<doc.id=2012.a1>
This essay is about me, or more correctly; about my level of proficiency in the various aspects of the English language. I will try to assess my different strengths and weaknesses and convey them to you, the reader, in a manner as objective and sincere as I can. It is not easy, being completely objective, though. To give some perspective to my own qualities I have also chosen to elaborate, in some sections, on the general process of learning English itself. I will try not to be too cumbersome.
I have no real difficulties understanding spoken English, especially not when I can see the person speaking, and definitely not when I am standing in front of him or her (as opposed to seeing said person on a screen). Speaking over the phone is more difficult. The quality of sound is poor compared to other mediums, and you have no eye contact. I should tell you that I am talking about the more common dialects of English, such as the American, Brittish, Australian, etc. I, as many others, may have some problems understanding people with very strong, or different, accents. You can usually comprehend what they say, but must pay more attention in order to do so. A friend of mine, for example, tried having a conversation with a drunken old Scottsman once, and wasn't able to recognize one single word (it has to be said that the situation was extreme, though, and that he had no problems understanding the rest of the population).

Happily for us Swedes we are constantly bombarded with different kinds of English via TV and films, although primarily American and Brittish English (lots of variants in there, though). It does train us, but we do tend to have more difficulty without the subtitles. I, too, have this weakness, although I tend to have problems only when the sounds of speech is more difficult to make out, like in a gunfight, or someone whispering softly, etc. But it could be argued that when you don't get the full spectrum of sound your ability to understand speech in general decreases, and non-native speakers are the first ones to notice simply due to their lesser proficiency in the language.

I have no problem in understanding written text other than odd expressions or odd words (I usually see to it that I have access to a glossary when reading, since I hate not understanding everything). I have read a lot of books in English, both fiction and non-fiction (mostly Computer Science-related). I also read quite a lot of articles concering different aspects of programming and Computer Science in general, thus having a pretty good understanding of the terms related to this field. All in all, I have to say that I am quite good at reading and understanding texts of various kinds.

I also think I am quite a good speaker. I tend to be pretty fluent, especially when talking to native speakers. I usually adapt somewhat to their style of talking and pronouncing, often without really thinking about it. One time at work comes to mind, when I came across an American, newly moved to Sweden. We started talking (I was actually supposed to show him a computer system) and although I felt kind of rusty and slow the first couple of minutes I later felt rather comfortable. In about five minutes I had adapted to a more American pronounciation (he was from NY, I think) than my normal one (a mixture somewhere between the hopelessly American and a rather relaxed Brittish English), and he even complemented me on this and said that I had lost my accent almost entirely over the time we spoke (around 45 minutes).

Here we also have the TV and film influence. Not having series and films dubbed to Swedish gives us the opportunity, wether we want it or not, to absorb the expressions and ways of the native speakers (although one might be slightly unsettled thinking about the influence of shows like "the Simpsons" if you are a follower of this theory). I sincerely believe that this is one of the main reasons for the poor mastery of English by some nationalities (not "the Simpsons", rather their dubbing of films and TV shows instead of using subtitles).

I normaly don't write very much in English, but I think that my extensive reading of varied English literature has given me an eye, or a feeling if you like, for what is correct and what is not. I do prefer free writing (i.e. short stories), instead of the more strict layout of essays and such. There are always at least two aspects of writing though. The technical, or grammatical, part and the more creative part of actually composing something interesting to read. I am actually quite lousy at the details of grammar (terms and their ilk) and normally go on what feels and looks right as would a native speaker (and many Swedes do use this "technique", with various success). This does not always work, of course, but the constant exposure to this language helps a lot. I suspect that my grammar skills will increase greatly (at least on the terminology side) during my English studies at Uppsala University.

Most of my writing has actually been rather informal, like e-mails and such, primarily to English colleagues at my work. On a side note concerning e-mails; I fondly remember one I wrote a couple of years ago to an esteemed techical writer called Michael Abrash (famous for his books and articles on computer graphics programming and optimization) and the very long and detailed answer I received from him. Being able to communicate with people you admire is a wonderful thing, and I have my competence in the English language to thank for that (this not meaning that there are no Swedish people I admire, mind you).
</doc>