next »

[egilson]

Spinning off from the "PhD Bears" tread, that cartoon got less funny after I had a similar conversation with someone in my department. I assumed, wrongly, that his having a secondary field in an area where the primary literature is in a particular and common non-English language meant that he could actually read that language. When I found out he couldn't and had never even studied it, I tactlessly asked how he expected to study X without being able to read language X.

Silly me. His response was that a secondary field was just a line on the diploma, that secondary literature was sufficient to teach an intro course if he had to, and that his goal (approved by his advisor) was to just pick a geographic area of study in which he could more easily get a job [which a brief look at the market says he failed to do because there aren't any] and get the PhD quickly.

I like this guy, but I wanted to say, "I sure hope I can get out on the market and get hired before our program's reputation goes completely in the sewer."

[polly_mer]

I'm stunned by the logical disconnect between "just a line on the diploma" and "picking something for that line in the hopes of increasing job chances in the field represented by the line".

Yes, anyone with a properly earned doctorate in almost anything probably could pull it together in a pinch to teach an introductory class in almost something else, but just because I probably could use the internet to put together, say, an art history class that isn't a complete disaster doesn't mean that someone should hire me (physical scientist and engineer) to do so.

I'm not disturbed by picking a secondary area to help maximize job prospects, but I certainly hope that what happens to this guy is that his advisor will rip him a new one upon discovering that the graduate student plans to fake a secondary field instead of taking the opportunity to learn something new, which is the point of a secondary field.

[erzuliefreda]

This is sadly common in History. People will do a minor field in, say, Chinese history, with no intention of learning to read any primary sources.

We've also seen job candidates claim to be Africanists with expertise in regions where French would be vital to parts of their study, but who read no languages other than English. And this is for their major field. Their response? "Oh, I paid to have translations done."

[a11ex]

I understood the cartoon in a different way. What I think the cartoon is about is the endless chain of requirements which pile up on the grad student, distancing him further and further from what he really wants to think about, say radical politics. So the situation becomes absurd - the more you read, the less you know about what actually got you reading in the first place. That's why the brown bear gets pissed, and that's why its funny IMO.

Sure, arguing why that joke is funny is a terrible thing to do on a Saturday, but it beats having to entertain those annoying guests my wife is having in the living room right now. 

[iclaudius]

This is sadly common in History. People will do a minor field in, say, Chinese history, with no intention of learning to read any primary sources.

We've also seen job candidates claim to be Africanists with expertise in regions where French would be vital to parts of their study, but who read no languages other than English. And this is for their major field. Their response? "Oh, I paid to have translations done."

At my PhD school a finalist in a search for a Chinese history position admitted during the interview that he/she didn't read the language and had no intention of learning to do so. And that candidate's dissertation was on Chinese history. The candidate did not get the job.

[bluezebracat]

This is sadly common in History. People will do a minor field in, say, Chinese history, with no intention of learning to read any primary sources.

We've also seen job candidates claim to be Africanists with expertise in regions where French would be vital to parts of their study, but who read no languages other than English. And this is for their major field. Their response? "Oh, I paid to have translations done."

At my PhD school a finalist in a search for a Chinese history position admitted during the interview that he/she didn't read the language and had no intention of learning to do so. And that candidate's dissertation was on Chinese history. The candidate did not get the job.

??? You're kidding, right? How is this possible?
I was a little offended when people asked me about my language skills at interviews, because I was thinking, 'well how the heck do you think I wrote all of this without being able to read, duh?' but now I see...

This has to be rare, though.  I've never heard of this before.

[gravitysrainbow]

This is sadly common in History. People will do a minor field in, say, Chinese history, with no intention of learning to read any primary sources.

We've also seen job candidates claim to be Africanists with expertise in regions where French would be vital to parts of their study, but who read no languages other than English. And this is for their major field. Their response? "Oh, I paid to have translations done."

Pardon my ignorance as a foreign (R1) student, but there are (R1) PhD programs in history that don't require two foreign languages? Crazy.

I was a little offended when people asked me about my language skills at interviews, because I was thinking, 'well how the heck do you think I wrote all of this without being able to read, duh?' but now I see...

I think it's pretty standard to put your languages on your cv. At least, they're on mine.

Cheers,
GR

[iclaudius]

Pardon my ignorance as a foreign (R1) student, but there are (R1) PhD programs in history that don't require two foreign languages? Crazy.

Yes, there are. My history program changed the foreign language requirement from two to one while I was in the middle of my PhD (about 10 years ago). However, it was made pretty clear that I better read well the foreign language(s) necessary for my dissertation topic. I guess in modern American history you could get away with just reading English. 

[bread_pirate_naan]

I can't wait until people who want to study oral cultures and traditions have to be able to recall all of the primary information about their fields without books or writing.  That will be awesome.

[bread_pirate_naan]

I also think Foucauldians should know a whole damn lot about human anatomy, and (visual) perception -- neurobiology, or philosophy of, is fine.  But just to start.

If you have accepted language is the way in all knowledge is mediated, and your methodology depends on it, I also want to know which theorists of translation influence your work and see requisite supporting coursework/publications in linguistics.

<I can do this all day>

I understood the cartoon in a different way. What I think the cartoon is about is the endless chain of requirements which pile up on the grad student, distancing him further and further from what he really wants to think about, say radical politics. So the situation becomes absurd - the more you read, the less you know about what actually got you reading in the first place. That's why the brown bear gets pissed, and that's why its funny IMO.

Sure, arguing why that joke is funny is a terrible thing to do on a Saturday, but it beats having to entertain those annoying guests my wife is having in the living room right now.  

It's unintentionally funny, because of the gross number of thought free assumptions that describe the character who is supposed to be the 'good scholar'.

[bluezebracat]

I was a little offended when people asked me about my language skills at interviews, because I was thinking, 'well how the heck do you think I wrote all of this without being able to read, duh?' but now I see...

I think it's pretty standard to put your languages on your cv. At least, they're on mine.

Cheers,
GR

Um. You're also assuming that everyone on the SC reads a CV carefully.  Sadly, no.

[msparticularity]

I was a little offended when people asked me about my language skills at interviews, because I was thinking, 'well how the heck do you think I wrote all of this without being able to read, duh?' but now I see...

I think it's pretty standard to put your languages on your cv. At least, they're on mine.

Cheers,
GR

Um. You're also assuming that everyone on the SC reads a CV carefully.  Sadly, no.

I think language skills can be messy, too--at least if you're a colonialist. I did a great deal of my master's research in Spanish, and a bit in Portuguese, but had to rely upon translations for indigenous languages, for example. I'm not sure that all of that would have been evident from a look at my CV.

[ticklemepink]

What history programs are these?!  Sometimes I think the US field is becoming insane because there are so many people who don't have foreign languages and don't want to bother with them.  Hence, just needing to brush up their French or Spanish from high school just to pass the reading exam.

My BA and MA advisers insisted that I get 2 languages down before I could apply for PhD (because my field requires 3-4), at least at proficient level.  No ands, ifs, or buts, even if I ultimately decide to do my dissertation in US history regarding this ethnic population.  So I've been working my butt off to make them happy and now I'm taking this time off to learn that 3rd language in another country as I apply for the PhD.

I have known and seen students get admitted with less than stellar language preparation.  I found out that a PhD student in my field had been admitted with just one language (ant it's not French or German!) and none of the usual required languages (but probably to some extent on one of them).  She had to take a German reading course throughout her first year.  Then, I swear, my eyes were ready to pop out of my head when this student told me her summer plans because I thought it was a language she should've had studied already before coming to this top R1 school.  Heck, it was the first language my professors told me to study when I told them that I wanted to get a PhD in this field.  

So yes, it irks me when I hear of people whine and do only the bare minimum just to maximize their job and publishing prospects.  Besides, wouldn't students be impressed if one can show them a slide of a Chinese newspaper IN CHINESE and tell the students what the headlines are saying? :)  Including the captions below photographs.

I was a little offended when people asked me about my language skills at interviews, because I was thinking, 'well how the heck do you think I wrote all of this without being able to read, duh?' but now I see...

I think it's pretty standard to put your languages on your cv. At least, they're on mine.

Cheers,
GR

Um. You're also assuming that everyone on the SC reads a CV carefully.  Sadly, no.

I think language skills can be messy, too--at least if you're a colonialist. I did a great deal of my master's research in Spanish, and a bit in Portuguese, but had to rely upon translations for indigenous languages, for example. I'm not sure that all of that would have been evident from a look at my CV.

But the idea of this thread is that if you're going to research/teach that particualr area, you should have the major languages.

[merce]

I have heard tell of candidates who had languages listed on their CV that the search committee then wanted to hear during the interview.  The candidates had apparently fibbed.  Didn't understand a word.
Wow. That would stink. I was interviewed and the language was switched to one of my weak languages. I was so glad I hadn't simply listed the languages as though my proficiency were the same in all of them.


I try to specify my comfort level with languages on my CV.
Reading knowledge
very basic beginner skills
fluent
I got the job which included teaching first-year in that language.

[prytania3]

I understood the cartoon in a different way. What I think the cartoon is about is the endless chain of requirements which pile up on the grad student, distancing him further and further from what he really wants to think about, say radical politics. So the situation becomes absurd - the more you read, the less you know about what actually got you reading in the first place. That's why the brown bear gets pissed, and that's why its funny IMO.

Sure, arguing why that joke is funny is a terrible thing to do on a Saturday, but it beats having to entertain those annoying guests my wife is having in the living room right now. 

I agree. Especially since Derrida expounded upon the radical absence.