The Best Language for a Journalist?

<p>I figured many of you parents would have the inside scoop on what languages are important to know in today’s world (and especially four years from now, when I graduate college and am looking for a job!). I am planning to study history and journalism in school and hope to one day travel the world writing for a big paper, Time Magazine, National Geographic, or anything, really :).</p>

<p>I have always wanted to learn Arabic, because I think that the language is very beautiful. But I wonder if maybe Chinese or some other language will be better (although the Middle East is certainly in the news now, it may not be such an important part of our foreign policy in the future, depending on what party controls the White House next!).</p>

<p>What foreign countries do you think will be in the headlines four years from now? What languages are most demanded by government agencies like the CIA?</p>

<p>Thanks!</p>

<p>Don’t know about the CIA, but the NSA (National Security Agency) will pay for you to go to college and major in either Arabic or Chinese (not journalism tho). Check their website and there is a page about the scholarship program for foreign lanquages and that should give you an idea of what they’re hungry for. The catch on the money is you have to work for them for so many years after you graduate, but I think they also pay for room and board in addtition to tuition, and I believe it’s at any university at all. Like wherever you’re aleady going they’ll pay for it if you major in a lanquage they want and work for them after.</p>

<p>Not exactly the answer to the question you asked, but maybe it will help.</p>

<p>For anyone interested, from the NSA page about a 25,000 dollar scholarship for college juniors:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>That was definitely very helpful! Thank you. More opinions are appreciated, including personal ones :). Because of my interest in Arabic and Middle Eastern issues, I am especially curious about opinions concerning whether this concentration will be as relevant in the future as it is today.</p>

<p>Here’s an angle to explore, even just for compelling research. Judea and Ruth Pearl, parents of slain journalist Daniel Pearl, have set up the Daniel Pearl Foundation, in their son’s memory.
One thing they do is bring over a journalist (not a newbie but a few years into his profession) from the Middle East to work on a newspaper in the United States, so that the journalist can experience working within a “freedom of the press” environment and take that insight back home after the fellowship.
Obviously, you’re not eligible for that fellowship, but it would be worth reading that website for any insights regarding journalism and the Middle East.
To learn more: <a href=“http://www.danielpearl.org%5B/url%5D”>www.danielpearl.org</a></p>

<p>Be very diligent about doing your research before you embark. You grew up in a free-press society. Daniel Pearl was slain while hot on the trail of a journalistic breakthrough story. I’d pay close attention to every warning you hear during your training. Pearl knew the entire landscape and was very experienced, agreeing only to meet a source in a public restaurant, but it was a set-up. The restaurant meeting indicated he’d have audience with a desired source, but it seems that the car ride to lead him to the source was a planned kidnapping; after which he was held by terrorists, then beheaded. </p>

<p>You have a very brave thought in mind. Do it but heed all the warnings. </p>

<p>On the West Bank, Palestinean journalists who cooperated with Western journalists were so intimidated by death and death-threats that the lines of communication were
choked off, so we don’t really know what’s going on there. No responsible Western journalist would want to imperil the life of a fellow journalist from another country, either. THese are all considerations.</p>

<p>My own take on this is that the Middle East has been central to American news since 1948 and that will not readily change, regardless of the near-term presidential decisions re: Iran or Iraq. You have to consider Saudi Arabia, UAR, Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon…the list is very long and many unresolved issues, from oil to religious fundamentalism, yet to be resolved. IMHO</p>

<p>heck, Anderson Cooper is fluent in Vietnamese.</p>

<p>Here’s my two cents, as the daughter of a WW2 war correspondent who was a newspaper editor, and whose brother worked at the Washington Post for many years… Both spoke no foreign language.</p>

<p>If you choose to study an uncommon foreign language, such as arabic or swahili or whatever, that could lead to you becoming a specialist in that area, which would be a major hook in finding journalism jobs as a correspondent in that area. Do you want to be a middle-eastern correspondent? Study arabic. East Africa specialist? Study swahili. Etc.</p>

<p>However, specializing is also a bit of a trap. A few years back I met a fascinating woman who was running a hotel in Mahale National Park in Tanzania. She’d worked for years for the BBC as an east Africa specialist. She’d quit because she was tired of reporting on “famine, flood, and fighting.”</p>

<p>ANother approach is to specialize in something like economics or political science. There are business and politics all over the world.</p>

<p>I believe you should study the language that interests you the most. </p>

<p>Having said that, if you’re looking for practicality, I’d say Spanish. Consider its importance in this country. And in this part of the world. And the fact that, realistically, you’re much more likely to get fluent in Spanish than you are in Chinese or Arabic.</p>

<p>English is a good language to know.</p>

<p>Dang. DT123 beat me to it.</p>

<p>“Why, in America they haven’t spoken it for years.”</p>

<p>The Pearl page was both sobering and interesting. I’ll admit I never thought about endangering other journalists’ lives…</p>

<p>I’m hoping my background in history would help me be a well-rounded journalist and that I would never be confined to just one region. I am currently learning both Spanish and Italian (the languages my family members speak), so I would like to dabble in something a little different in college. Hopefully I’ll become fluent in 4 languages (yes, I’ve got English down already). </p>

<p>Interestingly enough, I’ve heard Spanish is limited because so many Americans speak it. My own HS Spanish teacher was unable to find a job as a translator due to the overabundance of those fluent in the language. Dunno if this has any bearing or not. I have heard the same about Mandarin-Chinese and other common Asian languages. And although I am very interested in Chinese politics, unfortunately those heady languages are almost unbearable to listen to. No offense to anyone here :p.</p>

<p>I am still interested in high-demand languages, not purely for my aspirations as a journalist, but also due to my interest in linguistics in general and possible jobs with government agencies.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Yeah, that was my line of thinking.</p>

<p>If you’re interested in languages and linguistics, you should look at foundational languages such as Latin. They won’t do you a lot of good as a journalist, but they are important if you want to, as you say, become fluent in several languages, study linguistics, and study history.</p>

<p>Ah, Latin. Yeah, I guess. Dead languages, though…eh.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Emphasis on last phrase: no good for you as a journalist. Don’t waste time on a “foundational” dead language.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>This person’s point is crucial, though this should not be “another” approach for you. You should do this anyway. Economics a must. Poli sci very important. A specialization if you want to specialize: regional, scientific, business, etc. Journalism is competitive.</p>

<p>As regards language, here are some things to consider:</p>

<p>Most Commonly Spoken Languages
Rank Language Number of Speakers
1 Chinese (Mandarin) 1,000,000,000 +
2 English 508,000,000
3 Hindustani (Hindi and Urdu) 497,000,000
4 Spanish 392,000,000
5 Russian 277,000,000
6 Arabic 246,000,000
7 Bengali 211,000,000
8 Portuguese 191,000,000
9 Malay-Indonesian 159,000,000
10 French 129,000,000 </p>

<p>I think it’s better to look at the following list, which derives from the named rating factors:</p>

<p>After weighing six factors (number of primary speakers, number of secondary speakers, number and population of countries where used, number of major fields using the language internationally, economic power of countries using the languages, and socio-literary prestige), Weber compiled the following list of the world’s ten most influential languages:
(number of points given in parentheses)</p>

<p>English (37)
French (23)
Spanish (20)
Russian (16)
Arabic (14)
Chinese (13)
German (12)
Japanese (10)
Portuguese (10)
Hindi/Urdu (9) </p>

<p>Beyond English, you have to make some judgement calls, IMO. If you want to do journalism, what stories/regions do you want to cover? Terrorism/Middle East/Oil? Learn Arabic. Africa? Learn French. Economies? Learn Chinese or Hindi or even Portuguese.</p>

<p>Remember that learning Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, and perhaps Russian (I don’t know about Hindi) will require sometimes much more effort than learning one of the simpler European languages. E.g., they say you can learn 4 europeans in the time it takes to learn Chinese.</p>

<p>In terms of difficulty of learning, here’s how teachers rated the following languages. The higher the number, the more difficult the language.</p>

<p>French 2.4 Spanish 1.45 Italian 2.73 German 4.00 Russian 6.1 Chinese 8.64 Japanese 8.18 Latin 3.18 Ancient Greek 6.2 Hebrew 7.4 Arabic 7.91 </p>

<p>Though it’s rated as being easier here, I have personally heard that Japanese is harder than Chinese from a person who mastered both (at Berkeley, Harvard, and in Asia). I found the following analysis on the web:</p>

<p>Quote:
What is the most difficult language to learn?
Richard Brecht
Deputy Director, National Foreign Language Center</p>

<p>Japanese is without question the most daunting language for a native English speaker to tackle, according to Brecht. “I would like to learn Japanese but I don’t have enough time in my lifetime. That’s very depressing,” says the linguist, whose center is based at Hopkins’s Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS). He notes that the State Department allows its students three times as long to learn Japanese as it does languages like Spanish or French.</p>

<p>As Brecht explains it, the challenge with Japanese is threefold. First, there’s the fact that the Japanese written code is different from the spoken code. “Therefore, you can’t learn to speak the language by learning to read it,” and vice versa. What’s more, there are three different writing systems to master. The kanji system uses characters borrowed from Chinese. Users need to learn 10,000 to 15,000 of these characters through rote memorization; there are no mnemonic devices to help. Written Japanese also makes use of two syllabary systems: kata-kana for loan words and emphasis, and hira-gana for spelling suffixes and grammatical particles.</p>

<p>Get beyond that and you’re faced with a culture that, says Brecht, is “truly foreign for most Americans.” With many languages, students start by learning introductions (Comment-allez vous? Trs bien, merci, et vous?) “But with Japanese, you can’t even begin to do that with lesson one because of the social distinctions involved in making introductions,” says Brecht. Age, social status, gender–“all these sociological factors make it so complicated that introductions can’t be the first lesson,” he notes.</p>

<p>Finally, there’s the issue of grammar. In English syntax, grammar is right branching. We set a topic and then comment upon it: “I saw the man who was sitting on the red chair, which was sitting beside the door.” Japanese syntax is left branching-- “totally contrary to our approach,” says Brecht. Thus, the sentence above becomes something along the lines of: “I saw the red, which was the chair, which was…” You get the idea. </p>

<p>Good luck. For me, it really boiled down to be about the ladies. As superficial as that sounds, it’s the truth. I tend to like women from romance language-based cultures. Though it wasn’t ultimately my cup of tea, my male friends who learned Chinese and stuck with it (I basically gave up after a few years only because I didn’t want to stay in Asia) did so because they liked the ladies – and then it became a good career choice for them as well. With me, I started on Chinese for career, but ended on Portuguese for love – or for something a bit more visceral and sometimes related to love.</p>

<p>If you are going to learn a language, consider a few things: more difficult languages will make you a rarer commodity. The most important thing, though, is to choose a region you would like to live in and commit yourself to, if you are going to make the investment in learning the language. I am fascinated by Arab countries, but the time I have spent in them has led me to believe I would hate living in one over time. I learned Chinese for practical reasons, but at the end of the day, I am really happy I don’t live in China. However, I have close friends that are very happy there and a couple are as successful as journalists as it is possible to be.</p>

<p>Good luck.</p>

<p>NOTE: Much of the above is from a different thread, cut and paste.</p>

<p>

I love that something is a waste of time to study if it’s not focused on the career she expects, as a high school senior, to have in the future. :rolleyes:</p>

<p>Her posts include phrases such as:

All of these point toward the importance of language in her life–hopefully an interest that expands beyond a future job possibility. In order to study language seriously, which is what I’m getting from the fact that she’d like to become fluent in four or five languages and study linguistics, she would benefit greatly from studying those foundational languages, even if they are no longer spoken. Latin would greatly benefit her study of all three of her current languages–English, Spanish, and Italian.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Not to mention her SAT verbal scores.</p>

<p>Thanks, BedHead, for your very in-depth response! I haven’t been thinking about learning languages in terms of where I want to be, so that is a good point. The Arabic world is probably the last place I want to live! At the same time, if the issues are important enough…</p>

<p>Truthfully, although I would love to see the world, I know there’s no place I’d want to spend my whole life, or even more than a year or two, besides the United States.</p>

<p>Corranged’s comment was definitely in-line - my posts did indicate learning Latin would be a worthwhile pursuit, but part of my fascination with language stems from communication…I don’t know if I’d be able to get into Latin so much. Not to mention, I probably won’t have the time!</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Don’t think they could get much better ;). I’ve noticed among my classmates, though, that English skillz don’t always correlate with a talent for other languages. And it’s not exactly like I have a natural knack for it, either :/.</p>

<p>First, a caution – US papers have cut back on their international bureaus. AP and Reuters still employ reporters overseas. Many foreign correspondents are free-lancers. That’s a tough life, and tough to make a good living at. </p>

<p>If you want to work in the US, continue studying Spanish. It would definitely help you get a job at many major metros, like the Miami Herald, where there is a large Hispanic population.</p>

<p>Well, I hear about the print business going down the tubes all of the time. That’s not going to stop me from being a journalist. You do, however, have a good point about Spanish being spoken in many major metros. I love cities…</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>LOL! Well, that helps my case for Arabic. The women are gorgeous. There is that whole hijab thing, but…</p>

<p>Journalism is much more than print! And small town papers are actually growing in circulation, because some one has to advertise the local grocery store, report on the school system, etc.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I took several Latin classes, speak Portuguese and know French and a bit of Spanish. Still, I think the opportunity costs are too great to study Latin. I ended up with a vague knowledge of crappy Roman people – Roman culture’s not my favorite – and preparation for my GREs. Maybe I got 10 points more on the verbal GRE.</p>

<p>Yes, that’s my bias. Dead languages are a waste, unless you specifically know that you will undertake literary, academic pursuits. My brother learned Ancient Greek and he loved it at the time, but he’ll tell you he should have focused on other stuff (not for pure preparation for career, but for more relevancy to modern international living).</p>

<p>SATs are done for her.</p>

<p>In addition to living languages, a much more important language to learn for journalism is the language of economics. And/or politics. And/or business. In a sense, learning so many bodies of knowledge are really about learning languages. Additionally, learning how to write is a crucial skill and one that has much more relevance beyond journalistic endeavors.</p>

<p>Finally, I believe strongly in learning languages out of the classroom. Use the classroom ONLY to get the basics of the grammar. And then get on a plane and go to the country.</p>

<p>Here are some languages I have learned and how:</p>

<p>French (almost all classroom, little time in country or with Frenchies): read, can’t really speak
German (basics in the classroom, rest in country): read, speak, write
Portuguese (all from being with Brazilian girlfriends, very little classroom): speak and read, don’t write well
Chinese (basics in the classroom, rest in country): read and speak pretty well</p>

<p>The only language I completely suck at speaking on this list is the one I spent the longest time learning in the classroom. </p>

<p>I think learning languages is generally a dumb way to spend a college education if you don’t intend to follow up quickly with on-the-ground practice. What a waste to spend 1/4 of three years of training in Italian for an art history degree when you could do much more with 6 months in the country (and preferably out of the context of using up your college time), IMO. I think this because you tend to forget languages you only partially learned more than ones you could actually use for speaking. And you tend to forget a lot of what you learned in college in the way of specific knowledge as it is.</p>

<p>Just my biases. But I have a fair amount of experience with language learning (and teaching).</p>