<p>^^^^…and Brazilian girlfriends.</p>
<p>BedHead, where’d you get that “writer’s voice”? So refreshing to read!</p>
<p>It’s not always feasible to study in the country where the language of your choice is the predominant form of communication. Granted, I speak Italian and Spanish with my relatives at Christmas and Thanksgiving, but in between? Disney movies and Telemundo. Obviously immersion is the best technique, but it’s not like there aren’t other strategies to supplement learning in class.</p>
<p>Your phrase that I took offense to, BedHead, said that Latin was of no use to a journalist and therefore a waste of time. With a sincere interest in studying language academically, which the OP may or may not have, studying the building blocks for those languages is a very valuable use of time. Further, your brother shouldn’t be so fast to dismiss the study of something that he enjoyed. In terms of usefulness for “modern international living,” the best thing would be to take freshman English, statistics, intro courses in economics and political science, etc. Hopefully, though, in depth study of subjects and other serious academic pursuits would add value to life in a realm beyond its strict usefulness.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, Latin has certainly helped as a foundation for my love life. (Tongue entirely in cheek.)</p>
<p>I took Latin 'cause of its indirect value and because of a quaint old notion of a liberal education. It certainly did help my understanding of romance languages and that part of our English language. I just didn’t like it ultimately, and in retrospect, I wished I had spent the time studying something different.</p>
<p>I did not meant to cause offense. I think study for study’s sake is admirable and a nice luxury. But for me it became an excuse to put off making decisions and sifting through options. If I hadn’t stuck on Latin for superficial reasons, I might have sifted through the options.</p>
<p>And having paid for a graduate education, I have increasingly begun to see education in a narrow functional sense.</p>
<p>Study was a waste of time for you then because you did not approach it with the correct mindset or for the right reasons. You would of course get nothing out of it. That does not mean that study for the sake of study is worthless, as you stated originally. I can easily name ten people who I know personally who studied for the sake of their education in college–that “quaint old notion”–and ended up being very successful in their fields (business, finance, medicine, law, academia, etc.), several holding the very top positions possible. Every single one of them would speak passionately about the use and the value of that education. </p>
<p>It’s unfortunate that you can only see education in “a narrow functional sense.” I am thankful that I am able to see education as the opportunity that it is to study, learn, think, engage, and reflect.</p>
<p>We lead different lives.</p>
<p>EDIT: I do not mean to judge your personal experiences, values, or way of life. I do mean to judge your global statements about the worth of study that does not have a direct, material use.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Back off a bit – or get off your high horse. Remember that the person asked a functionally directed question. And I stand by what I said. Latin is a pretty stupid way to get prepared for journalism, particularly since the person expressed interest in Arabic and Chinese. I have studied English Lit., Chinese Studies (even after I knew I didn’t really want to pursue a career in Asia, but just because I was interested) and economics. So I am a walking advertisement for not studying practical stuff. On the other hand, I do think focus and drive towards particular goals is a good way to achieve something, even if that something is not what you originally set out to achieve. Latin represented a diversion for me, and it would be for this person, IMO.</p>
<p>On these boards, I have argued, for instance, that an undergrad business education is a waste given the opportunity to pursue a liberal education.</p>
<p>I never said that Latin is a good preparation for journalism but a good preparation for the academic study of language. At the time I posted, I was not sure what the OP’s intention toward language was, but based on what he had said, he seemed to have an interest in language which would perhaps extend to an academic interest in college, in which case Latin would be a good place to begin. What I was arguing in my lasts posts was the view you seemed to have that study was a waste if it was not strictly useful or functional. I am glad that you have studied subjects without a practical purpose–it would be a waste of an education to not. </p>
<p>BedHead, I’m only in my first year in college (and not studying Latin, by the way), so I’m not too close to that well-educated category yet. In any event, you should go to college with your mind and eyes open. Given your posts, I am sure that whatever you do will work out for you.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Thanks, Corranged, for your last post. I do think Latin has helped me understand legal terms; English, German, and other languages and grammar; our culture; and it has helped me learn Portuguese and Spanish. So I don’t want to underestimate its usefulness for a variety of purposes.</p>
<p>I think the issue of learning for learning’s sake vs. for a functional sake is a question for which there are only personal answers. I have had the luxury of pursuing educational interests somewhat separate from practical concerns, but many people don’t. When Latin and Greek were canonized as a crucial part of a liberal education, many of the fields of study that exist today were either rudimentary or entirely non-existent – e.g, biochemistry or computer science. I think a very difficult and crucial part of deciding the course of one’s education is to determine to what extent general edification versus specific, practically focused learning come into play. The reality is that wealthier people, people from wealthier families, typically can afford to indulge in education for its own sake more readily than others. I try to err on the side of being sensitive to that, particularly when the person has asked a specific, practically oriented question.</p>
<p>I’ve worked as a freelance journalist for several years, and can say it would have been very useful at times to have known Spanish. It’s becoming a very common 2nd language in the U.S.</p>
<p>My S surprised me by signing up for Arabic this fall as a freshman. He studied French for 6 years in jr high and HS. He wants to go into political science, and thinks it would be a great asset in understanding an area of the world crucial to our future.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Woah woah woah woah woah there!</p>
<p>You do NOT need 10000-15000 kanji to be fluent. Not by a long shot. You need about 2000 to get by, and about 3000 to be able to read a high-level newspaper. My goodness. 10000-15000? I know Japanese with PhDs and doctors who couldn’t read nearly that many.</p>
<p>And there ARE mnemonic devices to help, which are radicals. Many Japanese learn new kanji simply by association of radicals.</p>
<p>As for your explanation of kana, you’re almost there. Kana usage is complex and oftentimes not followed “by the book.” Hiragana is indeed used for conjugation and all sorts of domestic words (for example, the word “youkoso” is usually written in hiragana.) But this is not a hard and fast rule. I’ve seen it written in katakana in very rare circumstances. Katakana is also used for onomatopoeia. But I’ve seen hiragana serve that purpose too.</p>
<p>Japanese is tough, in many ways, because of how flexible its rules actually can be.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’ve never learned Japanese and wouldn’t presume to talk about it beyond the most basic points. The portion of my posting above that you quoted was taken from an article I found online via google, though it wasn’t perhaps clear in the way I quoted it. For me, the interesting point is that people I know who have studied both Japanese and Chinese tend to say that in the long run, they find Japanese harder. Thus, I thought the stats saying Chinese is slightly harder seemed to be a bit off.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This applies in Chinese as well. According to Read and Write Chinese, a book I have, 97% of the characters one encounters in a sophisticated newspaper are encompassed in 2,700 characters.</p>
<p>BedHead,</p>
<p>Gotcha! Yeah, I tend to find that there are a lot of 1/2 and 3/4 truths about Japanese out there, but so few complete truths. </p>
<p>I suppose it doesn’t hurt that the Japanese like many of the half-truths. I think that most Japanese would LOVE to have the world think that they know 10000-15000 kanji. With word processors, I’d say that written kanji has dropped to like…2000 for most people. Sad in a way.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I was only using the article to bolster what I had heard that Japanese is ultimately harder than Chinese. Being a Chinese, but not a Japanese, speaker, I can only take this on faith from people who have learned both.</p>
<p>What made sense to me is that Chinese is hard at first – acclimatizing to tones and characters and the lack of an alphabet – but over the long-term when this acclimatization has occurred, the fact is Chinese grammar is really baby grammar, I think. Thus, once over the hump, it’s easy.</p>
<p>I think Japanese may appear to be more accessible initially because there are phonetic components and it is not tonal, but it never really eases apparently.</p>
<p>Comments?</p>
<p>Japanese is hard for many reasons. The grammar is definitely one of them.</p>
<p>To really be fluent in Japanese, you need to be able to understand (and use) multiple levels of formality. And it’s much more than just the technical ability that matters-- it’s the ability to know when and where to use what level of formality AND remember to use it on a consistent basis.</p>
<p>This can get complicated, as I’m sure you might imagine. For example, let’s say I walk into a room and ask for Mr. Sato. Depending on whom I direct the question to, I may ask “Sato iru?” “Sato-kun iru?” “Sato-san imasu ka?” “Sato-san irasshaimasu ka?” Etc. etc. I may also tack on additional polite lead-in phrases like “sumimasen kedo…” or “ojyama shimasu!” </p>
<p>Never mind the fact that you need to be able to do multiple levels of formality PLUS understand how they tie in with conjugations that you couldn’t dream up on an OD of Nyquil. </p>
<p>Yeah, Japanese sucks. That, and they found ways of making hanzi even harder to use. </p>
<p>Sigh.</p>
<p>
Why in the world is Italian harder than French? I thought it was easier to pronounce and spell. Grammar seemed very, very similar. I actually found German pretty easy - more grammar than the Romance languages and that pesky neuter gender, but it seemed to have less irregularities in grammar and rules about subjunctive and conditional were easier for an English speaker. Chinese defeated me. However although Chinese did defeat me, I am amused by the description of “baby grammar”. It was odd - Chinese literally did sound like pidgin English.</p>
<p>I agree that spending a lot of time in college is a bit inefficient, but I’ve found taking a year of college language (which is about the equivalent of four years in high school), followed by a summer in the country will get you so that you can communicate quite well. A little quicker if you take languages within the same language group.</p>
<p>I seriously wish I had studied a Western language like French or Spanish. I’d be fluent by now.</p>
<p>I wish that I could go back in time and make the architect of the Japanese language commit seppuku with a dull butter knife.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Uh, in the annals of dreaming about different linguistic fates in history, I’d wish that the same guys who convinced the Vietnamese to “romanize” their language – “phoneticize” would actually be a more accurate term – would have done the same thing for Chinese.</p>
<p>Well, word processors are getting us a lot closer. But not close enough.</p>
<p>And I know some people are going to find that politically incorrect, but there you go. Uglier it is, but much, much more efficient for learning the language (literacy rates would be higher, both for Chinese as a primary and secondary language).</p>
<p>Mathmom: I only reported those ratings, did not make them up. I actually like what FSI did below with the same topic. And they happen to agree with me that Japanese is among the hardest of languages to learn (at least among those listed here).</p>
<p>
</li>
</ul>
<p>The FSI’s number for Malay-Indonesia is way off. There are about 275 million people in Malaysia and Indonesia, making native speakers of Malay Indonesian greater than many of the better known languages. AND it is a very easy language for English speakers in fact all foreigners to learn – simple grammar, phonetic pronunciation.</p>
<p>It is rarely taught at American universities, however, and I’d have to agree that it wouldn’t make the most influential language list. Indonesia’s a country that will have a lot of geo-political influence in the next 50 years – an Islamic democracy with immense natural resources, a huge (and growing) population which offers an antidote to Chinese power in the region.
hardtoimpress, I agree that you should focus on the culture that you are most interested in. It doesn’t do much good to speak Arabic if you fancy covering the EU.</p>
<p>Interesting list. I’ve been trying to tackle rudimentary Hungarian for the past eight weeks. Challenging it is compared to other languages. Among other things, it features 22 cases. It’s also full of booby-trapped vowel shifts between forms of the same word and there’s a notion called “harmonizing vowels” where the case ending may depend on what the first vowel in the word is. It has nothing in common with any other language except Finnish, so any knowledge of Slavic, Germanic, or Romance languages does absolutely zed for you.</p>
<p>I feel like an elephant on roller skates. Nobody expects him to do it well, it’s a miracle that he can do it at all. My Hungarian tutor laughed. </p>
<p>Only two vowel shifts and a word break separate “You did a lot for her” from “You ate her butt.” My tutor is a bit on the prim side and flushed when she said this but she wants me to take great care in pronunciation when I thank D’s host mother for the semester.</p>