# INTJs and language learning



## levicorpus (Aug 21, 2011)

I will apologize beforehand for any typos, I am on my phone. Onto my point, I am currently in a full immersion Japanese program in Tokyo and have found it to be very difficult. Out of curiosity I wondered how many INTJs excel at language and if language learning and MBTI had any relation. So my question is do you excel at language learning and what about it do you find easy or difficult?


----------



## infinitia (Oct 31, 2011)

Haha it may have been a better idea to post this in the INTJ forum.


----------



## Kasawd (Apr 12, 2012)

Learning french, when I was living in Quebec, came naturally. One day, I could barely speak the language and with only a week in between and no formal training, I was functionally fluent. Just let it sink in and make the learning of the language a top priority. Keep yourself around people and make an effort to perceive the meanings behind their gestures and facial features.

Don't worry about it, you'll do fine.


----------



## SocioApathetic (May 20, 2012)

Learning languages comes naturally to me but that could be because I was raised learning three different languages at once (English, Arabic, & French).


----------



## Abraxas (May 28, 2011)

Thank you for not posting this in the INTJ forum. We have enough threads asking dumb questions already.

Any connection between MBTI type and ease of language learning is speculative at best, and misleading at worst.

Maybe if you research this in an academic setting you might find a more conclusive and useful answer than asking on a public forum about it.


----------



## Deus Absconditus (Feb 27, 2011)

Abraxas said:


> Any connection between MBTI type and ease of language learning is speculative at best, and misleading at worst.


Not true, functions would learn a language easier than other functions. Every type has the potential to learn a language and speak it fluently but certain types would have an easier time learning it. Si would have a harder time than Ti, Si would have to compare the language presented with current language known. That would be cool but they don't have Ti which could analyze the differences and comparisons, looking similarities. Si would only compare it, so learning a new language for an Si if they already have an established language would be harder than a Ti dom. The Si Doms as younger children may have an easier time learning multiple languages since they're just starting to learn their first language. Older Si Doms would have trouble learning a new language.

I know they say mbti is not about abilities but that's not all true. Mbti is not "only" about abilities because cognitive functions all have different ways of working which makes some better than others in certain aspects of life. I don't know the correlation between Ni users and language learning yet but I would love to hear opinions from Ni users who are learning languages so I can understand something new about an Ni user. Also I was thinking about a theory between languages and cognitive functions all morning so this thread could be useful.


----------



## Abraxas (May 28, 2011)

Michaeldh0589 said:


> Not true, functions would learn a language easier than other functions. Every type has the potential to learn a language and speak it fluently but certain types would have an easier time learning it. Si would have a harder time than Ti, Si would have to compare the language presented with current language known. That would be cool but they don't have Ti which could analyze the differences and comparisons, looking similarities. Si would only compare it, so learning a new language for an Si if they already have an established language would be harder than a Ti dom. The Si Doms as younger children may have an easier time learning multiple languages since they're just starting to learn their first language. Older Si Doms would have trouble learning a new language.
> 
> I know they say mbti is not about abilities but that's not all true. Mbti is not "only" about abilities because cognitive functions all have different ways of working which makes some better than others in certain aspects of life. I don't know the correlation between Ni users and language learning yet but I would love to hear opinions from Ni users who are learning languages so I can understand something new about an Ni user. Also I was thinking about a theory between languages and cognitive functions all morning so this thread could be useful.


Your entire post is just bullshit.

Seriously, where the fuck did you get any of that from, because it's just completely wrong, all of it, from beginning to end.


----------



## Deus Absconditus (Feb 27, 2011)

Explain, please. If I'm wrong I want to see an irrefutable opposing view. Just saying it's bullshit isn't logical enough for me to accept, it may very well be "bullshit" but show me proof.

Edit: do you think each function is on equal footing when it comes to learning new subjects or doing activities? In other terms, Se users are your usual football, basketball players (sports players in general but I'm using those two sports for this example), do you think if you strip away all knowledge of a sport from the average Se user and the average Ne user, would the average Ne user have an equal chance of winning that sport against the average Se user?


----------



## Abraxas (May 28, 2011)

Look, friend.

You don't seem to understand how this works.

I'm siding with what is already established, already known. I'm saying that your "theory" flaunts and ignores what has already been demonstrated, what is written by the experts who fucking invented this shit for us to learn in the first place - Carl Jung, Isabel Myers Briggs, Keirsey, Thomson, Beebe, etc. Those people never made any of the speculative claims you are making, in fact they strongly discouraged them. Isabel Myers Briggs and her colleagues have done over 60 years of clinical studies and academic research into this shit, and there is not one bit of it that confirms anything you are saying. You are trying to pioneer your own spin on this stuff - hey, that's great. I respect that. But the fact is, your *hypothesis* is not even a theory yet, it's just bullshit you came up with off the top of your head.

And until I see something substantial to back it up, I'll keep on calling it exactly what it is and telling other people not to listen to it.


----------



## Deus Absconditus (Feb 27, 2011)

Abraxas said:


> Look, friend.
> 
> You don't seem to understand how this works.
> 
> ...


*Sigh*, You're one of those I see. I don't have a problem with how you feel about the subject but cognitive functions have a lot of things not understood about them yet. Like I said you may very well be right but logic says other wise. Also just because some people studied a system for 60 years doesn't mean they know everything, there is much more to learn, you can limit yourself to text book knowledge but I prefer creating theories based off what I study in human behavior using mbti and cognitive functions to analyze, compare and contrast with. I have studied mbti and cognitive functions in depth but not everything is known now.

Also people create and per-fect systems every day, people study and create new theories everyday. Just because some studies have been well established doesnt mean it's complete and all your doing is trying to prevent people from doing personal research on theories they created and are trying to prove. If you don't agree it's cool bro, but don't knock others down from trying to expand their knowledge. One day someone new is going to come out with stuff to add to mbti like keirsey and others once did. It well eventually become well established and if that person would've brought up their theories to you than you probably would've knocked them for their individual analyzation. When years went by and you saw that theory become well established you would probably learn it and enforce it going off of the behavior you're showing. Thats nasty behavior my friend, but to each his own. I'll respect your loyalty to already established information and your authority respecting behavior, I just don't agree with it.

Other than that I'll stick by what I have said until I have been proven "logically" otherwise, how you or anyone else "feels" about the stuff means nothing until pure logic is expressed that refutes my claims.


Edit: Also they discouraged what I claim because what I claim can push people into an elitist mindset, which can be bad. In order to prevent that they give definitions but preach equality in the system. If people feel lower than others then it creates an unbalance environment which could end up (in the most extreme) another hitler situation. Which proves the lack self worth and self discipline in most humans since they can't accept and handle maturely what could possibly be truth.


----------



## HippoHunter94 (Jan 19, 2012)

During high school, I taught myself French, Spanish, Latin, and enough German. Most languages are just a series of patterns and structures with a few irregularities. It's like knowing a different person, but with a few attributes that will set them apart.


----------



## TiNeSi (Jan 10, 2011)

Michaeldh0589 said:


> Not true, functions would learn a language easier than other functions. Every type has the potential to learn a language and speak it fluently but certain types would have an easier time learning it. Si would have a harder time than Ti, Si would have to compare the language presented with current language known. *That would be cool but they don't have Ti* which could analyze the differences and comparisons, looking similarities. Si would only compare it, so learning a new language for an Si if they already have an established language would be harder than a Ti dom. The Si Doms as younger children may have an easier time learning multiple languages since they're just starting to learn their first language. Older Si Doms would have trouble learning a new language.


As much as I identify with Ti, no type "is" one function. Even very unhealthy people use several functions. 
I think there would be more to speculate about what is the best way to learn (immersion, structured studying, through a hobby, etc.) for different types. And then, there is the question of what learning a language really is. I know some people who are vey good at communicating their needs in a foreign language even though their grammar is dreadful and their vocabulary limited, others who are able to achieve a really great command of the language, others who are not fluent but manage to understand subtleties and to appreciate foreign language litterature...


----------



## Deus Absconditus (Feb 27, 2011)

TiNeSi said:


> As much as I identify with Ti, no type "is" one function. Even very unhealthy people use several functions.
> I think there would be more to speculate about what is the best way to learn (immersion, structured studying, through a hobby, etc.) for different types. And then, there is the question of what learning a language really is. I know some people who are vey good at communicating their needs in a foreign language even though their grammar is dreadful and their vocabulary limited, others who are able to achieve a really great command of the language, others who are not fluent but manage to understand subtleties and to appreciate foreign language litterature...


I only mentioned Ti because Si compares but doesn't in depth analyze. I would've used a different function if I didn't use Si as my example. Ne with or without Ti would be good at learning language, so would Ni theoretically. You're right there are different ways people retain knowledge and different parts of a language that someone may be better at than other parts of language, from vocabulary to speech to reading. What I initially was trying to get at was depending on a persons function setup they may have an easier time picking up a language than someone else with a different function setup. I made a mistake though, I forgot to take everything you brought up into consideration, so what I should've said was a person with a certain set of functions may be able to pick up reading a new language easier than the person who is very adept at speaking it.


----------



## koakuma (May 6, 2012)

I learned a bit of japanese years ago. I learned the hiragana and katakana by rambling "ka ki ku ke ko" and watching tons of Japanese dramas (not anime). Found some "learn japanese" pc-programmes as well.

Languages come pretty easy to me, even though I don't really admit it in real life. I grew up in a multi-cultural society, learned Swedish, English and German in school. Learned a bit of Japanese for fun, and a bit of Portuguese as well. And now I'm learning Dutch. I learned that the more languages you learn, the more *patterns* you see in in and between languages.


Not sure my post helps at all. But worth a shot. 
Good luck.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

Michaeldh0589 said:


> Edit: do you think each function is on equal footing when it comes to learning new subjects or doing activities? In other terms, Se users are your usual football, basketball players (sports players in general but I'm using those two sports for this example), do you think if you strip away all knowledge of a sport from the average Se user and the average Ne user, would the average Ne user have an equal chance of winning that sport against the average Se user?


I'm an INTJ and I speak 2 foreign languages (English being one of them). I find it relatively easy to paraphrase words and keep talking, even if I don't know the 'right' word. I also find it easy to guess the meaning of new words from the context. If I come across a new word in a sentence, I just assume that it means this or that because it would make sense and most of the time I'm right. Sometimes I don't even notice when I come across a new word. When talking to people, I just get the general gist of what they are saying but I don't notice what words they use. My husband is an Si-dom and he notices new words immediately and looks them up in a dictionary. When I see an example of a new structure, I immediately make up a rule and use this structure with other verbs etc. My husband needs to see lots of examples and needs to learn the rules by heart from a book. My INTP friend is a lot more accurate then me and learns the subtle distinctions and nuances of similar words. He loves looking up near-synonyms in a dictionary and learning the differences between them. He also likes to just open a dictionary to discover new words (concepts) and then tries to use them later, whereas many people have an idea of what they want to say first and then look for the word. Also, an Ne-dom or Ne-aux might find it very easy to spot patterns (grammatical rules) and might even enjoy old-fashioned deductive grammar teaching (i.e. the teacher tells you a rule first and then you make up your own examples). That's just speculation, though. 
Se-doms might find it easier to just speak at an earlier stage without worrying about the grammar. A colleague of mine is probably and Se-dom and his Spanish grammar is atrocious but he just jabbers away merrily.

Do you speak any foreign languages? Or do you know people who do? What are your observations?


----------



## Deus Absconditus (Feb 27, 2011)

I don't speak any foreign languages but the older I get the easier it becomes to pick up languages and decipher them. For instance, a few months back I was watching the latest mission impossible movie, they were in Russia and I saw a writing on the building but I knew immediately what it meant. I tried to teach myself Russian but only for a few *like 6 years ago but then I got bored and found a different hobby. I knew though what those words meant and I couldn't explain it to people around me but I typed in what I thought I meant into a Russian translator and I was right. Also growing up I have always been extremely accurate at hearing any language and knowing what language it is, the dialect, and where that person usually is from. I mean if there was a Russian and a Ukranian speaking in their Slavic dialect I'm good at telling apart the two.

I'm a people analyzer so I just study people constantly 24/7 picking up things from them that I don't know I'm picking up until day, months, or even years later. Ever since learning about cognitive functions I just apply it to everyday situations with people and create theories by predicting a persons movements or behavior. If I'm right then my theory has been confirmed, but I make sure I predict based on all the other predictions that came to be right. Just so I'm tweaking my analysis on the person to be as accurate as possible, if I'm wrong I discard the theory and learn teach myself why my theory was wrong to prevent future mistakes and go about the more accurate way each time. Based off of all of that I noticed functions and language have a correlation, like I said and you proved, an Si user would have a harder time than a Ti user, it's not only ridiculously noticeable logic but it's what I have come to prove based off of my own analysis of people.

For myself, like I said earlier, it's easy for me to pick apart languages, seeing similarities between other languages, other dialects, and how they're structured, most of the time it's an unconscious process but I'll realize it when languages are spoken around me. I'm also good at deciphering languages which I found out during the military. Everything you said just further proves that functions do learn languages differently, some harder than others. If people studied the functions, just read their definitions and apply it to a possibility of people learning languages, they would notice that an Se user would have a harder time than a Ne user in learning a new language.

While in college I will be teaching myself different languages though to prove a point to myself.


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

Bit of a small sample size, but I recently did some business networking with an INTJ (we actually discussed MBTI, and he knew his type) who would probably best be called a linguistic genius. He's fluent, and I mean like fluent at an academic level, in something like 15 different languages. FWIW...


----------



## Perhaps (Aug 20, 2011)

I can't really learn languages through formal instruction because I hate memorization and my retention rate is poor when it comes to mostly auditory teaching methods. I took Japanese in college, and the aspects I remember are what was regularly utilized. So in my particular case, a full immersion program would work best for me, because then I'd have the opportunity to immediately apply what I learn, rather than having to hold onto it just for an exam.

That said, I doubt there's any correlation between MBTI and language learning ability.


----------



## Garee (May 2, 2012)

Not an INTJ, but I love the thought of learning new languages but I don't have the focus to learn it at an adult. My dad is fluent in Thai and Lao, and I've been trying to learn both for the past two years and I keep slacking off. I mean I have the basics down, I get the immersion from my dad and his Laotians and Thai friends and family. I'm just IDK, lazy? Maybe...


----------

