"looking up some words in a dictionary OCCASIONALLY". There is no single language I can speak/write without looking up some words in a dictionary ever.
Is there a definition of having learnt a language or of "the rough outlines"? As for me having learnt a language means being able to communicate in it fluently (not necessarily in a finely literate manner) and for "the rough outlines" - do we ever learn anything but the rough outlines of anything? I can't even say I know anything but the rough outlines of my native language (it had never felt any close to possible for me to write it without mistakes) or of English.
Do we ever learn anything but the rough outlines of anything?
Actually, people do -- those who become, if not necessarily world-reknown experts -- at least generally recognized as competent professionals in just about any field.
For example, if you've managed to successfully operate a well-regarded restaurant in a major city for a significant length of time (10 years, say) -- it's safe to say that you've moved beyond learning the "rough outlines" of that field - but in fact have mastered the core material.
As for learning a language - the metrics would probably be (1) fluency (not needing a dictionary to make yourself understood 99% of the time, in quotidian contexts at least) and (2) durability (not forgetting everything you've learned after a few weeks or months). That is to say - they've mastered the core material.
Most language learners are on a spectrum somewhere between these endpoints (and your English is really quite good, BTW). The whole point it, it sounds like your exposure to Spanish was much closer to learning the "rough outlines" of it than having "mastered the core".
Which is generally what people mean by saying "I learned X" (as opposed to "I learned a bit of X").
> not needing a dictionary to make yourself understood 99% of the time, in quotidian contexts at least ... (and your English is really quite good, BTW)
But I still had to google the definition of "quotidian" - although my guess of what does it mean given the context was correct I had never met it before. A nice addition to my vocabulary, thanks :-)
> The whole point it, it sounds like your exposure to Spanish was much closer to learning the "rough outlines" of it than having "mastered the core".
That's why I've said I've learnt it, not mastered it. I doubt I'm going to master any language ever. Perhaps I could master my native language if I were interested enough. It seems people capable of mastering a foreign language are rare and they usually work at intelligence agencies AFAIK.
> Which is generally what people mean by saying "I learned X" (as opposed to "I learned a bit of X").
IMHO saying "I learned a bit of X" would mean "I can say 'hello', 'bye', 'my name is' and 'I'd like a cup of coffee' in it", having intuitive understanding of the language grammar and being able to express any quotidian idea in it so you would be comfortable living in the country, would feel no "language barrier" and would be able to read a local newspaper qualifies for having learnt (not "mastered") a language.
As you mentioned earlier that English is not your native language, allow me as a native English speaker to affirm the previous reply. In English, when somebody states that they "learned X" - while not necessarily implying mastery, certainly suggests a strong understanding of something which is emphasized by the "past simple" tense of the statement.
Yup - the past simple almost always means "did X to completion, more or less".
E.g. "ate dinner", "wrote a program", "invaded France", etc. Or "learned Spanish".
Some verbs have indefinite scope in this regard, however - for example "study", which is similar to "learn" but more open-ended.
So to say "I studied German" doesn't imply anything about how successful the ultimate outcome was. But to say "I learned German" definitely implies you became at least reasonably proficient at it.
Is there a definition of having learnt a language or of "the rough outlines"? As for me having learnt a language means being able to communicate in it fluently (not necessarily in a finely literate manner) and for "the rough outlines" - do we ever learn anything but the rough outlines of anything? I can't even say I know anything but the rough outlines of my native language (it had never felt any close to possible for me to write it without mistakes) or of English.