Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - To those of you who can speak Korean

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

To those of you who can speak Korean
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> General Discussion Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

mithridates

Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency

Posted: Sat Mar 02, 2013 9:58 am Post subject:

I always compare the time to working an average office job. You work 9 to 5 or 8 to 5, feel a bit awkward for a few weeks, start to get used to it after a few months, after about six months everything is comfortable, after a year you're pretty good at what you do. Now imagine that you put the same amount of time into this job that the average student does into languages, maybe 30 minutes to an hour a bit a day. Your shift starts at 9 and ends at 9:45, then you go and do whatever else for the rest of the day. Come in the next day at 9, work until 9:30 or 10, then you're gone again. How long will it take to learn your job at that rate? Nor should a person who works from 9 to 9:45 say after a year that he has a year's experience, not when everyone else has been working from 8 to 5. Now, the fact that this 9 to 9:45 shift is the norm in language learning is what enables certain people to come across as geniuses when they really are just working the whole day at it instead of an hour or less. There's a really nice polyglot named Richard Simcott who brings up the analogy of sports fans, people who can rattle off stats for just about any player or scores for games for decades. Nobody would call them geniuses either, they just happen to spend their days immersed in the stuff and it shows.

hiamnotcool

Joined: 06 Feb 2012

Posted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 6:17 pm Post subject:

mithridates wrote:

I always compare the time to working an average office job. You work 9 to 5 or 8 to 5, feel a bit awkward for a few weeks, start to get used to it after a few months, after about six months everything is comfortable, after a year you're pretty good at what you do. Now imagine that you put the same amount of time into this job that the average student does into languages, maybe 30 minutes to an hour a bit a day. Your shift starts at 9 and ends at 9:45, then you go and do whatever else for the rest of the day. Come in the next day at 9, work until 9:30 or 10, then you're gone again. How long will it take to learn your job at that rate? Nor should a person who works from 9 to 9:45 say after a year that he has a year's experience, not when everyone else has been working from 8 to 5.

Now, the fact that this 9 to 9:45 shift is the norm in language learning is what enables certain people to come across as geniuses when they really are just working the whole day at it instead of an hour or less.

There's a really nice polyglot named Richard Simcott who brings up the analogy of sports fans, people who can rattle off stats for just about any player or scores for games for decades. Nobody would call them geniuses either, they just happen to spend their days immersed in the stuff and it shows.

Thanks for the informative posts here. I was wondering, as you learned Korean did you begin to forget Japanese? When you totally immersed yourself in Korean like that how did you manage retaining your Japanese level?

javis

Joined: 28 Feb 2013

Posted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 2:23 am Post subject:

mithridates wrote:

joelove wrote:

Was it about 1000 hours in 3 months? No wonder 3 hours a week doesn't really cut it.

1000 hours is about right. For reference, here's the number of hours the DLI believes it takes to be proficient in certain languages:

Quote:

III/ The Defense Language Institute (DLI) has developed a separate foreign language difficulty scale (the "DLI scale") based on language relationships and "practical experience". The DLI scale has four categories.

Group I: About 575-600 hours.
Dutch/ French/ Italian/ Portuguese/ Romanian/ Scandinavian languages/ Spanish

Group I/II: German is between the above and below group, as it requires 750 hours

Group II: Approximately 1100 hours.
Albanian/ Amharic/Armenian, Azerbaijani, Georgian/ Slavic languages/ Greek/ Hebrew/ Hindi (all Indian languages belonging to the Indo-European branch)/ Hungarian/ Finnish/ Khmer/ Lao / Vietnamese/ Thai/ Burmese/ Baltic languages/ Mongolian/ Persian (Dari, Farsi, Tajik)/ Tagalog/ Turkish/ Uzbek/ Xhosa/ Zulu

Group III: Approximately 2200 hours.
Arabic/ Cantonese/ Mandarin/ Japanese/ Korean

I'm not sure what level of fluency they believe students should attain after this, whether it's just practical fluency or something higher.

Those specific figures seem to be either outdated or to not originate from DLI. They appear on this website: http://aboutworldlanguages.com/LanguageDifficulty/ , which describes them as the Foreign Service Institute's estimate of the number of classroom hours required to reach a 3 in listening and a 3 in reading (3/3) on the Interagency Language Roundtable (ILR) scale. You can read a description of what that means here: http://www.govtilr.org/skills/ILRscale1.htm . Anyway, the goal of the basic courses at DLI to take students with no knowledge of a language and bring them up to a 2/2/1+ in a short amount of time. As the skills stressed at DLI are reading and listening comprehension over conversational and survival speaking, the result is often a person who can get the gist of a news story talking about how the low birth rate and tendecy to marry late are changing the demographics of Korean society, but wouldn't necessarily be able to ask for no anchovies on his/her pizza.

I would call it "functional" proficiency.

mithridates

Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency

Posted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 4:40 pm Post subject:

javis wrote:

mithridates wrote:

joelove wrote:

Was it about 1000 hours in 3 months? No wonder 3 hours a week doesn't really cut it.

1000 hours is about right. For reference, here's the number of hours the DLI believes it takes to be proficient in certain languages:

Quote:

I'm not sure what level of fluency they believe students should attain after this, whether it's just practical fluency or something higher.

That's weird - I always heard that DLI was the program where people are sat down with native teachers of a language and forced to respond to drills over and over again until they begin speaking it without thinking. Maybe I'm thinking about another program.

Quote:

It's not hard to retain when the languages are as similar to each other as Korean and Japanese are. It's kind of like Romance languages vs. English in terms of shared vocabulary except that in this case they're written in a different script, and the more you learn of one the more you understand the other as well.

javis

Joined: 28 Feb 2013

Posted: Tue Mar 05, 2013 3:40 am Post subject:

mithridates wrote:

javis wrote:

mithridates wrote:

joelove wrote:

Was it about 1000 hours in 3 months? No wonder 3 hours a week doesn't really cut it.

1000 hours is about right. For reference, here's the number of hours the DLI believes it takes to be proficient in certain languages:

Quote:

I'm not sure what level of fluency they believe students should attain after this, whether it's just practical fluency or something higher.

Yes, there is quite a bit of repetition, and the instructors are native speakers who primarily use the target language as their language of instruction from day one. Also, everyone who makes it through the course is capable of completing a 45-60 minute interview-style speaking test. It's just that there is more emphasis on reading and listening comprehension, so those skills go to a much high level compared to speaking.

I could go into more detail about the DLI teaching style, and how it compares to a college course in the states, or a university program in Korea, or one-to-one tutoring, or self study if you'd like.

mithridates

Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency

Posted: Tue Mar 05, 2013 5:38 am Post subject:

javis wrote:

mithridates wrote:

javis wrote:

mithridates wrote:

joelove wrote:

Was it about 1000 hours in 3 months? No wonder 3 hours a week doesn't really cut it.

1000 hours is about right. For reference, here's the number of hours the DLI believes it takes to be proficient in certain languages:

Quote:

I'm not sure what level of fluency they believe students should attain after this, whether it's just practical fluency or something higher.

Sure, that would be a help for anyone else following the thread who is using one of those other methods. There's a guy named Christophe Clugston that swears by the DLI method and uploads a lot of videos on YouTube criticizing some of the fairly well-known polyglots out there, and there's a ton of bad blood between a lot of them that is pretty fascinating to watch. It's at its worst when one of them has published and begins to sell a new surefire method that makes it super easy to learn any language, which the rest of them will invariably jump in to criticize and beat down.

giraffe

Joined: 07 Apr 2009

Posted: Tue Mar 05, 2013 9:25 pm Post subject:

mithridates wrote:

sounds like what mormon missionaries go through during their language training before going out on their"mission"

javis

Joined: 28 Feb 2013

Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 7:51 am Post subject:

mithridates wrote:

javis wrote:

I could go into more detail about the DLI teaching style, and how it compares to a college course in the states, or a university program in Korea, or one-to-one tutoring, or self study if you'd like.

Sorry, it's taken a while to get around to making this post. I've been quite busy with work lately. I have experienced a variety of different language learning methods, and some of them have worked better than others for me, and I suspect that it would be the same case for others. I'm interested in helping other people learn Korean, but I would have to get to know them first before making any specific recommendations.

I hadn't ever heard of Christophe Clugston before your post here. I watched a couple of his videos, and I don't know what his exact background is, but he sure doesn't talk like a military linguist (I'll get into explaining that in a bit) or someone who was an instructor at DLI. My assessment is that he is in the beginning stages of doing some graduate work in linguistics, and his excitement with his newfound knowledge has combined with his competitive/aggressive nature (he seems to be some kind of fighting/self defense trainer as well) to create an urge to beat down his perceived competitors and prove himself to be the best. Anyway

So what is a military linguist? Basically it's an enlisted occupational specialty that requires proficiency in a foreign language, which can either be obtained through language training provided by the Department of Defense, or simply gained as a heritage speaker of the target language. Just like other career fields there's a considerable amount of training besides language required to do the job. The actual duty varies between interpretation, translation, and analysis of foreign language materials, depending on the specific assignment. I wasn't a native Korean speaker, but had 7 years of background with the language before I joined, so I didn't take the typical path into this career field, but I am enjoying myself nonetheless.

I first encountered Korean in 2003 when I was fresh out of high school, and deciding which classes to take to satisfy a foreign language requirement for my major. I had some sort of government work with an international focus in mind for once I graduated, so I chose a language from the critical languages list that had a reputedly easy writing system and which wasn't saturated with people trying to learn it, as Arabic was at the time.

I left home to go to college in Washington, DC. Classes the first four semesters met five days a week for a bit more than an hour, and the professor was a kind, motherly type who had done her graduate and PhD studies in Europe. The class followed the typical pattern for basic college language classes, but the professor thought of us as her kids and would often emphasize that she didn't want us to stress out, so would sometimes postpone assignments if there were too many outside demands on our time from other classes. The emphasis was on basic grammar conveyed through conversation patterns, and supported with a bit of vocabulary. The next year, I went to study at the Yonsei KLI for 6 months, and when I first arrived, I found that having a spontaneous conversation with a live Korean was beyond my abilities. While I had taken away from my studies in the US a keen interest in Korean history and a thorough understanding of some of the fundamentals of Korean grammar, I simply hadnt been thrown into a situation where I had had to actuall use Korean yet. Anyway, I placed into level 2 out of 6 at Yonsei and took through level 3 before I went back to the US. My speaking improved during that time from using Korean in my every day life as well as when I was at school. As I'm sure others have mentioned, the emphasis there is on grammar, but a lot of time is spent listening to the teacher talk. That said, I wouldn't discount the value of having the target language double as the primary language of instruction. I say this because learning to follow the teachers' classroom procedures and the grammar patterns they used while explaining things was useful later on for more advanced listening and speaking.

My first visit to Korea was a turning point. I saw firsthand the nation I had heard about before, and became interested in issues related to North Korean human rights. I started taking Korean more seriously, and over the next year exhausted the Korean language classes that my school had to offer, including one that introduced more fiction and poetry reading, as well as hanja, and one that focused on current events. In 2007 I realized that I was more interested in the Korean language than in finishing the badly mismanaged academic program I was originally enrolled in, so I went back to Korea to study some more. This time, I opted for a Korean hakwon called Ganada located near Hongdae, because it had been started by former KLI teachers, but was much cheaper. I liked the classroom environment there because the other students tended to be older and took that class more seriously than their counterparts at Yonsei did. I got up to the first so-called advanced class there, then returned to the US when my 90 day tourist visa ran out.

I got an internship at an NGO that did human rights work in North Korea, and enjoyed that work, but ultimately in 2008 I had to move back to Oklahoma when money became a problem. At that point, I began to rely heavily on self-study and online language learning tools. I had utilized language exchange partners throughout the time that I was in school to get practice in free conversation and ask specific questions, and I began to apply this method to online chatting. I found that through actively engaging in free-flowing conversation with native speakers, and challenging myself to fully understand what was said and express myself accurately, I could solidify my knowledge of the fundamentals that I had learned in the classroom, as well as learn more natural and colloquial expressions. I also listened to lots of podcasts and online language lessons, and actively participated in the communities. Immediately practicing what I was learning, and learning through teaching other community members were both very helpful to me. I also, got in writing practice through another online community. Going on like this, I improved in many areas, but stagnated in other areas. As you can imagine, there weren't that many opportunities to practice speaking Korean in Oklahoma.

The next chapter came when I decided that I really would like to pursue a career that utilized Korean, and discovered the possibility of becoming a military linguist. I researched as much as I could, and found the right combination of branch of military service and career field that could not only send me to DLI, but also guarantee that I would be stationed in Korea, and signed away the next 6 years of my life in late 2010.

The teaching method at DLI is often compared to drinking from a firehose. Classes are 7 hours a day with about 3 hours of homework per night. The instructors are all native speakers, so their culture influences the method of instruction. I can only speak for the Korean schoolhouse, but I know that the others are challenging as well. The program is designed to take someone who has passed a language aptitude test, but has no prior knowledge of a foreign language and build them up to a general level of proficiency in 6-18 months, depending on the language. It was hard even for someone like me who had a lot of background. That is because the learning objective is to actually teach you the language in a short amount of time, and you're held accountable for making progress. The government is putting in a considerable investment in each student, so they are determined to get their money's worth. A student's progress and behavior in class can have severe professional and personal consequences. My teachers all knew where my abilities were, and provided opportunities for me to do my best. I went from about a 1+/2 level on the ILR scale when I got there to a 3/4 by the time I left. I would say that about half of the students in the Korean basic course make it all the way through and pass the DLPT on the first try. Of those who don't, most get sent back to a class in a previous part of the course (getting rolled back) or get another chance at the DLPT after a couple months of studying.

One key component of the program is the frequest tests. Students have a feedback session with their teacher every couple weeks where they can discuss the student's strengths and weaknesses, and what they can do to improve. Those feedback sessions are used as documentation to make a determination of what to do with the student should they be struggling too much to continue along with the rest of the class. The keys to being successful at DLI are to a. do what the teachers say b. find an activity that you already enjoy doing and combine your language study with it to give yourself more opportunities to use the language on your own and c. Spend a day every now and then not studying, so your can blow off steam and don't burn out.

I hope that bit of background helps. If there are any specific questions about the teaching methodology we can go from here.

wanderkind

Joined: 01 Jan 2012
Location: Japan

Posted: Thu Apr 04, 2013 2:15 pm Post subject:

I met an American guy in a hostel in Europe at one point who was a military serviceman on vacation. He was a military linguist, and, according to him at least, was going back to the states after the vacation to do his fifth language course at what I assume now was the DLI. He said something like, they reach the completion of Rosetta stone content in a couple weeks, and are completely fluent within 4-6 months. If he wasn't bullshitting the firehouse analogy seems pretty apt.

Also I wish it was available for the public.

mithridates wrote:

....One of my favourite times was on the second day at the goshiwon where I hung out with some Chinese people that barely spoke Korean and a Korean guy that had spent a few years...

EDIT: Sorry, I didn't read the blog post before. Which was fantastic by the way! But still a couple questions.

How did you locate the goshiwon?

What sort of visa were you on?

From what you've heard from other people who have learned Korean, how did your experience compare to people who study in a full-time uni program?

young_clinton

Joined: 09 Sep 2009

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 4:50 pm Post subject:

tokkibunni8 wrote:

I learned Korean by hanging out with just Koreans. Gave the classroom a tried but all it really did was flatten my wallet.

Come out to the boonies and you'll learn Korean just like that Smile

Really? I don't think everyone.

young_clinton

Joined: 09 Sep 2009

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 5:00 pm Post subject:

wanderkind wrote:

mithridates wrote:

....One of my favourite times was on the second day at the goshiwon where I hung out with some Chinese people that barely spoke Korean and a Korean guy that had spent a few years...

These are people with very high language learning aptitude, or maybe just language aptitude. However they are something like that. Which is why they may learn it that fast under intense learning conditions. Believe me the military tests them before they go into the program. Actually this is another thing to bring up. The language learning aptitude of an individual is a key factor as well as age. Language learning aptitude is not likely to be the same as language aptitude, although I don't know that for a fact. I have a language ability that is average for a typical graduate student and I wouldn't learn Korean that fast even in an intensive Korean program.

javis

Joined: 28 Feb 2013

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 8:49 pm Post subject:

wanderkind wrote:

The fire hose analogy is pretty commonly accepted to be accurate, but the numbers he stated are definitely an exagerration. The only way I could think of quantitatively comparing a basic course at DLI to Rosetta Stone is the number of vocabulary words. In that case, I suppose the student would be exposed to much more at DLI, but I don't think that vocabulary in and of itself is a good measure of fluency.

Anyway, did he seem older, like he had been in the service for quite a while? Over time, linguists can be sent back to Monterey for periodic refresher courses, intermediate or advanced language classes, or to attend the basic course for a new language (btw, the terms basic, intermediate and advanced refer to DLI courses here, which are designed around DLPT target scores, so they don't translate that well to courses elsewhere). The classes beyond the basic course are shorter and much less intense. It's very unlikely that he had been trained in more than 2-3 languages. How is the military supposed to get a return on their investment if he's spent his whole career in training?

fezmond

Joined: 27 Oct 2008

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 10:01 pm Post subject:

wanderkind wrote:

Also I wish it was available for the public.

The DLI course?

I have it on my laptop (French course). You can download them for free on the net, entirely legally (I believe). The FSI courses are worth checking out too. Same thing essentially just with less military jargon.

mithridates

Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 11:04 pm Post subject:

wanderkind wrote:

mithridates wrote:

....One of my favourite times was on the second day at the goshiwon where I hung out with some Chinese people that barely spoke Korean and a Korean guy that had spent a few years...

How I located the goshiwon - a search on a Korean site somewhere, looked like a fairly good location in shinchon and I wasn't picky. Visa was a travel visa since I wasn't enrolled in any sort of program and wasn't working. Uni programs I can't say, but most people I met who were in them seemed to end up with friends that spoke the same L1 as them. I was considering something like that but it seemed like an unnecessary expenditure and the class content and homework probably would have been distracting.

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> General Discussion Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4
Page 4 of 4

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe