QUOTE (cabbagefairy @ Dec 6 2007, 7:24 pm)

As far as I know someone who has grown up speaking english is a native speaker. People who have a high level of english from study, work or living overseas would still not be native speakers, but be called fluent or native level speakers.
This, dearest cabbagefairy, is the essence of modern racism, projected onto the realm of language. I can't even begin to describe the piles, shelves and libraries of books written on this exact view as expressing the essence of modern racism. I know you meant good and you would probably think you are the farthest removed from racist a person can ever be, but just think for a second what you're saying here - the Ausländer, he will never be like a real native. Even if he speaks the language perfectly (indeed, in early 20th century continental philosophy,
because he can speak it perfectly), he will never be the same, always different, always the outsider.
Language is about talking, reading, writing and generally communicating. It has nothing to do with the place a person was born into (please don't get me started on this. Just to catch a glimpse - what if he was adopted 93 days after he was born? 94? 194? 195?)
I invoke, with your permission, the
Turing test. Not about intelligence and not involving a machine and a human, but rather about language, the ability thereof and between what you call a "native speaker" (PC version of "one of ours") and a "non-native speaker" ("one of them"). I think, if you can't tell the difference between the two and guess correctly which one is one of yours and which one of theirs, there is no difference in their linguistic capabilities. Only in their race.
So your distinction between native and native level is bogus and not about language.