ARABIC-L: PEDA: Language Classification Responses

[Dilworth B. Parkinson]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Arabic-L: Fri 12 Mar 1999
Moderator: Dilworth Parkinson <dilworth_parkinson at byu.edu>
[To post messages to the list, send them to arabic-l at byu.edu]
[To unsubscribe, send message to listserv at byu.edu with first line reading:
          unsubscribe arabic-l                                      ]

-------------------------Directory-------------------------------------

1) Subject: Defense Language Institute URL
2) Subject: Accurate Classifications?
3) Subject: Department of Defense
4) Subject: Foreign Service Institute

-------------------------Messages--------------------------------------
1)
Date: 12 Mar 1999
From: "T.A. MCALLISTER" <ecl6tam at lucs-01.novell.leeds.ac.uk>
Subject: Defense Language Institute URL

You could try:
http://dli-www.army.mil/pages_/catalog/acadcred.htm

The classification is based on the difficulty of learning the
language for speakers of American English, so it might not be exactly
equivalent for Norwegians, who might, for example, find learning
German easier than Americans would find it.

Best wishes.

Alec McAllister
Arts Computing Development Officer
Computing Service
University of Leeds
Leeds
LS2 9JT
United Kingdom
tel 0113 233 3573
email: T.A.McAllister at Leeds.AC.UK
fax: 0113 233 5411

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
2)
Date: 12 Mar 1999
From: Jackie Murgida <jmurg at star.net>
Subject: Accurate Classifications?

Gunvor, I think you're referring to the classification system used by the
U.S. government. I don't know if there's anything in writing that you could
request, but the most likely source for it would be the State Department.
Their Foreign Service Institute bases length of courses on that
classification. The system was devised quite some time ago [over 25 years, I
believe], and I don't know if the rationale and justification for the
ratings of difficulty were ever really articulated in a document.

Perhaps someone on the list who's in the Washington area can check with the
Library of Congress and FSI itself to see if there's anything available that
would help you. Also, the military people use the system -- that might be a
source, too.

My own feeling, having worked in the gov. on foreign language projects is
that some of the classifications are kind of dubious. They seem to have
decided that languages were difficult or easy for English speakers based on
a mix of characteristics. For instance, Chinese is in the most difficult
category, because it has a difficult writing system, and Japanese and Arabic
are in the same category. But spoken Arabic is much easier than spoken
Japanese, and the Arabic writing system is alphabetic and, in my opinion,
far easier than Japanese and Chinese orthography. But Chinese grammar isn't
that strenuous, compared to Japanese. On the other hand, you have the Arabic
diglossia situation to contend with if you're learning both spoken and
written Arabic.

The thing that always seemed wrong to me is that languages like Turkish and
Finnish are considered "easier" than Arabic [presumably because of the Latin
orthography], when they are far more difficult to learn to speak. But if
you're in a speaking-only course [like colloquial Egyptian, in
transliteration], you get more credit for Arabic than for Turkish.

When I was involved with this there were three categories, by the way.

I don't know if this has helped, but I feel better having vented my
dissatisfaction with the system. At least if the American bureaucrats
consider these languages to warrant two to three times as much course time
than Spanish, French, and German, it should give you some ammunition with
your university authorities. I would try to point out to them that learning
Arabic is like learning a language and a half [a dialect + MSA], and some
would even say it's like learning two languages, if you want to learn to
both speak/understand and read.

Best regards,
Jackie Murgida
[we met at a conference once, didn't we?]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
3)
Date: 12 Mar 1999
From: Bill Turpen <BTURPEN at ossm.edu>
Subject: Department of Defense

     The United States Department of Defense Foreign Language
Institute in Monterey, California, uses some such system.  As I
recall the basic courses in Spanish and French are 24 seven
hour per day weeks, German is 32 weeks, and Russian is 47.  Other
languages, including MSA and other Arabic courses, are taught there
as well.     You might be able to get their listing of courses, then
you would know which languages are considered to take more time in
achieving a basic knowledge than others.
     (The "other Arabic courses," I believe, are taught to those who
have already completed the MSA course.  I do not remember its length,
but I believe the MSA course  is more than 47 weeks--and I am not
certain that they use the Arabic alphabet, either!}
     Bill L. Turpen
     Oklahoma School of Science and Mathematics

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
4)
Date: 12 Mar 1999
From: Taoufik Ben-Amor <tb46 at columbia.edu>
Subject: Foreign Service Institute

Greetings,

The language classification you alluded to is that produced by the FSI
(Foreign Service Institute). It classifies Arabic as a Category 4
language. Unfortunately, I do not have an address or e-mail for them, but
they are based in Washington DC.

good luck,

T. ben Amor
Columbia University

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Arabic-L: 12 Mar 1999