Comments on: Specialization and Languages http://www.thefloppyhat.com/2009/06/10/specialization-and-languages/ The journey of two people towards PhDs and beyond Tue, 14 Dec 2010 04:15:06 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Hebrew Student http://www.thefloppyhat.com/2009/06/10/specialization-and-languages/comment-page-1/#comment-2447 Hebrew Student Thu, 11 Jun 2009 19:10:55 +0000 http://www.thefloppyhat.com/?p=187#comment-2447 Yes, the difference between what university 'scholars' think they know when they have are 'proficient' in a Biblical language is shocking. To me, being proficient in a language like Hebrew means being able to hold a conversation in the language with a native speaker. If you can't hold a conversation in Hebrew, you are not proficient in the language. That's harder with Aramaic, but there are ways. Simply doing a 1-year module in a language is exposure to the language, not being proficient! Yes, the difference between what university ‘scholars’ think they know when they have are ‘proficient’ in a Biblical language is shocking. To me, being proficient in a language like Hebrew means being able to hold a conversation in the language with a native speaker. If you can’t hold a conversation in Hebrew, you are not proficient in the language. That’s harder with Aramaic, but there are ways. Simply doing a 1-year module in a language is exposure to the language, not being proficient!

]]> By: Calvin http://www.thefloppyhat.com/2009/06/10/specialization-and-languages/comment-page-1/#comment-2442 Calvin Thu, 11 Jun 2009 13:50:55 +0000 http://www.thefloppyhat.com/?p=187#comment-2442 Luke, I would absolutely agree. Though we might want to pick a word between "mastery" and "exposure" (perhaps the ambiguous "proficiency?"). One might even argue that by requiring/encouraging such a breadth of languages the programs in our field doom one to knowing each language to a lesser extent that classicists know Greek and Latin. That's not really an argument I want to engage in; but I do still find the number of languages expect to be interesting. Luke, I would absolutely agree. Though we might want to pick a word between “mastery” and “exposure” (perhaps the ambiguous “proficiency?”).

One might even argue that by requiring/encouraging such a breadth of languages the programs in our field doom one to knowing each language to a lesser extent that classicists know Greek and Latin. That’s not really an argument I want to engage in; but I do still find the number of languages expect to be interesting.

]]> By: Luke http://www.thefloppyhat.com/2009/06/10/specialization-and-languages/comment-page-1/#comment-2441 Luke Thu, 11 Jun 2009 13:44:19 +0000 http://www.thefloppyhat.com/?p=187#comment-2441 I would hardly call the level of proficiency required of all these languages "mastery".I think "exposure" would be a more appropriate word in most instances. Compare the rigor of a classics department's language learning, where composition courses are typical, with your average Hebrew or biblical Greek track---big difference. I would hardly call the level of proficiency required of all these languages “mastery”.I think “exposure” would be a more appropriate word in most instances. Compare the rigor of a classics department’s language learning, where composition courses are typical, with your average Hebrew or biblical Greek track—big difference.

]]>