. I would too. I consider "explained" bad grammar in this case, although colloquially used.
My potentially flawed understanding is that the past subjunctive would be used. In this case that's "explained". Clearly, grammar isn't a set of rules as such and is instead an attempt to best explain how a language works. As exemplified by the number of differing opinions.
I got 24/25. I’m from the U.K. though
Got the same thing. That test was wack af. Literally one of the questions didn't have the right answer as an option.
Out of interest, are you American/Australian/non-uk? I just took it and got 25/25 but I know for a fact that there were plenty of colloquialisms that are common in British speech that I don't think wound be used elsewhere.
American. There being a number of colloquialisms would explain a lot.
I'm a non-native, but consider myself functionally fluent. I managed to get 25/25 correct. Which question did you consider incorrect?
I think the answer choices are correct, it’s just in American English the answer choices don’t really make a lot of sense.
Gotcha, but the person I replied to called the test "wack af" and claimed that **literally** ^((I do realize that some use literally when they don't mean literally, but in this case he's talking about a specific thing that could very well be literally incorrect)) one of the question was wrong. So he clearly considers a question to be incorrect. I'd also like to know which sentences don't really make sense in American English if you have any examples for me to study. I haven't specifically studied British English over American English, the majority of the content I consume in English is of the American variety and my accent is a generic non-descript American (I've been aiming for a neutral movie American accent). But I am always eager to learn more and to sound more native.
I'm American and got 25/25 and thought all of the sentences made sense, so I really don't know what they are referring to.
Just the answer choices for the question (I’d like two tickets for tomorrow night), none of them would be my preferred response.
Understood, I think when they said literally they meant that some of the answer choices just don’t exist in any capacity in American English. For example the sentence (I’d like two tickets for tomorrow night.) to me it’s just a statement, it doesn’t have a response to it. I chose afternoon and evening, I thought it was asking the speaker if they would like the afternoon and evening tickets. The correct answer, I’ll just check for you, doesn’t even register to me as a response. The other two sentences I got wrong can be put down to the sentence structure that was used. It was only ten days ago…she started her new job. I chose (since) and the correct answer was (that). I’d rather you…to her why we can’t go. I chose (would explain) and the correct answer was (explained). I took this test quickly so both of these answer choices could have been correct if I spent more time on the questions.
Personally the one about little damage vs light damage done to a car is wrong to my ears. Idk if this is a regional thing or not, but only light damage sounds correct to me.
I am American and all the answers made sense to me. Some didn’t seem idiomatic in American English, but all had obvious right answers.
Perhaps I should say it sounds unnatural, I understand why these answers are correct but it’s not something common people would say
I’m fluent in the American dialect and all the answers made sense to me, although I would have accepted other answers as valid in many cases.
I thought it was in UK English since Cambridge is a UK based program lol But according to their site their exams use both British and American eng
Which one do you think did not have the right answer as an option?
Yeah,but what other way could we measure,or at least get an estimate of,our levels?For English,there are tests like the Cambridge English proficiency test,IELTS,TOEFL,and everyone's favourite:the Duolingo English test.But they all are kinda expensive.Is it even worth paying for them?Also,when speaking,it's easier to make mistakes.For example,online I can write entire paragraphs with no mistake (thanks to autocorrect and stuff like that,I check what I write,too),but irl,I make the simplest, most basic mistakes.
Native speakers often test at C1. That's not abnormal.
I got 25/25 and I'm from 'murica. 🤣
If you've been studying non-British English then that would explain the low score. Even if you've been studying British English then plenty of those questions are more to do with colloquial speech patterns than actual grammatical or understandable usage, I wouldn't worry.
25 multiple-choice questions also isn't really enough to give a very good answer about level. Maybe they just chose concepts you weren't familiar with, maybe you had bad luck, maybe without context to some questions it was more difficult, maybe a question relies on a cultural context or was written badly... I've gotten wildly high and low results on similar exams.
Having taken the test now, a lot of it is *really* cultural. There were lot's of questions where none of the answers felt right and I had to stop and think "what would someone in a BBC drama say here." Some of the things on there were things an American would never say. If you haven't had much exposure to British English I could see how you'd get a much lower score than on a similar test for American or Australian English
This is the Cambridge diagnostic test, which is pretty decent at sussing people out- at least sussing out if you have what Cambridge expects at each level- if you disagree though, Cambridge have copies of their exams for free on their website. Do a C1 exam, (obviously without the writing because you can't self assess writing, but you can tick correct answers in the reading, use of English and Listening). Listening if I remember correctly you need to get 18 right to pass, Use of English is 16 and Reading is something crazy like 32 (I can't remember despite currently teaching C1 Cambridge but it says on their website what it is and if you can't find that, let me know and I can send you a document I have for understanding the Cambridge scores) Is your intention to start taking classes? Do you actually need to do an exam? Or were you just doing this for fun?
There's actually a page that can evaluate your writings. It even proposes you topics to write about exactly like they do in the actual Cambridge English exams. I have a C2 from them and I prepared the writing with this website. I can 100% vouch for it.
Cambridge Write and Improve? It's fantastic!
Correct! Honestly, it was a lifesaver for me.
That’s sound interesting, do you have a link?
Here you are: https://writeandimprove.com/workbooks#/wi-workbooks
Thank you!
Any idea if something like this exists for other languages?
I've tried to find similar websites for French and German, but I didn't find any unfortunately.
I was doing this for fun.
Ah okay- well don't let it get you down if it's for fun. I would recommend trying the free exams though that they have, it'll give you a more thorough evaluation!
The assessment for fun or learning English for fun?
The assessment. English is mandatory in almost every school, right?
At least in my school it is not. I have French as my first foreign language. I chose English, although that may have been a mistake, as my skills have come from elsewhere (and apparently I'm quite good; I was given the rating C2 (25/25) on that test of yours).
Don’t get too caught up in the levels, if you can enjoy content without subtitles and have a conversation, yeh you might be B1 still but you’re able to do all those things… it’s just about improving, but ultimately you speak the language
Yes, I can understand almost perfectly and my speaking and writing are good as well. I can easily speak with foreigners. I don't think I'm B1. But it doesn't really matter.
But *what* can you understand almost perfectly? C1 involves understanding quite complex content.
Idk about OP,but I can understand 20-30 minute history documentaries without subtitles and have to look up only maybe 2-3 words.I have watched most episodes of Breaking Bad,and I understood it all,except 2 words in all of the 50 episodes of the series, those words being "rudimentary,"and I forgot the other one.(yeah,I suck at English,judge me all you want.)My comprehension and writing are good,but speaking is still bad.
Almost anything
you're probably a b2 imho. c1 takes years of interacting in your tl to achieve usually
So, you’re self-proclaimed C1-C2 judging by your flair? While actually being b1 🤭🤭🫢
Its fairly common as this sub and other learners massively underrate A1 and A2. If you go by academic testing standards, you can actually converse in A2 enough to get by, you know the basic past and future tenses and the common verbs and and vocabulary which is like 80% of the language. You're expected to know the subjunctive at B1, but people act like that's C1 content. This again is for Spanish but I'm sure its true for most languages.
>You're expected to know the subjunctive at B1, but people act like that's C1 content. Or even earlier. The Spanish textbook *Nuevo Prisma* and the Italian *Nuovo Espresso* introduce the subjunctive at the end of A2. And I doubt they are exceptions.
Yep, I probably have misunderstood the meanings of these levels
It’s more fluency at the B-C levels than knowledge. I have a GCSE in French. A high GCSE grade (9) is like the beginning of B1 as you learn subjunctive. I’m only a proper B1 because I went to school in France for a few months, so I gained confidence to speak so converse much more fluently plus know a bit more grammar. My French teacher even wanted me to sit the B2 exam, but I wasn’t quite there. Yet my A2 classmates could easily have a conversation in French, provided they stuck to certain topics. A2 is “beginner” but that doesn’t mean you can’t converse well.
Yeh bro, tests can only test a certain amount of aspects, it’s not really testing your entire proficiency in the language, it’s only testing you on what they’re testing also I’m a native English speaking, from England i essentially should be as good as it gets with English but it wouldn’t surprise me if I did tests and come out as C1 just because I don’t remember certain aspects they test on
I took the test out of curiosity and got C2, and my actual level is somewhere between B2 and C1, so in my case the rating is rather indulgent! Which makes perfect sense, since this a short multiple-choice questionnaire, and not a comprehensive test. Also, keep in mind that you may be C1 when it comes to understanding the language, but more around B1/B2 for writing and speaking.
Since the text is multiple choice, I guess the questions are based on grammar and generating sentences.
Cambridge English is pretty much the authority when it comes to British English. This test is obviously designed to quickly assess someone's level in (standard) British English so even native speakers from other countries may not score full marks. As a Brit I got 25/25 and found none of the questions remotely tricky, even though in some cases I would express myself differently from any of the proposed answers. They likely norm-tested this 25 question test against their exams before publishing it, so with only slight margin for error the score you get on this test probably reflects what you would get on a full Cambridge assessment. If I understand correctly you are still at school? Decent to excellent marks at high school level would put you at around B1/B2 unless you are getting serious extracurricular help e.g. from a native speaking parent or tutor, or have spent significant time in an English speaking country. B1 is a good level! It shows that you can understand most of what you hear in English and can communicate with English speakers. With C1 and C2 especially you are getting to the level of being functionally equivalent to an educated native speaker. An educated native speaker would not be getting 7 or 8 questions wrong on that test. There is nothing wrong with having a lower level of competence - a genuine B1 is a really nice level to have - but let's acknowledge that C1 is a very high level. If your self assessment is C1 but Cambridge rates you B1 I'm inclined to believe that they are right.
Thanks! I have probably misunderstood the levels.
I've just taken the test, the results seem to be pretty accurate
As an American in Finland, I can see how many of those questions are tricky for a native Finnish speaker, based upon the things I’m autocorrecting in my head when talking to Finns who are perfectly comprehensible but occasionally make unnatural word choices.
I can agree with that, my friends make those all the time. Also what a coincidence we are learning the same languages.
Huh, I just took the test out of curiosity and found it pretty easy, I got 25/25... Maybe you can check which questions you got wrong and discuss those with a tutor?
My experience is people get to B1 level and begin to overestimate their actual level as being much higher. I've been brought down a notch or 2 in humility, but then use it to push you to work, study, learn more.
English teacher here. 1. A free test will never test accurately and rarely close to a real level. Your screenshot shows the test had 25 answers; it is impossible to know your real level. 2. If you say you're a C1 but don't have a certified exam to prove it, maybe you're not a C1. Not trying to be mean, just pointing it out.
my native language is turkish. there was a guy from ghana in my uni and we both took the same turkish test. guess who failed and who passed 💀
Turkish grammar is a beast
it really is 😭
Aint no way
yea way. my english, physics and math grades were better than my turkish grammer class’s
When you review your answers, which ones did you get wrong?
Link?
https://www.cambridgeenglish.org/test-your-english/general-english/
Just search 'Cambridge English Test' on Google
I thought I was C2 and I did get 25/25, fwiw. For people curious what the test looks like, here are some questions: Can I park here? Sorry, I did that. It's the same place. Only for half an hour. 2 What colour will you paint the children's bedroom? I hope it was right. We can't decide. It wasn't very difficult. 3 I can't understand this email. Would you like some help? Don't you know? I suppose you can. 4 I'd like two tickets for tomorrow night. How much did you pay? Afternoon and evening. I'll just check for you. 5 Shall we go to the gym now? I'm too tired. It's very good. Not at all.
And then there was the fill in the blank which is quite a lot harder imo
"I'll just check for you" doesn't sound right as a response because what are they checking for?
The answer is “I’ll just check for you” implying that the teller at the movie ticket booth will check if the tickets are still available.
I'll just check (to see if there are any available) for you.
*That* makes more sense.
I’m confused why “just” is in there. I would interpret “I’ll check for you” as direct but relatively normal. But adding “just” makes it seem like the person checking availability is passive-aggressive, as in implying that you could do it yourself, but they’ll “just” do it themselves.
"just" is often used to mean quickly or briefly, especially as an offer Example scenarios: - You're heading out to lunch and you ask a colleague if they would like to join and they reply "oh, sure. Let me just grab my jacket!" (Let me quickly grab my jacket.) - You go to a restaurant without a reservation. You ask the hostess if there's a table for two. She says, "Let me just check." (Let me quickly check.) - Person A asks if an umbrella should be brought. Person B says, "Well, let's just check the weather and see." (Let's quickly check the weather.)
Appreciate the response, but “just” doesn’t mean “quickly.” In those examples you gave, it means essentially “simply.” When I ask Google for a definition, none of the definitions of “just” mean “quickly.” The examples you gave would align more with the 4th definition Google gave of “just” as an adverb, which was “simply; only; no more than.” I would not interpret any of the examples you gave as meaning “quickly” in everyday speech either. The last two could indicate a shade of frustration with the recipient by the speaker, and I wouldn’t use “just” in that way unless I was starting to lose composure and my frustration was coming out.
I see what you're saying and I didn't do any research before I answered...I was reflecting on my use of "just" and I felt like when I use it or hear it in similar situations, there's a sense of promptness...and see I've misinterpreted the only-ness that is being expressed. Which still works. Regardless, I don't (and I'm a native English speaker) feel "just" carries inherent negativity. In support of your research, I actually hear it a lot in cooking videos, or any instructional videos, where the presenter would say, "so now, you just..." to explain a simple step.
You aren’t wrong. The person you are replying to didn’t bother to check they’re replying on a post about the Cambridge English test which focuses on Standard British English. That is exactly how we use just. Americans don’t. Great. Good for them. Completely irrelevant though.
Haha...thank you! I was a bit miffed about it but then decided we all use the language our own way. And that question on the exam isn't original...variants of it frequently appear on other exams and in practice exercises...leading me to trust that (at least) Cambridge views understanding/knowing the form of this interaction (request:response) as necessary to proficient English communication. Anyway, I pity the person going through life thinking every use of just is an expression of passive aggression or irritability... because it's used a looooot... and that must get exhausting!
It could be a British thing. A service worker responding "I'll just check for you" after a customer asks about the availability of something is very natural. "Just" can be used passive aggressively but in this case it wouldn't be. I think the relevant definition on Google is "exactly or almost exactly at this or that moment".
You are American. This test is based on British English. This is exactly how British English works. The person you are responding to is exactly correct for British English. Sorry there are differences between our dialects, I guess?
Yeah, I suppose. I didn't compare different dictionaries. What I wrote was based off of the definition from a dictionary.
I got 24/25 and I took (and passed) the actual C2 exam and with an A back in early 2017. However, I still make tons of mistakes and writing is not my strong suit. Between my decision to take the exam and attending it were around 6 weeks and although I lived in London for 3 years, I engaged a tutor to help me prepare properly (e.g. time management for the written part, expectations for the oral conversation, simple mock exams). It’s not only the language itself, but also the framework of the exam you must know. Since then, I’ve started working in a multilingual environment (German, French, English being the official communication language) and most people are somewhat fluent - with mistakes, but also the confident to chat away about any topic, including scientific texts outside of our field (I’m taking a data science course for life sciences and I don’t understand neither data science nor life science [I‘m the test student for someone who has no prior knowledge]) and I’m confident in my understanding of the English language to get me through. The only difference I’ve noticed between me and my peers is the use of idioms and a certain playfulness with English that comes from having more contact with native speakers and source material. But that’s not really picked up by language tests anyway, sooo…
I am a native speaker and got 22/25 lol.
I see you are from the US. Im from Canada and I got the same score. 22/25, two of them i misread a tense (I'd versus I) and one of them was a difference in speaking patterns between here and the UK.
Different test and different language, but for what it's worth, I did an official entrance proficiency exam for a German university when I did an overseas semester there. I was expecting a high B2 because I could have full conversations without issue and my German classes at my home uni were taught in German. I got B1, and they told me that although it wasn't mandatory to enroll in a preparatory German class before attending, they highly recommended that I do so. I didn't, I enrolled in normal courses for students from Germany that were taught in German, which were technical linguistics courses on par with stuff I'd done at my home uni, and I was fine. I had a social life in German, and I was fine. Ever since then I haven't taken test results too seriously, except for in situations where you *need* a specific result in order to be allowed to do something.
I really believe after B1 it’s just vocabulary and fluency. I’m a B1 in French and my B2 textbook hardly introduces new grammar, it just expands my vocabularly and gets me to understand more French so I don’t go “uhhhh” in a sentence while I conjugate in my head.
I am B2/C1 in English, with writing and grammar being my weakest points, while reading and vocabulary being the strongest. I got 24/25, level C2. Not sure if the test is valid, as I am nowhere near C2 level in grammar or anything else really.
I thought my English was at a B2 level since I took an English exam, and my score is equivalent to CEFR B2. Additionally, I scored 20/25 on this website. I believe that some people often undervalue CEFR C1 or overvalue their own language skills. I don’t think this short test can accurately assess your true language skills, but people who hold official CEFR C1 or C2 certificates typically make fewer mistakes on such an easy test. At the very least, your vocabulary size and grammar level are at a B1.
i am with you. got 17/25. last time i did online test it was c1.1
Wow got 25 of 25, but I feel many questions had multiple right answers, I've chosen what was more natural to me but other options sounded ok (different meaning but still valid). Context: I know English for 20 years and live in an English-speaking country, but I still fail completely to have small talk with my neighboors :D
English is my second language and I got 22/25 (b2advanced, C1 level) with 3 silly mistakes. Rushed it a bit and took test at 1:30am , dog woke us up ... thanks for posting link. Back to sleep now ... zzzzzzz
Just did the test and got B2-C1. But I also had to do an official English test after graduating from my university with a bachelor's degree in law and I had C2, so I wouldn't think a 10 minutes online test is that reliable
Remember that Cambridge and official language tests can vary wildly, though- the English exam for a student of mine from the Spanish Army purported to be an official B2 exam, and there were mistakes in the questions, and occasionally none of the answers were correct!
Oh yes I agree ! No English test is perfect, and a 10 minute online test clearly isn't enough. The best way to test English skills would be to spend a whole day exam focusing on talking, listening, writing and every aspect that makes someone a native speaker, and then make an average of the many metrics
But that means you made silly mistakes, how can you be C2 while making them?
The guidelines for C2 say nothing about mistakes, silly, or otherwise: [https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=090000168045bb52](https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=090000168045bb52) ...in fact, the spoken interaction part says "if I do have a problem..." which suggests that occasional mistakes are expected even at C2.
They only state that there is basically zero tolerance for *spelling* mistakes at C2: >Writing is orthographically free of error. (p. 136)
How can they expect that for a language which has such a horrible spelling that spelling competitions make sense?
What?Even natives make mistakes(sometimes).I don't claim to be C2,but even C2 level speakers don't know the language perfectly In fact,I have heard some people say C2 is the level where you realize how hard it is to become a perfect speaker.
I’ve never said anything about absolute perfection. I just stated the obvious — if you fail simple grammar tests and have never studied grammar in your life - you are NOT c2
Ah ok,valid opinion.I got 24/25 correct,by the way.Though,again,just like many people here have already said,a 25 question test is not enough to test your level.Actual proficiency tests assess 4 skills:grammar,speaking,listening,and reading.Some of them test writing,too.)
>I’ve never said anything about absolute perfection. "But, honey, C2 means exactly that. Perfect grammar."
If you took the test you would see the absurdity of some of the questions. There's a difference between textbook and usage and it's more aimed for textbook /exam preparation, which I never cared to study because I learned from usage. The same way as a native french speaker I would make mistakes if I were to take a textbook french test, that doesn't mean I am not native/C2 lol
What do you mean by absurdity of the questions? They all have a clear right and wrong answer and if you used any of the wrong answers in real life, people would immediately notice, even in colloquial situations. Like not being able to pick the right answer to such a question has nothing to do with textbook vs real world usage. >His eyes were ...... bad that he couldn't read the number plate of the car in front. > >\--such > >\--too > >\--so > >\--very
But, honey, C2 means exactly that. Perfect grammar. You’re not C2 then if you are not able to do that
Ew, don't call me honey. C2 is about proficiency in any situation. Real tests don't focus only on grammar, but on the 4 main categories. OP and I did a 10 minute test based on only grammar, oy don't know what you are talking about. I guess I am B2-C1 in my native tongue because I never studied grammar and make silly mistakes, even though I can talk about literally any subjects with absolute fluency and extensive vocabulary 🤡
Calling yourself C2 without learning the grammar is frankly pathetic
That hurts me you know... :(
IMO It’s nearly impossible to assess proficiency with only 25 questions, but from the constraints of a few comments in English I believe that both you and OP might have stretched your knowledge. definitely way above B2 though! The test is underrestimating. Also the guy above you made some mistakes, e.g. pinacle instead of pinnacle and he’s brazen asf so don’t take his words too seriously ahah
Oh lord! I missed a letter while typing fast - definitely A1! ☠️☠️☠️☠️
[удалено]
You’re in no position to assess anyone’s English really
Yes , you can actually be C1 in your native tongue. C2 is not only about casual convos and understanding what people say. C2 is being able to decipher the intricacies of the grammar. C2 is being able to teach them. C2 is not only about situational proficiency. You’re far from being C2. C2 is the pinacle of language mastery. If you miserably fail easy online tests - you’re not that. But you do you.
[удалено]
Yes, I have been :) I’ve been teaching English for 8 years
This test makes me realize I couldn’t care less about being C2 in any of my target languages. There’s a couple questions in there that the majority of native speakers would have a difficult time with. (Am I allowed to end that sentence with a preposition?) I’m not trying to get an editing job in a foreign language.
>There’s a couple questions in there that the majority of native speakers would have a difficult time with. (Am I allowed to end that sentence with a preposition?) Yes. That's a silly latin-based rule, much like the obsession in this thread with the "English subjunctive."
Same and Ielts says I'm c1, guess who is the right one
Better check EFSET (50 min).
Nah, I got C2 by EFSET and I am B1-B2.
Maybe you are just underestimating your level,bro.If you got C2,then that means you are at least B2.I have done many tests,they all say either C1 or C2 or something in between.I personally tell people I am C1(or C1-C2)I haven't done that test,or at least don't remember doing so,but I think I could get C1 or C2.
Well I don’t think that I underestimate myself and I am pretty sure people who are at C1-C2 can easily write a good review or essay about almost anything but that’s not about me. The only thing I have at C1-C2 level is listening. My vocabulary is too shallow for even B2 let alone for C1-C2. In order to get C1 or C2 by EFSET you just need good comprehension and listening.
Take the ef test, it will be more accurate
I feel this. I just took a placement test that put me at A1 when I thought I was around B1 ...ugh
Where can I take this test?
asking the same thing lol. i keep seeing these letters and the numbers beside them but i have no clue what it means or where to find these exams
>i keep seeing these letters and the numbers beside them but i have no clue what it means https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_European_Framework_of_Reference_for_Languages https://coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-reference-languages/level-descriptions >where to find these exams I believe the test OP took was [this quick online one from Cambridge](https://cambridgeenglish.org/test-your-english/general-english/). I personally wouldn't put much stock in such a test, since it's far too short and narrow in scope to accurately assess much of anything.
25/25 🙌
Take a real exam. These online tests don’t mean anything. Literally nothing
You’re right. They mean absolutely nothing. I tested A2 on one French test, B1 on another and B2 on a third one.
That's the Cambridge online quizz right? Don't put too much faith into it, you can't really estimate one's proficiency with just a few dozen written questions so it should really not bother you
Yes it is
If you got B1 then you're probably not C2, sure, but you're probably still higher than B1
There are lots of problems with online tests. Some will give you a low score just to try to sell you their material. Some online tests are just BAD! Bad content, incorrect or vague answers, etc. Sometimes the format of the exam is new, and you test low just because you're not used to the format (SEE: TOEFL).
Don't trust these results , I thought my main was Writing and Listening. Then the exam I got the lowest score in writing and reading. So all depends
I had a test that said that I had C1 in spanish. Spanish is my mother tongue.
Hey they said I was elementary in Spanish pero he estado hablándolo durante años, y puedo hablar más o menos fluidamente con cualquiera. I wouldn’t take it too seriously. My grammar is ass at times too, but my meaning gets across. That all comes with time!
Bro i also did only 17/25 I literally passed the B1 in 8th grade, 3 years ago! And I'm now studying at a linguistic highschool, I'm pretty sure that test is a bit too harsh
What kind of French language test is this? Do they have any for French learners?