September 30, 2013

Poison victim now better at English

By Ke Jiayun
September 29, 2013

A BILINGUAL Chinese office worker who suffered carbon monoxide poisoning can now only speak English fluently.

Chen Jia, a 28-year-old graduate from Jianghan University in Hubei Province, was overcome by carbon monoxide fumes from an indoor barbecue at a friend’s birthday party in Wuhan City last year.

She had returned to Wuhan last February, after a two-year stint as a representative with Insearch College at the University of Technology in Sydney.

Exposure to the toxic environment greatly impaired Chen’s ability in her native Chinese, although her English skills remained, Changjiang Daily reported.

Chen was unable to walk until March this year and she has been receiving rehabilitation training in language ability at the General Hospital of the Yangtze River Shipping since August.

As part of her rehabilitation work, doctors asked Chen to teach English to medical staff in the hospital.

“Similar cases have been reported before,” Deng Hongwei, a doctor with the rehabilitation department, said.

“When bilingual patients suffer brain damage, they can lose the ability to speak one language but speak the other language very well,” said Deng.

Deng added that Chen’s rehabilitative training in teaching English could help her regain her confidence and recover sooner.

An intern of the hospital said Chen’s English class is as good as those given by her university teachers.

Chen’s family is hoping to get social support to pay for her rehabilitation costs of more than 10,000 yuan (US$1,634) a month.
©

September 27, 2013

Ten Biggest Mistakes Bosses Make In Performance Reviews

Forbes

Eric Jackson

In the world of organizational life, there’s no single discussion that causes so much fear and dread on the boss’s side and so much anger and resentment on the direct report’s side than the performance review.

I had drinks last week with a senior guy who works for a global financial institution, who had just had his year-end performance review a couple of weeks ago. He exploded in anger to me about the experience. “I’ve had it with those guys. They don’t give a s— about any of the work I’ve done in the last 3 years. I’m doing the old jobs of 4 people pre-2008 and they don’t thank me and they just want me to do more. I’m quitting.”

“Wait a second,” I said. “In this economy? You’re going to quit over this?”

“Damn right. I can find another job in the next month for what I do. If these guys don’t appreciate me, I’ll go somewhere else.”

Why do almost all performance reviews cause aggravation? Here are the top ten ways you can ensure your next performance with your reports will be a total bomb:

1. Too vague. I love the bosses who have 10 minute performance reviews with their people, usually in the last week of the year — after being harassed 4 times from HR to get them done. The meetings are usually called on the spur of the moment: “Hey Sally, could you stop in my office for a sec?” They’re as brief as possible and give the reports no specific feedback on the work they’ve done in the last year. There’s usually lots of “you’re doing good work” and “keep it up” sprinkled in to the conversation. But how does a report take that as feedback and improve their job performance in the next year? Be specific about what you liked and didn’t like in their performance.

2. Everything’s perfect – until it’s not and you’re fired. This reason usually follows #1. Over the years, I’ve heard lots of complaints from laid off workers who never saw it coming and then are bitter when they are tossed aside because they’re apparently no longer getting the job done. They point to a series of glowing annual performance reviews and then suddenly being called into the boss’s office to be let go. People aren’t usually resentful if they’re laid off because the company is suddenly facing a crisis not of their own making (which isn’t usually the case). However, what drives people up the wall is when it’s clear that the boss has been bothered by some aspect of their performance, but never bothered to mention it to them until the time of their firing. ”A little heads up would have been nice so I could have tried to improve in that area,” said one person I know who went through this experience.

3. Recency effect. This is a psychology term for when we overly focus on the most recent event as the basis for analyzing the entire past year’s performance. So, if you have some mistake happen to you very recently and it ends up being the entire topic of your performance review even if you’ve done a great job the rest of the year, you’ve been a victim of the recency effect. Some bosses seem to have no memory, so they only base their opinions on the most recent events and opinions from others to form their opinion on what’s happening. Plus, the world we live in today, with always on email and Twitter stream updates, makes us even more susceptible to doing this.

4. No preparation. Some bosses like to do these meetings “on the fly.” I knew one boss that would drive around with his sales guys and give them feedback from the passenger seat on long roadtrips. The worst part of this kind of approach is that it typically means the boss hasn’t given any thought to how the report has done in the last year and what they need to do to improve. Even worse are the bosses who simply cut and paste what was on last year’s performance review form to this year’s with minimal if any changes. The message sent to the employee is: “I’m very important and busy. I don’t have time to tell you how I think you’re doing at your job.”

5. They never happen at all or “My people know my door is always open.” I can’t tell you how many times I’ve chatted with lazy bosses who use that line: “Oh, my people know I have an open-door policy and they can come to me to talk about anything at any time.” I would say 80% of the time in those cases, if I went to the reports and they answered me honestly, they would say that they typically don’t go to the boss because he or she is always on the phone or looks too busy. And, by the way, they usually never take the boss up on the offer. The bosses who don’t plan their performance reviews are typically not great planners in their jobs. There will typically be other problems down the road for that boss’s work group if they’re showing evidence of being unable to plan the simplest of meetings.

6. No pats on the back. It might seem like a simple thing, but lots of bosses just don’t give recognition to their people when they do a good job. These days, we’re all busy and most people are over-worked and under-appreciated. But it never ceases to amaze me how much abuse people can take from the worst boss and the worst work environment, as long as they get some random appreciation for their hard work every now and then. Maybe it’s just inertia, or fears about doing a job search in a bad economy, but I find most people want to stay where they are working at their current jobs. Maybe they have their kids in a daycare nearby. Maybe they have a decent commute. Whatever it is, people can put up with a lot of grief. They just need an occasional bone to be thrown their way. Say thanks to your people when they do a good job. It’s the cheapest bonus you’ll ever pay.

7. No recognition for doing the work of 3 people. More than just saying thanks, it’s important to remember that something structural has happened in the job market since the 2008 financial crisis. Most industries have dramatically cut headcount. As a result, the remaining folks have been asked to take on the responsibilities of their former colleagues. We’re now going into the 3rd year since most of these major layoffs have happened. On the one hand, the remaining employees are happy they continue to have their jobs, but a lot of them are starting to get burned out. As mentioned in the previous point, a little thanks would go a long way. Most times though, bosses say nothing. The old employees are gone, the new people pick up the slack, and life rolls on. Except that there’s a deep undercurrent of resentment among lots of employees out there.

8. Not being truthful with employees about their performance. We all know Mr. Nice Guy bosses, who have a hard time giving one of their reports negative feedback. We also know bosses who never say anything good. They only complain. Steve Jobs at Apple (AAPL) was famous for ripping his people. In my experience, most people can handle the truth; they just can’t handle inaccurate perceptions. And those who can’t handle the truth should’ve heard it years ago but probably had lazy managers. If it’s truthful, most people can take negative feedback — even lots or constant negative feedback as was the case with Jobs. They can take it because the feedback is in service of the mission at the company. But if the boss is way off-base in his or her perceptions of a report’s performance, it is maddeningly frustrating for the employee.

9. No follow-up. One of the most bureaucratic things about performance review meetings are the forms that get filled out dutifully and sent to HR. As part of every performance review, there should be goals set for the coming year. The worst bosses forget about these goals as soon as they’ve been completed. There’s no quarterly review of them to see if the employee is on track. There’s no mid-stream feedback on how the report is doing in relation to the goals or tips from the boss on what to do to get back on track. Then, 12 months later, the old form gets pulled out from the file to be discussed again and new goals are set. To be effective, the goals have to be top of mind for both the report and the boss throughout the year.

10. No discussion around the report’s career ambitions. Most people don’t think a lot of their career path – whether they’re a boss or a report. Yet, people need to be asked “what do you want to do?” or “where do you want to go?” at every performance review (or at a separate dedicated meeting annually). This forces the employee to look him or herself in the mirror. A lot of times, some disgruntled employee – if they’re forced to answer the question of where they want to progress to — will realize they’re not in the right spot in the current job. Others will use the discussion to soak up tips from the boss like a sponge and end up being much more engaged and motivated in their jobs.

Performance reviews might not ever be fun, but they can be effective and powerful ways of creating more loyalty among team members when they’re done right.
©

September 26, 2013

Why Chinese Is So Damn Hard

Why Chinese Is So Damn Hard

by David Moser
University of Michigan Center for Chinese Studies


The first question any thoughtful person might ask when reading the title of this essay is, "Hard for whom?" A reasonable question. After all, Chinese people seem to learn it just fine. When little Chinese kids go through the "terrible twos", it's Chinese they use to drive their parents crazy, and in a few years the same kids are actually using those impossibly complicated Chinese characters to scribble love notes and shopping lists. So what do I mean by "hard"? Since I know at the outset that the whole tone of this document is going to involve a lot of whining and complaining, I may as well come right out and say exactly what I mean. I mean hard for me, a native English speaker trying to learn Chinese as an adult, going through the whole process with the textbooks, the tapes, the conversation partners, etc., the whole torturous rigmarole. I mean hard for me -- and, of course, for the many other Westerners who have spent years of their lives bashing their heads against the Great Wall of Chinese.
From Schriftfestschrift: Essays on Writing and Language in Honor of John DeFrancis on His Eightieth Birthday (Sino-Platonic Papers No. 27, August 1991), edited by Victor H. Mair

If this were as far as I went, my statement would be a pretty empty one. Of course Chinese is hard for me. After all, any foreign language is hard for a non-native, right? Well, sort of. Not all foreign languages are equally difficult for any learner. It depends on which language you're coming from. A French person can usually learn Italian faster than an American, and an average American could probably master German a lot faster than an average Japanese, and so on. So part of what I'm contending is that Chinese is hard compared to ... well, compared to almost any other language you might care to tackle. What I mean is that Chinese is not only hard for us (English speakers), but it's also hard in absolute terms. Which means that Chinese is also hard for them, for Chinese people.1

If you don't believe this, just ask a Chinese person. Most Chinese people will cheerfully acknowledge that their language is hard, maybe the hardest on earth. (Many are even proud of this, in the same way some New Yorkers are actually proud of living in the most unlivable city in America.) Maybe all Chinese people deserve a medal just for being born Chinese. At any rate, they generally become aware at some point of the Everest-like status of their native language, as they, from their privileged vantage point on the summit, observe foolhardy foreigners huffing and puffing up the steep slopes.

Everyone's heard the supposed fact that if you take the English idiom "It's Greek to me" and search for equivalent idioms in all the world's languages to arrive at a consensus as to which language is the hardest, the results of such a linguistic survey is that Chinese easily wins as the canonical incomprehensible language. (For example, the French have the expression "C'est du chinois", "It's Chinese", i.e., "It's incomprehensible". Other languages have similar sayings.) So then the question arises: What do the Chinese themselves consider to be an impossibly hard language? You then look for the corresponding phrase in Chinese, and you find Gēn tiānshū yíyàng 跟天书一样 meaning "It's like heavenly script."

There is truth in this linguistic yarn; Chinese does deserve its reputation for heartbreaking difficulty. Those who undertake to study the language for any other reason than the sheer joy of it will always be frustrated by the abysmal ratio of effort to effect. Those who are actually attracted to the language precisely because of its daunting complexity and difficulty will never be disappointed. Whatever the reason they started, every single person who has undertaken to study Chinese sooner or later asks themselves "Why in the world am I doing this?" Those who can still remember their original goals will wisely abandon the attempt then and there, since nothing could be worth all that tedious struggle. Those who merely say "I've come this far -- I can't stop now" will have some chance of succeeding, since they have the kind of mindless doggedness and lack of sensible overall perspective that it takes.

Okay, having explained a bit of what I mean by the word, I return to my original question: Why is Chinese so damn hard?
1. Because the writing system is ridiculous.

Beautiful, complex, mysterious -- but ridiculous. I, like many students of Chinese, was first attracted to Chinese because of the writing system, which is surely one of the most fascinating scripts in the world. The more you learn about Chinese characters the more intriguing and addicting they become. The study of Chinese characters can become a lifelong obsession, and you soon find yourself engaged in the daily task of accumulating them, drop by drop from the vast sea of characters, in a vain attempt to hoard them in the leaky bucket of long-term memory.

The beauty of the characters is indisputable, but as the Chinese people began to realize the importance of universal literacy, it became clear that these ideograms were sort of like bound feet -- some fetishists may have liked the way they looked, but they weren't too practical for daily use.

For one thing, it is simply unreasonably hard to learn enough characters to become functionally literate. Again, someone may ask "Hard in comparison to what?" And the answer is easy: Hard in comparison to Spanish, Greek, Russian, Hindi, or any other sane, "normal" language that requires at most a few dozen symbols to write anything in the language. John DeFrancis, in his book The Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy, reports that his Chinese colleagues estimate it takes seven to eight years for a Mandarin speaker to learn to read and write three thousand characters, whereas his French and Spanish colleagues estimate that students in their respective countries achieve comparable levels in half that time.2 Naturally, this estimate is rather crude and impressionistic (it's unclear what "comparable levels" means here), but the overall implications are obvious: the Chinese writing system is harder to learn, in absolute terms, than an alphabetic writing system.3 Even Chinese kids, whose minds are at their peak absorptive power, have more trouble with Chinese characters than their little counterparts in other countries have with their respective scripts. Just imagine the difficulties experienced by relatively sluggish post-pubescent foreign learners such as myself.

Everyone has heard that Chinese is hard because of the huge number of characters one has to learn, and this is absolutely true. There are a lot of popular books and articles that downplay this difficulty, saying things like "Despite the fact that Chinese has [10,000, 25,000, 50,000, take your pick] separate characters you really only need 2,000 or so to read a newspaper". Poppycock. I couldn't comfortably read a newspaper when I had 2,000 characters under my belt. I often had to look up several characters per line, and even after that I had trouble pulling the meaning out of the article. (I take it as a given that what is meant by "read" in this context is "read and basically comprehend the text without having to look up dozens of characters"; otherwise the claim is rather empty.)

This fairy tale is promulgated because of the fact that, when you look at the character frequencies, over 95% of the characters in any newspaper are easily among the first 2,000 most common ones.4 But what such accounts don't tell you is that there will still be plenty of unfamiliar words made up of those familiar characters. (To illustrate this problem, note that in English, knowing the words "up" and "tight" doesn't mean you know the word "uptight".) Plus, as anyone who has studied any language knows, you can often be familiar with every single word in a text and still not be able to grasp the meaning. Reading comprehension is not simply a matter of knowing a lot of words; one has to get a feeling for how those words combine with other words in a multitude of different contexts.5 In addition, there is the obvious fact that even though you may know 95% of the characters in a given text, the remaining 5% are often the very characters that are crucial for understanding the main point of the text. A non-native speaker of English reading an article with the headline "JACUZZIS FOUND EFFECTIVE IN TREATING PHLEBITIS" is not going to get very far if they don't know the words "jacuzzi" or "phlebitis".

The problem of reading is often a touchy one for those in the China field. How many of us would dare stand up in front of a group of colleagues and read a randomly-selected passage out loud? Yet inferiority complexes or fear of losing face causes many teachers and students to become unwitting cooperators in a kind of conspiracy of silence wherein everyone pretends that after four years of Chinese the diligent student should be whizzing through anything from Confucius to Lu Xun, pausing only occasionally to look up some pesky low-frequency character (in their Chinese-Chinese dictionary, of course). Others, of course, are more honest about the difficulties. The other day one of my fellow graduate students, someone who has been studying Chinese for ten years or more, said to me "My research is really hampered by the fact that I still just can't read Chinese. It takes me hours to get through two or three pages, and I can't skim to save my life." This would be an astonishing admission for a tenth-year student of, say, French literature, yet it is a comment I hear all the time among my peers (at least in those unguarded moments when one has had a few too many Tsingtao beers and has begun to lament how slowly work on the thesis is coming).

A teacher of mine once told me of a game he and a colleague would sometimes play: The contest involved pulling a book at random from the shelves of the Chinese section of the Asia Library and then seeing who could be the first to figure out what the book was about. Anyone who has spent time working in an East Asia collection can verify that this can indeed be a difficult enough task -- never mind reading the book in question. This state of affairs is very disheartening for the student who is impatient to begin feasting on the vast riches of Chinese literature, but must subsist on a bland diet of canned handouts, textbook examples, and carefully edited appetizers for the first few years.

The comparison with learning the usual western languages is striking. After about a year of studying French, I was able to read a lot. I went through the usual kinds of novels -- La nausée by Sartre, Voltaire's Candide, L'étranger by Camus -- plus countless newspapers, magazines, comic books, etc. It was a lot of work but fairly painless; all I really needed was a good dictionary and a battered French grammar book I got at a garage sale.

This kind of "sink or swim" approach just doesn't work in Chinese. At the end of three years of learning Chinese, I hadn't yet read a single complete novel. I found it just too hard, impossibly slow, and unrewarding. Newspapers, too, were still too daunting. I couldn't read an article without looking up about every tenth character, and it was not uncommon for me to scan the front page of the People's Daily and not be able to completely decipher a single headline. Someone at that time suggested I read The Dream of the Red Chamber and gave me a nice three-volume edition. I just have to laugh. It still sits on my shelf like a fat, smug Buddha, only the first twenty or so pages filled with scribbled definitions and question marks, the rest crisp and virgin. After six years of studying Chinese, I'm still not at a level where I can actually read it without an English translation to consult. (By "read it", I mean, of course, "read it for pleasure". I suppose if someone put a gun to my head and a dictionary in my hand, I could get through it.) Simply diving into the vast pool of Chinese in the beginning is not only foolhardy, it can even be counterproductive. As George Kennedy writes, "The difficulty of memorizing a Chinese ideograph as compared with the difficulty of learning a new word in a European language, is such that a rigid economy of mental effort is imperative."6 This is, if anything, an understatement. With the risk of drowning so great, the student is better advised to spend more time in the shallow end treading water before heading toward the deep end.

As if all this weren't bad enough, another ridiculous aspect of the Chinese writing system is that there are two (mercifully overlapping) sets of characters: the traditional characters still used in Taiwan and Hong Kong, and the simplified characters adopted by the People's Republic of China in the late 1950's and early 60's. Any foreign student of Chinese is more or less forced to become familiar with both sets, since they are routinely exposed to textbooks and materials from both Chinas. This linguistic camel's-back-breaking straw puts an absurd burden on the already absurdly burdened student of Chinese, who at this point would gladly trade places with Sisyphus. But since Chinese people themselves are never equally proficient in both simplified and complex characters, there is absolutely no shame whatsoever in eventually concentrating on one set to the partial exclusion the other. In fact, there is absolutely no shame in giving up Chinese altogether, when you come right down to it.
2. Because the language doesn't have the common sense to use an alphabet.

To further explain why the Chinese writing system is so hard in this respect, it might be a good idea to spell out (no pun intended) why that of English is so easy. Imagine the kind of task faced by the average Chinese adult who decides to study English. What skills are needed to master the writing system? That's easy: 26 letters. (In upper and lower case, of course, plus script and a few variant forms. And throw in some quote marks, apostrophes, dashes, parentheses, etc. -- all things the Chinese use in their own writing system.) And how are these letters written? From left to right, horizontally, across the page, with spaces to indicate word boundaries. Forgetting for a moment the problem of spelling and actually making words out of these letters, how long does it take this Chinese learner of English to master the various components of the English writing system? Maybe a day or two.

Now consider the American undergraduate who decides to study Chinese. What does it take for this person to master the Chinese writing system? There is nothing that corresponds to an alphabet, though there are recurring components that make up the characters. How many such components are there? Don't ask. As with all such questions about Chinese, the answer is very messy and unsatisfying. It depends on how you define "component" (strokes? radicals?), plus a lot of other tedious details. Suffice it to say, the number is quite large, vastly more than the 26 letters of the Roman alphabet. And how are these components combined to form characters? Well, you name it -- components to the left of other components, to the right of other components, on top of other components, surrounding other components, inside of other components -- almost anything is possible. And in the process of making these spatial accommodations, these components get flattened, stretched, squashed, shortened, and distorted in order to fit in the uniform square space that all characters are supposed to fit into. In other words, the components of Chinese characters are arrayed in two dimensions, rather than in the neat one-dimensional rows of alphabetic writing.

Okay, so ignoring for the moment the question of elegance, how long does it take a Westerner to learn the Chinese writing system so that when confronted with any new character they at least know how to move the pen around in order to produce a reasonable facsimile of that character? Again, hard to say, but I would estimate that it takes the average learner several months of hard work to get the basics down. Maybe a year or more if they're a klutz who was never very good in art class. Meanwhile, their Chinese counterpart learning English has zoomed ahead to learn cursive script, with time left over to read Moby Dick, or at least Strunk & White.

This is not exactly big news, I know; the alphabet really is a breeze to learn. Chinese people I know who have studied English for a few years can usually write with a handwriting style that is almost indistinguishable from that of the average American. Very few Americans, on the other hand, ever learn to produce a natural calligraphic hand in Chinese that resembles anything but that of an awkward Chinese third-grader. If there were nothing else hard about Chinese, the task of learning to write characters alone would put it in the rogues' gallery of hard-to-learn languages.
3. Because the writing system just ain't very phonetic.

So much for the physical process of writing the characters themselves. What about the sheer task of memorizing so many characters? Again, a comparison of English and Chinese is instructive. Suppose a Chinese person has just the previous day learned the English word "president", and now wants to write it from memory. How to start? Anyone with a year or two of English experience is going to have a host of clues and spelling rules-of-thumb, albeit imperfect ones, to help them along. The word really couldn't start with anything but "pr", and after that a little guesswork aided by visual memory ("Could a 'z' be in there? That's an unusual letter, I would have noticed it, I think. Must be an 's'...") should produce something close to the target. Not every foreigner (or native speaker for that matter) has noted or internalized the various flawed spelling heuristics of English, of course, but they are at least there to be utilized.

Now imagine that you, a learner of Chinese, have just the previous day encountered the Chinese word for "president" (总统 zǒngtǒng ) and want to write it. What processes do you go through in retrieving the word? Well, very often you just totally forget, with a forgetting that is both absolute and perfect in a way few things in this life are. You can repeat the word as often as you like; the sound won't give you a clue as to how the character is to be written. After you learn a few more characters and get hip to a few more phonetic components, you can do a bit better. ("Zǒng 总 is a phonetic component in some other character, right?...Song? Zeng? Oh yeah, cong 总 as in cōngmíng 聪明.") Of course, the phonetic aspect of some characters is more obvious than that of others, but many characters, including some of the most high-frequency ones, give no clue at all as to their pronunciation.

All of this is to say that Chinese is just not very phonetic when compared to English. (English, in turn, is less phonetic than a language like German or Spanish, but Chinese isn't even in the same ballpark.) It is not true, as some people outside the field tend to think, that Chinese is not phonetic at all, though a perfectly intelligent beginning student could go several months without noticing this fact. Just how phonetic the language is a very complex issue. Educated opinions range from 25% (Zhao Yuanren)7 to around 66% (DeFrancis),8 though the latter estimate assumes more knowledge of phonetic components than most learners are likely to have. One could say that Chinese is phonetic in the way that sex is aerobic: technically so, but in practical use not the most salient thing about it. Furthermore, this phonetic aspect of the language doesn't really become very useful until you've learned a few hundred characters, and even when you've learned two thousand, the feeble phoneticity of Chinese will never provide you with the constant memory prod that the phonetic quality of English does.

Which means that often you just completely forget how to write a character. Period. If there is no obvious semantic clue in the radical, and no helpful phonetic component somewhere in the character, you're just sunk. And you're sunk whether your native language is Chinese or not; contrary to popular myth, Chinese people are not born with the ability to memorize arbitrary squiggles. In fact, one of the most gratifying experiences a foreign student of Chinese can have is to see a native speaker come up a complete blank when called upon to write the characters for some relatively common word. You feel an enormous sense of vindication and relief to see a native speaker experience the exact same difficulty you experience every day.

This is such a gratifying experience, in fact, that I have actually kept a list of characters that I have observed Chinese people forget how to write. (A sick, obsessive activity, I know.) I have seen highly literate Chinese people forget how to write certain characters in common words like "tin can", "knee", "screwdriver", "snap" (as in "to snap one's fingers"), "elbow", "ginger", "cushion", "firecracker", and so on. And when I say "forget", I mean that they often cannot even put the first stroke down on the paper. Can you imagine a well-educated native English speaker totally forgetting how to write a word like "knee" or "tin can"? Or even a rarely-seen word like "scabbard" or "ragamuffin"? I was once at a luncheon with three Ph.D. students in the Chinese Department at Peking University, all native Chinese (one from Hong Kong). I happened to have a cold that day, and was trying to write a brief note to a friend canceling an appointment that day. I found that I couldn't remember how to write the character 嚔, as in da penti 打喷嚔 "to sneeze". I asked my three friends how to write the character, and to my surprise, all three of them simply shrugged in sheepish embarrassment. Not one of them could correctly produce the character. Now, Peking University is usually considered the "Harvard of China". Can you imagine three Ph.D. students in English at Harvard forgetting how to write the English word "sneeze"?? Yet this state of affairs is by no means uncommon in China. English is simply orders of magnitude easier to write and remember. No matter how low-frequency the word is, or how unorthodox the spelling, the English speaker can always come up with something, simply because there has to be some correspondence between sound and spelling. One might forget whether "abracadabra" is hyphenated or not, or get the last few letters wrong on "rhinoceros", but even the poorest of spellers can make a reasonable stab at almost anything. By contrast, often even the most well-educated Chinese have no recourse but to throw up their hands and ask someone else in the room how to write some particularly elusive character.

As one mundane example of the advantages of a phonetic writing system, here is one kind of linguistic situation I encountered constantly while I was in France. (Again I use French as my canonical example of an "easy" foreign language.) I wake up one morning in Paris and turn on the radio. An ad comes on, and I hear the word "amortisseur" several times. "What's an amortisseur?" I think to myself, but as I am in a hurry to make an appointment, I forget to look the word up in my haste to leave the apartment. A few hours later I'm walking down the street, and I read, on a sign, the word "AMORTISSEUR" -- the word I heard earlier this morning. Beneath the word on the sign is a picture of a shock absorber. Aha! So "amortisseur" means "shock absorber". And voila! I've learned a new word, quickly and painlessly, all because the sound I construct when reading the word is the same as the sound in my head from the radio this morning -- one reinforces the other. Throughout the next week I see the word again several times, and each time I can reconstruct the sound by simply reading the word phonetically -- "a-mor-tis-seur". Before long I can retrieve the word easily, use it in conversation, or write it in a letter to a friend. And the process of learning a foreign language begins to seem less daunting.

When I first went to Taiwan for a few months, the situation was quite different. I was awash in a sea of characters that were all visually interesting but phonetically mute. I carried around a little dictionary to look up unfamiliar characters in, but it's almost impossible to look up a character in a Chinese dictionary while walking along a crowded street (more on dictionary look-up later), and so I didn't get nearly as much phonetic reinforcement as I got in France. In Taiwan I could pass a shop with a sign advertising shock absorbers and never know how to pronounce any of the characters unless I first look them up. And even then, the next time I pass the shop I might have to look the characters up again. And again, and again. The reinforcement does not come naturally and easily.
4. Because you can't cheat by using cognates.

I remember when I had been studying Chinese very hard for about three years, I had an interesting experience. One day I happened to find a Spanish-language newspaper sitting on a seat next to me. I picked it up out of curiosity. "Hmm," I thought to myself. "I've never studied Spanish in my life. I wonder how much of this I can understand." At random I picked a short article about an airplane crash and started to read. I found I could basically glean, with some guesswork, most of the information from the article. The crash took place near Los Angeles. 186 people were killed. There were no survivors. The plane crashed just one minute after take-off. There was nothing on the flight recorder to indicate a critical situation, and the tower was unaware of any emergency. The plane had just been serviced three days before and no mechanical problems had been found. And so on. After finishing the article I had a sudden discouraging realization: Having never studied a day of Spanish, I could read a Spanish newspaper more easily than I could a Chinese newspaper after more than three years of studying Chinese.

What was going on here? Why was this "foreign" language so transparent? The reason was obvious: cognates -- those helpful words that are just English words with a little foreign make-up.9 I could read the article because most of the operative words were basically English: aeropuerto, problema mechanico, un minuto, situacion critica, emergencia, etc. Recognizing these words as just English words in disguise is about as difficult as noticing that Superman is really Clark Kent without his glasses. That these quasi-English words are easier to learn than Chinese characters (which might as well be quasi-Martian) goes without saying.

Imagine you are a diabetic, and you find yourself in Spain about to go into insulin shock. You can rush into a doctor's office, and, with a minimum of Spanish and a couple of pieces of guesswork ("diabetes" is just "diabetes" and "insulin" is "insulina", it turns out), you're saved. In China you'd be a goner for sure, unless you happen to have a dictionary with you, and even then you would probably pass out while frantically looking for the first character in the word for insulin. Which brings me to the next reason why Chinese is so hard.
5. Because even looking up a word in the dictionary is complicated.

One of the most unreasonably difficult things about learning Chinese is that merely learning how to look up a word in the dictionary is about the equivalent of an entire semester of secretarial school. When I was in Taiwan, I heard that they sometimes held dictionary look-up contests in the junior high schools. Imagine a language where simply looking a word up in the dictionary is considered a skill like debate or volleyball! Chinese is not exactly what you would call a user-friendly language, but a Chinese dictionary is positively user-hostile.

Figuring out all the radicals and their variants, plus dealing with the ambiguous characters with no obvious radical at all is a stupid, time-consuming chore that slows the learning process down by a factor of ten as compared to other languages with a sensible alphabet or the equivalent. I'd say it took me a good year before I could reliably find in the dictionary any character I might encounter. And to this day, I will very occasionally stumble onto a character that I simply can't find at all, even after ten minutes of searching. At such times I raise my hands to the sky, Job-like, and consider going into telemarketing.

Chinese must also be one of the most dictionary-intensive languages on earth. I currently have more than twenty Chinese dictionaries of various kinds on my desk, and they all have a specific and distinct use. There are dictionaries with simplified characters used on the mainland, dictionaries with the traditional characters used in Taiwan and Hong Kong, and dictionaries with both. There are dictionaries that use the Wade-Giles romanization, dictionaries that use pinyin, and dictionaries that use other more surrealistic romanization methods. There are dictionaries of classical Chinese particles, dictionaries of Beijing dialect, dictionaries of chéngyǔ (four-character idioms), dictionaries of xiēhòuyǔ (special allegorical two-part sayings), dictionaries of yànyǔ (proverbs), dictionaries of Chinese communist terms, dictionaries of Buddhist terms, reverse dictionaries... on and on. An exhaustive hunt for some elusive or problematic lexical item can leave one's desk "strewn with dictionaries as numerous as dead soldiers on a battlefield."10

For looking up unfamiliar characters there is another method called the four-corner system. This method is very fast -- rumored to be, in principle, about as fast as alphabetic look-up (though I haven't met anyone yet who can hit the winning number each time on the first try). Unfortunately, learning this method takes about as much time and practice as learning the Dewey decimal system. Plus you are then at the mercy of the few dictionaries that are arranged according to the numbering scheme of the four-corner system. Those who have mastered this system usually swear by it. The rest of us just swear.

Another problem with looking up words in the dictionary has to do with the nature of written Chinese. In most languages it's pretty obvious where the word boundaries lie -- there are spaces between the words. If you don't know the word in question, it's usually fairly clear what you should look up. (What actually constitutes a word is a very subtle issue, of course, but for my purposes here, what I'm saying is basically correct.) In Chinese there are spaces between characters, but it takes quite a lot of knowledge of the language and often some genuine sleuth work to tell where word boundaries lie; thus it's often trial and error to look up a word. It would be as if English were written thus:
FEAR LESS LY OUT SPOKE N BUT SOME WHAT HUMOR LESS NEW ENG LAND BORN LEAD ACT OR GEORGE MICHAEL SON EX PRESS ED OUT RAGE TO DAY AT THE STALE MATE BE TWEEN MAN AGE MENT AND THE ACT OR 'S UNION BE CAUSE THE STAND OFF HAD SET BACK THE TIME TABLE FOR PRO DUC TION OF HIS PLAY, A ONE MAN SHOW CASE THAT WAS HIS FIRST RUN A WAY BROAD WAY BOX OFFICE SMASH HIT. "THE FIRST A MEND MENT IS AT IS SUE" HE PRO CLAIM ED. "FOR A CENS OR OR AN EDIT OR TO EDIT OR OTHER WISE BLUE PENCIL QUESTION ABLE DIA LOG JUST TO KOW TOW TO RIGHT WING BORN AGAIN BIBLE THUMP ING FRUIT CAKE S IS A DOWN RIGHT DIS GRACE."

Imagine how this difference would compound the dictionary look-up difficulties of a non-native speaker of English. The passage is pretty trivial for us to understand, but then we already know English. For them it would often be hard to tell where the word boundaries were supposed to be. So it is, too, with someone trying to learn Chinese.
6. Then there's classical Chinese (wenyanwen).

Forget it. Way too difficult. If you think that after three or four years of study you'll be breezing through Confucius and Mencius in the way third-year French students at a comparable level are reading Diderot and Voltaire, you're sadly mistaken. There are some westerners who can comfortably read classical Chinese, but most of them have a lot of gray hair or at least tenure.

Unfortunately, classical Chinese pops up everywhere, especially in Chinese paintings and character scrolls, and most people will assume anyone literate in Chinese can read it. It's truly embarrassing to be out at a Chinese restaurant, and someone asks you to translate some characters on a wall hanging.

"Hey, you speak Chinese. What does this scroll say?" You look up and see that the characters are written in wenyan, and in incomprehensible "grass-style" calligraphy to boot. It might as well be an EKG readout of a dying heart patient.

"Uh, I can make out one or two of the characters, but I couldn't tell you what it says," you stammer. "I think it's about a phoenix or something."

"Oh, I thought you knew Chinese," says your friend, returning to their menu. Never mind that an honest-to-goodness Chinese person would also just scratch their head and shrug; the face that is lost is yours.

Whereas modern Mandarin is merely perversely hard, classical Chinese is deliberately impossible. Here's a secret that sinologists won't tell you: A passage in classical Chinese can be understood only if you already know what the passage says in the first place. This is because classical Chinese really consists of several centuries of esoteric anecdotes and in-jokes written in a kind of terse, miserly code for dissemination among a small, elite group of intellectually-inbred bookworms who already knew the whole literature backwards and forwards, anyway. An uninitiated westerner can no more be expected to understand such writing than Confucius himself, if transported to the present, could understand the entries in the "personal" section of the classified ads that say things like: "Hndsm. SWGM, 24, 160, sks BGM or WGM for gentle S&M, mod. bndg., some lthr., twosm or threesm ok, have own equip., wheels, 988-8752 lv. mssg. on ans. mach., no weirdos please."

In fairness, it should be said that classical Chinese gets easier the more you attempt it. But then so does hitting a hole in one, or swimming the English channel in a straitjacket.
7. Because there are too many romanization methods and they all suck.

Well, perhaps that's too harsh. But it is true that there are too many of them, and most of them were designed either by committee or by linguists, or -- even worse -- by a committee of linguists. It is, of course, a very tricky task to devise a romanization method; some are better than others, but all involve plenty of counterintuitive spellings.11 And if you're serious about a career in Chinese, you'll have to grapple with at least four or five of them, not including the bopomofu phonetic symbols used in Taiwan. There are probably a dozen or more romanization schemes out there somewhere, most of them mercifully obscure and rightfully ignored. There is a standing joke among sinologists that one of the first signs of senility in a China scholar is the compulsion to come up with a new romanization method.
8. Because tonal languages are weird.

Okay, that's very Anglo-centric, I know it. But I have to mention this problem because it's one of the most common complaints about learning Chinese, and it's one of the aspects of the language that westerners are notoriously bad at. Every person who tackles Chinese at first has a little trouble believing this aspect of the language. How is it possible that shùxué means "mathematics" while shūxuě means "blood transfusion", or that guòjiǎng means "you flatter me" while guǒjiàng means "fruit paste"?

By itself, this property of Chinese would be hard enough; it means that, for us non-native speakers, there is this extra, seemingly irrelevant aspect of the sound of a word that you must memorize along with the vowels and consonants. But where the real difficulty comes in is when you start to really use Chinese to express yourself. You suddenly find yourself straitjacketed -- when you say the sentence with the intonation that feels natural, the tones come out all wrong. For example, if you wish say something like "Hey, that's my water glass you're drinking out of!", and you follow your intonational instincts -- that is, to put a distinct falling tone on the first character of the word for "my" -- you will have said a kind of gibberish that may or may not be understood.

Intonation and stress habits are incredibly ingrained and second-nature. With non-tonal languages you can basically import, mutatis mutandis, your habitual ways of emphasizing, negating, stressing, and questioning. The results may be somewhat non-native but usually understandable. Not so with Chinese, where your intonational contours must always obey the tonal constraints of the specific words you've chosen. Chinese speakers, of course, can express all of the intonational subtleties available in non-tonal languages -- it's just that they do it in a way that is somewhat alien to us speakers of non-tonal languages. When you first begin using your Chinese to talk about subjects that actually matter to you, you find that it feels somewhat like trying to have a passionate argument with your hands tied behind your back -- you are suddenly robbed of some vital expressive tools you hadn't even been aware of having.
9. Because east is east and west is west, and the twain have only recently met.

Language and culture cannot be separated, of course, and one of the main reasons Chinese is so difficult for Americans is that our two cultures have been isolated for so long. The reason reading French sentences like "Le président Bush assure le peuple koweitien que le gouvernement américain va continuer à défendre le Koweit contre la menace irakienne," is about as hard as deciphering pig Latin is not just because of the deep Indo-European family resemblance, but also because the core concepts and cultural assumptions in such utterances stem from the same source. We share the same art history, the same music history, the same history history -- which means that in the head of a French person there is basically the same set of archetypes and the same cultural cast of characters that's in an American's head. We are as familiar with Rimbaud as they are with Rambo. In fact, compared to the difference between China and the U.S., American culture and and French culture seem about as different as Peter Pan and Skippy peanut butter.

Speaking with a Chinese person is usually a different matter. You just can't drop Dickens, Tarzan, Jack the Ripper, Goethe, or the Beatles into a conversation and always expect to be understood. I once had a Chinese friend who had read the first translations of Kafka into Chinese, yet didn't know who Santa Claus was. China has had extensive contact with the West in the last few decades, but there is still a vast sea of knowledge and ideas that is not shared by both cultures.

Similarly, how many Americans other than sinophiles have even a rough idea of the chronology of China's dynasties? Has the average history major here ever heard of Qin Shi Huangdi and his contribution to Chinese culture? How many American music majors have ever heard a note of Peking Opera, or would recognize a pipa if they tripped over one? How many otherwise literate Americans have heard of Lu Xun, Ba Jin, or even Mozi?

What this means is that when Americans and Chinese get together, there is often not just a language barrier, but an immense cultural barrier as well. Of course, this is one of the reasons the study of Chinese is so interesting. It is also one of the reasons it is so damn hard.
Conclusion

I could go on and on, but I figure if the reader has bothered to read this far, I'm preaching to the converted, anyway. Those who have tackled other difficult languages have their own litany of horror stories, I'm sure. But I still feel reasonably confident in asserting that, for an average American, Chinese is significantly harder to learn than any of the other thirty or so major world languages that are usually studied formally at the university level (though Japanese in many ways comes close). Not too interesting for linguists, maybe, but something to consider if you've decided to better yourself by learning a foreign language, and you're thinking "Gee, Chinese looks kinda neat."

It's pretty hard to quantify a process as complex and multi-faceted as language-learning, but one simple metric is to simply estimate the time it takes to master the requisite language-learning skills. When you consider all the above-mentioned things a learner of Chinese has to acquire -- ability to use a dictionary, familiarity with two or three romanization methods, a grasp of principles involved in writing characters (both simplified and traditional) -- it adds up to an awful lot of down time while one is "learning to learn" Chinese.

How much harder is Chinese? Again, I'll use French as my canonical "easy language". This is a very rough and intuitive estimate, but I would say that it takes about three times as long to reach a level of comfortable fluency in speaking, reading, and writing Chinese as it takes to reach a comparable level in French. An average American could probably become reasonably fluent in two Romance languages in the time it would take them to reach the same level in Chinese.

One could perhaps view learning languages as being similar to learning musical instruments. Despite the esoteric glories of the harmonica literature, it's probably safe to say that the piano is a lot harder and more time-consuming to learn. To extend the analogy, there is also the fact that we are all virtuosos on at least one "instrument" (namely, our native language), and learning instruments from the same family is easier than embarking on a completely different instrument. A Spanish person learning Portuguese is comparable to a violinist taking up the viola, whereas an American learning Chinese is more like a rock guitarist trying to learn to play an elaborate 30-stop three-manual pipe organ.

Someone once said that learning Chinese is "a five-year lesson in humility". I used to think this meant that at the end of five years you will have mastered Chinese and learned humility along the way. However, now having studied Chinese for over six years, I have concluded that actually the phrase means that after five years your Chinese will still be abysmal, but at least you will have thoroughly learned humility.

There is still the awe-inspiring fact that Chinese people manage to learn their own language very well. Perhaps they are like the gradeschool kids that Baroque performance groups recruit to sing Bach cantatas. The story goes that someone in the audience, amazed at hearing such youthful cherubs flawlessly singing Bach's uncompromisingly difficult vocal music, asks the choir director, "But how are they able to perform such difficult music?"

"Shh -- not so loud!" says the director, "If you don't tell them it's difficult, they never know."
Bibliography

(A longer version of this paper is available through CRCC, Indiana University, 510 N. Fess, Bloomington, IN, 47408.)

Chen, Heqin, (1928)"Yutiwen yingyong zihui" [Characters used in vernacular literature], Shanghai.

DeFrancis, John (1966) "Why Johnny Can't Read Chinese", Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association, Vol. 1, No. 1, Feb. 1966, pp. 1-20.

DeFrancis, John (1984) The Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

DeFrancis, John (1989) Visible Speech: The Diverse Oneness of Writing Systems, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Kennedy, George (1964) "A Minimum Vocabulary in Modern Chinese", in Selected Works of George Kennedy, Tien-yi Li (ed.), New Haven: Far Eastern Publications.

Mair, Victor (1986) "The Need for an Alphabetically Arranged General Usage Dictionary of Mandarin Chinese: A Review Article of Some Recent Dictionaries and Current Lexicographical Projects", Sino-Platonic Papers, No. 1, February, 1986 (Dept. of Oriental Studies, University of Pennsylvania).

Zhao, Yuanren, (1972) Aspects of Chinese Sociolinguistics, Anwar S. Dil (ed.), Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Notes

I am speaking of the writing system here, but the difficulty of the writing system has such a pervasive effect on literacy and general language mastery that I think the statement as a whole is still valid. back
John DeFrancis, The Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1984, p.153. Most of the issues in this paper are dealt with at length and with great clarity in both this book and in his Visible Speech: The Diverse Oneness of Writing Systems, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1989. back
Incidentally, I'm aware that much of what I've said above applies to Japanese as well, but it seems clear that the burden placed on a learner of Japanese is much lighter because (a) the number of Chinese characters used in Japanese is "only" about 2,000 -- fewer by a factor of two or three compared to the number needed by the average literate Chinese reader; and (b) the Japanese have phonetic syllabaries (the hiragana and katakana characters), which are nearly 100% phonetically reliable and are in many ways easier to master than chaotic English orthography is. back
See, for ex., Chen Heqin, "Yutiwen yingyong zihui" [Characters used in vernacular literature], Shanghai, 1928. back
John DeFrancis deals with this issue, among other places, in "Why Johnny Can't Read Chinese", Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association, Vol. 1, No. 1, Feb. 1966, pp. 1-20. back
George Kennedy, "A Minimum Vocabulary in Modern Chinese", in Selected Works of George Kennedy, Tien-yi Li (ed.), New Haven, 1964, p. 8. back
Zhao Yuanren, Aspects of Chinese Sociolinguistics, Anwar S. Dil (ed.), Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1976, p. 92. back
John DeFrancis, The Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy, p. 109. back
Charles Hockett reminds me that many of my examples are really instances of loan words, not cognates, but rather than take up space dealing with the issue, I will blur the distinction a bit here. There are phonetic loan words from English into Chinese, of course, but they are scarce curiosities rather than plentiful semantic moorings. back
A phrase taken from an article by Victor Mair with the deceptively boring title " The Need for an Alphabetically Arranged General Usage Dictionary of Mandarin Chinese: A Review Article of Some Recent Dictionaries and Current Lexicographical Projects" (Sino-Platonic Papers, No. 1, February, 1986, Dept. of Oriental Studies, University of Pennsylvania). Mair includes a rather hilarious but realistic account of the tortuous steeplechase of looking up a low-frequency lexical item in his arsenal of Chinese dictionaries. back
I have noticed from time to time that the romanization method first used tends to influence one's accent in Chinese. It seems to me a Chinese person with a very keen ear could distinguish Americans speaking, say, Wade-Giles-accented Chinese from pinyin-accented Chinese. back
©

September 24, 2013

Russian slang and colloquialisms

Russian, like most of the world's cosmopolitan languages, is a language full of slang and colloquialisms. Here is a list of some common slang words and colloquialisms in Russian, along with their English equivalents (in American slang,
if possible). Derogatory words are marked with a 'D,' and
rude/offensive words or phrases are marked with an 'X.' Have fun, and
please contact me if you have anything I should add.


  • arbitúra -- college freshmen, frosh
  • Alë, garázh! -- (lit. 'Hello, citizen!') an ironical address or hail
  • alkásh -- a drunk, an alcoholic, an alky D
  • ambál -- a big, strong, stout man.
  • ás'ka -- ICQ

  • bábki -- (lit. 'the little cakes') 'the dough', a necessary monetary amount
  • bábnik -- a womanizer, a philanderer, a 'pimp' (not the real meaning of pimp, but how it's used in slang)
  • bazár -- (lit. 'bazaar') a bullshit session, chitchat
  • bardák -- (lit. whorehouse) a big mess, a shambles, disorder; 'hell has broken loose' or 'the shit hit the fan' X
  • bez bazára -- (lit. without the chitchat) 'no problem'
  • Blin! -- (lit. pancake) Shoot! Darn! Fudge! a G-ratedinterjection
  • bljad' -- bitch, whore, bastard X
  • Bljákha-múkha! -- (lit. 'buckle-fly) Gosh! Gee-whiz! a G-rated interjection expressing suprise or amazement
  • bolván -- a dummy, a blockhead
  • bratán -- man, bro, dude, ese, bra, etc. a form of address expressing solidarity
  • bukhát' -- (lit. to bang, to thunder) to hit the bottle

  • v zádnitse -- (lit. in a butt) in a sticky situation, in a difficult situation, up shit creek
  • v natúre -- (lit. in nature) actually, for real
  • Valí otsjúda! -- (lit. 'fall out of here', more or less) Fuck off! Piss off! X
  • Vásja Púpkin -- John Doe, an 'average Joe'
  • Vsë nishtják!, Vsë puchkóm, Vsë tip-tóp! -- Everything's allright, It's all good; the last one is an obvious borrowing from English
  • vtjúrit'sja -- to fall in love
  • vyezzhát' -- (lit. to enter by vehicle) to dig, to understand. ty vyezzháesh'?
  • 'can ya dig it?'
  • výrubit'sja -- (lit. to be cut down) to zonk out, to fall asleep, to become unconscious


  • gemorróy -- (lit. hemorrhoids) a pig problem
  • gljuk -- a bug, a glitch
  • govnó -- shit, literally, like in the 'I've got shit on my shoe' sense X
  • govnjúk -- (lit. 'shit-man' more or less, I think) a bastard X
  • golubóy -- (lit. light blue) gay (male)
  • Goní bábki -- Give me the dough! / the money!
  • gudét' -- (lit. to hoot, to throb) to 'whoop it up', to 'kick it,' to enjoy oneself


  • Da nu! --- You don't say! Well I'll be! ('nu' is very idiomatic and doesn't really translate literally)
  • Daváy otorvëmsja -- (lit. 'let's break away') 'let's live it up,' 'let's paint the town red'
  • dévushka po výzovu -- a call girl, a phone-in prostitute
  • Délo drjan' -- (lit. 'the matter's trash') 'this don't look so good,' 'things are looking bad'
  • dërganyy -- antsy, jumpy
  • der'mó -- shit, but moreso in the 'oh shit!' and 'don't give me that shit' sense X
  • détka -- baby, as in the tender or ironical form of address to a woman
  • deshëvka -- 'el cheapo,' a low price, a bargain, a steal
  • Dostál(a)! (lit. took, got it) You got me up to here! I'm very annoyed with you!
  • dúra (f.), durák (m.) -- a fool, a moron, an idiot
  • duraká valját' -- (lit. to shape the fool) to play the fool, to mess around, to goof off
  • durdóm -- (lit. fool-house) the looney bin, the funny farm


  • zhmot -- a skinflint, a miser
  • zhmúrik -- (lit. a squinter, more or less) a stiff, a corpse
  • zhópa -- ass(hole) literally, a fiasco, or an asshole as in 'he's an asshole' X
  • zhrat' -- to devour, to gorge, to wolf down


  • Za bazár otvétish’ – (lit. you’ll answer for the loose words) ‘you’ll be held accountable for what you said.
  • zabít' strélku -- (lit. to hit the needle/switch) to make a date/meeting on time, to be 'on the dot'
  • zádnitsa -- (lit. butt, backside) a bad person, a jerk
  • Zakolebál(a). -- like dostal, this means 'you’ve annoyed me.'
  • zanúda -- a killjoy, a party poper, a bore
  • Zatknís'! -- 'shut up,!' 'shut it!'
  • zvezdá -- a star, meaning a celebrity. It's also commonly used
    sarcastically for someone who thinks or acts like they're outstanding
    but aren't; someone who thinks their shit doesn't stink.
  • zélen' -- (lit. greens, green) green bucks, greenbacks, the US Dollar.


  • Inét -- short for Internét, which is self-explanatory
  • iskhodít' sljunjámi -- (lit. 'to emanate with spit,' more or less) to envy, to be eager
  • Ischézni! -- (lit. Disappear!) Get lost! Go away!


  • kayf -- a high, a kick, a buzz, a feeling of euphoria
  • kakát' -- to poo-poo, this is used in children's speech
  • kakáshka -- a turd, a bad person
  • Kakáya zanúda! -- What a bore!
  • Kakógo chërta! -- (lit. what a devil!) What the hell!
  • kalanchá -- (lit. watchtower) a somewhat archaic slang for a tall girl or boy, a beanpole
  • kapústa -- (lit. cabbage) money, cash, cash money
  • Kátit -- (lit. 'It rolls') 'That'll do,' 'That's cool,' 'It suits'
  • kachók -- (lit. jock-strap) a jock, and athlete
  • kláva -- short for klaviatúra, a keyboard
  • klássnyy -- (lit. classy) cool, nice, kickin', as an adjective especially when describing people
  • klëvo -- cool, as a stand-alone word
  • klëvyy -- cool, hot, wicked, gnarly, bitchin, etc.
  • klëvyy muzhík -- a cool cat
  • kléit'sja -- (lit. to stick, to come together) to try to get acquainted
  • kozël -- (lit. billy goat) a loser, a worthless human being, from the phrase ot negó kak ot kozlá moloká, 'from him is like milk from a billy goat,' meaning the guy's as useless as tits on a bull D
  • kolotún -- (lit. from kolot', to chop, to crack and various perfectives, meaning to prick, to stab, etc.) a sharp frost
  • kolót'sja -- (lit. 'to be cracked') to get a fix, to be on drugs, to be tripping
  • kolymága -- a heap, a jalopy, an old vehicle (doesn't necessarily have to be a car)
  • komp -- short for komp'juter.
  • Koncháy bazár. -- (lit. 'End the chitchat') 'Quit yer yappin',' 'Stop talking'
  • Króme shútok -- (lit. 'except for jokes,' more or less) 'no kidding'
  • króshka -- (lit. crumb) baby, little one, a tender or ironic address to a female
  • krúto -- (lit. steep, sharp) this is the most common word for cool, awesome, kickass, etc.
  • krutóy -- the adjectival form of the previous word, pretty much equivalent to 'cool' in English. Interestingly, not so long ago, the word 'sharp' could be used in English to express pretty much the same thing as 'cool.' The the literal meaning of krutóy is 'sharp.'
  • krutóy páren' -- (lit. 'sharp fellow') either means 'cool guy' or 'tough guy'
  • krýsha -- (lit. roof) can mean head or patron (as of an organization), but commonly refers to 'protection' by organized crime.
  • krýsha poékhala -- (lit. the roof is gone) 'blown one's roof,' 'gone crazy'
  • Kudá namýlilsja -- (lit. where were you soaping up to go?) 'Where do you think you're going?'


  • lípa -- (lit. lime, lime tree) a fake, an imitation, a forgery, a phony
  • lípovyy -- (lit. lime, lime blossom) adjectival fake, imitation, phony, fugazi
  • lokh -- a sucker, a klutz
  • ljubopýtnaya Varvára -- (lit. curious Barbara), a nosy person, a curious George
  • ljásy tochít' -- (lit. to sharpen (if anyone knows the literal meaning of ljasy, I'd appreciate if you could help me) to chew the fat


  • mat' -- (lit. mother) ironical form of address to a woman, like in English we say 'one hot mama' or the Spanish mamacita
  • mácho -- macho, that's one Spanish word that made it all the way into Russian
  • mézhdu námi, dévochkami -- (lit. between us, girls) frankly speaking, between you and me
  • ment -- cop, but not as acceptable of a term as in English, a bit more insulting ... kind of like 'the fuzz', I guess. D
  • mentóvka -- aa police station, 'cop-shop,' 'fuzz station'
  • Menjá nadúli! -- (lit. 'you conned me,' 'you filled me with air')
    You got me! You took me for a sucker!, used when you've been lied to or
    had a joke played on you.
  • Mne v lom -- (lit. 'to scrap metal for me,' but that's iffy...this is highly idiomatic) 'I'm too lazy (to do something)'
  • Mne do lámpochki -- (lit. 'to me it's up to the lightbulb,' I think. Once again, highly idiomatic) 'I don't care,' 'whatever'
  • Mne nasrát', chto ty dúmaesh' -- 'I don't give a shit what you think,''I don't care what you think' D
  • Mne po barabánu -- (lit. 'to me it's by drum,' more or less) -- 'I don't care,' 'whatever'
  • Mne pó figu -- (lit. 'to me it's by fig'... ?) 'It's all the same to me,' 'I don't care,' 'It's all good'
  • mobíla -- cell phone (also mobílnik
  • mýlo -- (lit. soap, used because of phonetic similarities to English 'mail') e-mail program or message
  • mýrma -- a bitch, an unpleasant woman


  • na svoíkh dvoíkh -- (lit. on your own two) on foot, on your own two feet
  • naveselé -- (lit. in the cheer) tipsy, buzzing, a bit drunk
  • naezzhát' (na kogo-libo) -- (lit. to break into someone) to express dissatisfaction, to blame, to point the finger
  • narjádnyy -- fancy, well-dressed, rich
  • na ushákh -- (lit. on one's ears) tipsy, buzzing, a bit drunk
  • Ne berí v gólovu -- (lit. 'don't take it to your head') 'take it easy,' 'don't let it get to you'
  • Ne goní purgú -- (lit. 'don't chase away the snowstorm') 'don't tell lies,' 'be honest'
  • Ne gruzís' -- (lit. don't load youself up) 'Don't worry,' 'Don't take it so seriously'
  • Ne svistí -- (lit. don't whistle) 'Don't lie,' 'Be honest'
  • Ni figá sebé! -- (lit. 'not a fig to itself' ?) Golly! Gosh! Jeez!, expression of suprise
  • ni khrená -- (lit. 'not a horseradish') nothing, nothing of the kind, no
  • nulëvyy -- (lit. from zero, more or less) brand spanking new, mint condition


  • O, klassno! -- man, that's cool!
  • Obaldét' -- (lit. to go crazy) Wow! Golly! Gosh! Jeez!, expression of suprise
  • oblóm -- (lit. broken-off piece) failure of plans and hopes
  • ogryzát'sja -- (lit. to snap) to talk back, to sass, to snap back
  • oy! -- ouch!, also a conversational particle used mainly by women equivalent to 'sheesh' or a sigh
  • ostát'sja s nosom -- (lit. to leave with the nose) to be left with nothing
  • Ostýn' -- (lit. to cool down) 'chill out,' 'calm down'
  • Otvali -- (lit. push aside) 'leave me alone,' 'piss off'
  • otryvát'sja -- (lit. to break away, to tear away) -- to have a wild time, to party hard
  • otstóy -- (lit. sediment) something worthless or disgraceful, rubbish, trash, junk (in the figurative sense)


  • pédik -- a gay guy, a homo (not quite as derogatory as fag, I don't think , if it's necessarily derogatory at all
  • )
  • perdét' -- to fart
  • perdún -- a fart
  • pervodít strélki -- (lit. to transfer the switch/needle) 'to pass the buck,' to put the blame on someone else
  • pértsy -- (lit. peppers) cool guys, 'the guys,' 'the boys'
  • pivásik -- beer, from pivo, beer. So I guess this is kind of like saying 'bizeer' or something to that effect
  • pilít' -- (lit. to saw) to nag, to lecture, to run someone down
  • pit' zapóem -- to drink heavily, to drink like a fish. Interestingly, you can use this zapoem after other verbs, to get that '-aholic' effect, so that on rabótaet zapóem is 'he's works a hell of a lot,' 'he's a workaholic'
  • pod káyfom -- (lit. 'under a high/buzz') high, stoned
  • Poékhali! -- Let's go! Kick it into gear!(like the Spanish vámonos!)
  • póylo -- booze
  • po-ljubómu -- (lit. 'by whatever') 'at any rate,' 'anyways'
  • porót' chush' -- (lit. 'to pick apart the garbage') to get a scew loose, to talk nonsense
  • potrjásnyy -- stunning, striking, smashing, excellent
  • Poshël ty! -- (lit. 'you go away!') 'Fuck off!' 'Bugger off!' 'Piss off!' X
  • prédki -- (lit. ancestors) parents, old man and old lady, folks
  • pridúrok -- a nitwit, a numbskull, a silly foolish person
  • prikíd -- an outfit, a getup
  • Prikín'! -- (lit. 'work it out!') 'Just imagine...'
  • prikól -- (lit. a moor, a mooring) a joke or funny situation, 'funny stuff'
  • prikól'no -- jokingly, comically, funnily
  • priyátel' -- buddy, dude, friend (in Czech this word is the regular word for friend, pøítel)
  • profúkat' -- to lose, to be 'down the drain/down the toilet'
  • psikh -- a psycho, a kook, a nutso, used slangily as in English when someone is being really weird, but not necessarily a sociopath
  • p'yan v stél'ku -- (drunk down to the sole) dead drunk, destroyed, obliterated, shitfaced, plastered, wasted, etc. etc. etc.
  • pjálit'sja (na kogó-to, chegó-to)-- to gawk (at someone or something)


  • rasklád -- state of affairs, situation
  • raskolót'sja -- (lit. to split open) to spill one's guts, to tell the truth
  • raskusít' -- (lit. to bite into) to suss out, to tell someone's secret
  • Rasskazhí éto komú-nibúd' drugómu -- 'Tell it to someone else,' 'Tell it to someone who cares'
  • rasfufýrennyy -- all dolled up, festively dressed
  • rózha -- a mug (as in a face)
  • rubít' kapústu -- (lit. 'to chop the cabbage') to make a quick buck


  • s privétom -- (lit. 'with regards') having or showing a weak mind
  • svóloch' -- a bastard, a dick, a douche D
  • sidét' na iglé -- (lit. 'to be sitting on the needle') to be on the needle, on the horse, on drugs
  • skorefánit'sja -- to make friends
  • Sledí za bazárom! -- (lit. 'watch after the chitchat') -- 'Watch your tongue!'
  • smýt'sja -- (lit. to wash off) to slip away, to slip through one's fingers
  • sortír -- the shithouse, the shitter, the john, the toilet, the crapper
  • stáryy perdún -- old fart, geezer
  • stvol -- (lit. a gun barrel, a tree trunk) a weapon, an arm, a piece
  • stróit' glázki -- to make eyes at someone, to flirt with the eyes
  • súka -- a classic four-letter word, it means bitch, bastard, etc. X
  • sygrát' v yáscik -- (lit. to play the box/trash bin) to kick the bucket, to snuff it, to die


  • táchka -- (lit. wheelbarrow) a car, a ride
  • Tvoyú mat'! -- (lit. 'Your mom!') Goddammit! Sonofabitch! (not quite as bad as 'fucking shit!') X
  • télik -- the idiot box, the boob tube
  • tëlka -- a heifer, a fat chick D
  • tórmoz -- (lit. brake, obstacle) a dummy, someone who's 'a bit slow'
  • torchát' -- (lit. to stick up, to stick out) to get delighted, to enjoy something greatly, to turn on (non-sexual)
  • trávka -- (lit. diminutive of 'grass,' travá) grass, weed, pot, marijuana
  • trakhát'sja -- (lit. to bang on something) to bang, to fuck, to nail, to do someone X
  • trepló -- (I think it's from trepát', to blow about, but I'm not sure) a bigmouth, a blabbermouth
  • tusóvka, túsa -- a hangout, a party, a place where young people gather
  • tuftá -- nonsense, trifle
  • Ty menjá dostál! -- 'You got me up to here! (most literal)' 'I'm sick and tired to you'
  • tjurjága -- to clink, the slammer, jail, prison (tjur'má is the real word fro prison)


  • Fíga s dva -- (lit. 'of a fig with two,' more or less...highly idiomatic) 'Nothing of the kind!'
  • fignjá -- (the word is from fíga, fig) -- nonsense, bullshit
  • fingál -- a shiner, a black eye
  • físhka -- (lit. a chip) exclusive information, the scoop
  • fonár' -- (lit. a lamp, a torch) a shiner, a black eye


  • khavát' -- to have a meal, to eat, to grab some grub
  • khávchik -- grub, chow, food
  • khaltúra, khaltúrka -- work on the side, moonlighting
  • khaljáva -- a freebie, something free of charge
  • khaljávscik -- a freeloader, a mooch
  • khren -- (lit. horseradish) a dick, a crank, a schlong. This word is used in place of the more obscene khuy, cock X
  • khrenóvo -- (lit. horseradishly) crappily, lousily, suckily, not well, badly


  • cháynik -- (lit. tea kettle, teapot) a newbie, a beginner, green
  • Chërt voz'mí! -- (lit. 'Devil take (me)') 'Dammit!' 'Oh shit! 'Jesus H Christ!,' expressing anger or annoyance
  • Chërt poberí -- same as above
  • Chërt! -- (lit. Devil!) Damn! Hell!, expressing anger or annoyance
  • chërtov -- (lit. 'of devils') goddamn, fucking, cursed, bloody, as an adjective
  • chëtkiy -- (lit. clear, precise) neat, cool
  • choknútyy -- barmy, crazy, screwy, dotty
  • Chto ty nesësh'? -- 'What are you drivelling about?'
  • chuvák -- buddy, kiddo
  • chush' -- garbage, rubbish, lies, worthless or stupid ideas
  • chush' sobách'ya -- (lit. dog mess/crap) -- bullshit X


  • shárit' -- (lit. to grope, to sweep) to have a good understanding of something
  • Shevelís' -- (lit. to stir, to move) 'Shake a leg!' 'Move it!'
  • shirját'sja -- to shoot up, to get a fix, to inject drugs
  • shíshka -- (lit. pine cone, shishka) a big shot, a VIP, someone of great importnace
  • shmótki -- clothes, getup, duds
  • shnúrki v stakáne -- (lit. the lace is on the glass) teen slang from the eighties meaning 'the parents are at home'
  • shtúka -- (lit. item, thing) 1000 roubles


  • Ya v osádke -- (lit. 'I'm in the sediment') 'I'm shocked,' 'I'm suprised'
  • Ya ne vyezzháyu -- I don't dig it, I don't get it, I don't understand
  • yáytsa -- (lit. eggs) balls, nuts X
  • yáscik -- (lit. trash bin) idiot box, boob tube, TV set
©

September 18, 2013

О литературе с Виктором Топоровым: Ужас и ужас-ужас

Фонтанка.Ру

Лучшим переводным романом 2011 года стал, на мой взгляд, «Кровавый меридиан» Кормака Маккарти, впервые увидевший свет еще в 1985 году, но ничуть не утративший актуальности и сегодня, о чем лишний раз свидетельствует тот факт, что роман буквально сейчас экранизируют – и выход фильма на экран намечен на 2014 год. Да и вообще творческая судьба этого писателя, как мы увидим дальше, неотделима от кинематографа, а говоря об актуальности, мы имеем в виду актуальность метафизическую.

Совсем недавно я посвятил две колонки романам «Благоволительницы» Джонатана Литтела и «Пражское кладбище» Умберто Эко, стихийно сложившимся в своего рода дилогию со знаком минус. А вот «Свобода» Джонатана Франзена, речь о которой шла ровно неделю назад, и «Кровавый меридиан» столь же стихийно складываются в дилогию со знаком плюс – при всей внутренней противоположности этих двух романов. Ведь исповедуемую Франзеном свободу быть посредственностью его творческий антагонист Маккарти яростно отвергает. Яростно отвергает или яростно отрицает? Пожалуй, и то, и другое сразу.



Кормак Маккарти (произнесем его имя еще раз и постараемся запомнить, потому что у него немало знаменитых однофамильцев, в том числе несколько писателей) родился в 1933 году и, - как оно, увы, бывает не только у нас, - писать начал рано, печататься поздно, а зарабатывать писательским трудом так и не научился. Впрочем, и автомехаником он проработал недолго – вернее, лишь до выхода первой книги, которая (как и несколько вышедших вслед за нею) чрезвычайно понравилась критике и категорически не понравилась читателю, он же, если кто забыл, покупатель.

Правда, в отличие от России, в США существует несколько хаотичная, но широко разветвленная система поддержки писателей нерыночного направления. Это премии (премии, впрочем, есть и у нас), гранты и всевозможные главным образом университетские синекуры: приглашенный профессор, почетный библиотекарь (Иосиф Бродский был одно время почетным библиотекарем) и т.д., и т.п. Изо всей этой роскоши на долю Маккарти выпали гранты – на которых он и просидел в общей сложности лет сорок.

«Кровавый меридиан» перевел писателя из разряда подающих надежды в условную категорию мастеров (это в 52 года!), но денег все равно не принес. Лишь в начале нового тысячелетия писателя открыл для себя кинематограф – и вслед за не слишком удачными «Конями, конями» (2000; в отечественном прокате – «Неукротимые сердца») вышел шедевр братьев Коэнов «Старикам здесь не место» (2007), а за ним и «Дорога» (2009) – и в том же году экранизация раннего романа «Предельная тьма». И вот теперь на очереди «Кровавый меридиан».

Не совсем стандартна и личная жизнь писателя: он женился третьим браком и во второй раз стал отцом далеко за семьдесят. Ведет полуотшельнический образ жизни, слывет учеником и преемником Уильяма Фолкнера – не только великого писателя, но и законченного алкоголика; в случае с Маккарти ситуацию усугубляет и традиционный ирландский национальный характер… Да и фолкнеровская идея (из нобелевской лекции) о том, как и какой ценой человечество все-таки выстоит, ему, разумеется, не чужда.

Любимая книга Кормака Маккарти (понятно, помимо Библии) – «Моби Дик». Не борьба Добра со Злом (Добра как такового нет ни в романе Германа Мелвилла, ни в гностических учениях, на которые ориентируется наш герой), а схватка Человека (который сам по себе дуалистичен по своей природе) со Злом – с воплощенным или, в иных случаях, развоплощенным злом. Чтобы не впадать в чрезмерную высокопарность, отмечу, что в прозе Маккарти происходит вечное кровопролитное боестолкновение двух субстанций, известных нам из малоприличного анекдота, - столкновение Ужаса с Ужасом-Ужасом.

Живи Маккарти где-нибудь в Европе или, наоборот, в Латинской Америке, его наверняка признали бы магическим реалистом. Потому что реальность, которую он детально, дотошно и невыразимо жутко описывает, всё же чересчур инфернальна для того, чтобы оказаться истинной. Вспомним злодея в исполнении Хуана Бардема из фильма «Старикам здесь не место». Вспомним постапокалиптический мир «Дороги» (которой, конечно же, правильнее называться «Путем»). Таких злодеев не бывает, скажете вы, и такого ужасного мира не существует. Но гипотетически-то они возможны – и Кормак Маккарти верит в них, и видит их, и заставляет поверить в их существование и своего читателя.

Но, живя в США и стремясь, пусть и безуспешно, к коммерческому успеху, Маккарти облекает свои видения в «форматную» упаковку вестерна. Формат, конечно, трещит по всем швам, а затем и лопается, - но тут уж ничего не поделаешь. Представим себе «Великолепную семерку» - «плохие» бандиты грабят несчастных крестьян, а «хорошие» бандиты защищают, сражаясь при этом плечом к плечу с самыми отважными из местных жителей. Вспомним, какого-нибудь «Непрощенного»: герой Клинта Иствуда редкое чудовище, - но чудовище поневоле, - на путь истинный ему, положим, уже не встать, но орудием праведной мести он послужить способен.

А теперь представим себе, что «плохие» бандиты из «Великолепной семерки» безбожно обирают крестьян, но хотя бы не убивают и не насилуют всех подряд, а вот «хорошие» бандиты во главе с Юлом Бриннером разъезжают по свету, просто-напросто вырезая деревню за деревней, вырезая и скальпируя – потому что за каждый доставленный в столицу штата скальп им платят по сто долларов, - а это куда больше всего, что можно выручить за конфискованное зерно и угнанный скот. Вот такая вот экспедиция «великолепной семерки» за скальпами и описана, а вернее, расписана во всех убийственных подробностях в романе «Кровавый меридиан».

Фантазирует и предается страшным видениям Кормак Маккарти, как это ни странно, на определенной документальной основе. Ад, о котором он пишет, называется Фронтир – но Фронтир не Западный (которому, собственно, и обязан своим названием жанр вестерна), а Южный. Америку, начиная с Центральной, открыли в основном испанцы; двести лет назад существовало огромное, куда больше тогдашних США, государство Мексика, а вот отдельное государство Техас, а потом и Конфедерация, а потом и сами Штаты отгрызали у Мексики кусок за куском.

Шли многолетние войны, проходили отдельные краткосрочные кампании, да и просто разбойничьи налеты. Отряд, в который входит шестнадцатилетний Малец (главный герой романа), - это, условно говоря, «зеленые»; они грабят и убивают всех подряд, но и их самих тоже никто не жалеет, а главное, ни за что не пожалеет. Поймав, их непременно повесят и общеамериканские власти, и автономные техасские, и, разумеется, мексиканские (потому что разбойничая они продвигаются вглубь Мексики). А уж что с ними сделают индейцы, и говорить не приходится.

И вот этих солдат удачи берут в плен, но не убивают, а скорее, перевербовывают. Губернатор мексиканского штата отправляет их в погоню за индейскими скальпами – как уже сказано, по сто долларов за штуку. И это опять-таки исторический факт, и даже фамилия командира отряда подлинная. Кровавый квест не то чтобы начинается, но, сказали бы сегодня, выходит на качественно иной уровень.

Один из главных персонажей романа – Судья. Что это за судья, догадаться нетрудно (если, конечно, не умничать). В образе Судьи к отряду головорезов (в буквальном смысле слова) прибивается сам сатана.

Итак, есть ужас – головорезы. Есть ужас-ужас – сатана (он же Судья). И есть отнюдь не лабораторные, но все же экспериментальные условия, в которых человек и сатана (ужас и ужас-ужас) «нормально» взаимодействуют в одной плоскости. Человек человеку волк. Человек человеку степной волк. Человек человеку койот.

1848-1849 годы – всего через двенадцать лет эти же самые головорезы, если доживут, станут участниками гражданской войны, а по ее окончании – вновь разбойниками (вернее, кто разбойниками, кто шерифами), и будут брать банки, вешать друг друга на суку, искать золото и нефть, линчевать негров и добивать индейцев, производить автомобили (обязательно черные), гнать кукурузный виски и великую американскую мечту. И более-менее все это сумеет описать Кормак Маккарти – прямой продолжатель безжалостной традиции Германа Мелвилла и Уильяма Фолкнера. Но «Кровавый меридиан» - пока не экранизированный – так и останется лучшей его книгой.

Виктор Топоров, специально для «Фонтанки.ру»
©

September 17, 2013

Some of us think holding on makes us strong but...

“Some of us think holding on makes us strong but sometimes it is letting go”
― Hermann Hesse
©

Guangzhou Air Pollution

Как работает система образования в США

californista
ПРОМЕТЕЙ НЕ ДЛЯ ВСЕХ: КАК РАБОТАЕТ СИСТЕМА ОБРАЗОВАНИЯ В США?

Американское образование считается одним из лучших в мире, благодаря университетам, которые занимают лучшие места в мировом рейтинге ВУЗов. Попробуем разобраться, что из себя представляет американская система образования и чем она отличается от российской. Какие у нее достоинства и недостатки? С чем сталкиваются ученики и их родители?

Preschool4


Итак, вопросы образования в США регулируются на трех уровнях - властями штата, городскими и федеральными властями.
На федеральном уровне этими вопросами занимается Министерство Образования. Оно следит за исполнением федеральных образовательных законов о праве на неприкосновенность частной жизни и гражданских прав, распределяет федеральное финансирование, анализирует успеваемость студентов, а также проводит расследования связанные с мошенничеством и неплатежами по кредитам на образование.
В юрисдикцию властей штата и города входит - разработка образовательных стандартов, программ и тестирований, распределение финансирования из бюджетов города и штата, прием на работу учителей и привязка городских районов к школьным округам. Именно поэтому, не существует единых государственных образовательных норм и программ, они разнятся от штата к штату.
Система образования в США состоит из среднего (school), бакалавриата (undergraduate), магистратуры (graduate) и докторантуры (postgraduate).

Среднее или школьное государственное образование является обязательным, общедоступным и бесплатным. Любому ребенку, находящемуся на территории США, гарантировано право на школьное образование не зависимо от его статуса, национальности, религии, пола, физического состояния и владения английским языком.

2. Большинство школ - государственные и бесплатные. К каждому району города прикреплена одна или несколько школ. Дети могут ходить только в школу по месту жительства. В США не существует понятия "прописки". В доказательство проживания в районе, прикрепленном к конкретной школе, родители предъявляют договор аренды или покупки жилья с указанием адреса и оплаченные счета за коммунальные услуги. На фото: UCLA Community School Los Angeles.
F-Principal-0412-School

Управление школами осуществляет избранный на выборах Школьный Совет Округа (school boards). Он занимается разработкой школьных программ, учебных планов, выбором учебников, распределением финансирования, экзаменацией школьников и оформлением преподавателей на работу. Финансирование бесплатных школ происходит из городского налога на недвижимость. Здесь и возникает "замкнутый круг". Дети из обеспеченных семей, проживающие в дорогих районах с хорошими школами, имеют доступ к довольно качественному среднему образованию, а дети из бедных районов вынуждены ходить в соответствующие школы с низким рейтингом. Согласно документальному фильму "Ожидая Супермена" (Waiting for "Superman"), профсоюзы учителей в США работают таким образом, что преподавателя почти невозможно уволить. Проработав определенное время (срок варьируется от штата к штату), учитель получает гарантию пожизненного рабочего места. Многие школы зачастую просто "обмениваются" плохими учителями, которых не в силах уволить. Поэтому, зная все это, многие семьи (которые могут себе позволить переезд в новый дом) сначала выбирают будущую школу для детей, а только потом недвижимость для покупки. Если родители хотят отдать ребенка в хорошую школу, перед ними всегда стоит выбор: переехать в район с дорогой недвижимостью (даже если финансово им это не по карману) или купить дом подешевле и платить ежемесячно за частную школу. Ну а если ребенок родился в бедной семье, которая не может позволить себе переезд в дорогой район, где есть хорошая школа, шансов на хорошее школьное образование мало. Нет хорошего школьного образования, попасть потом в хороший университет или колледж тоже будет сложнее.

Чуть больше 10% американских школ - частные. Они не финансируются из городского бюджета и не подчиняются Школьным Советам Округа. Образовательная программа у каждой школы может быть своя. Как правило, уровень обучения и конкурс на поступление там намного выше, чем в обычной школе.

3. Частная школа The Lawrenceville School в Нью Джерси, основана в 1810 году. В 2012 году из 2063 желающих там учиться, было принято только 250 учеников.


Основная задача частных школ - подготовить выпускников к поступлению в самые престижные университеты США. После окончания частной школы многие школьники имеют более высокий балл на итоговом тестировании по сравнению с учениками государственных школ. Стоимость обучения в таких школах, варьируется от штата к штату, в среднем составляет $2000 - $4000 в месяц за ребенка.

4. Во многих частных школах дети носят школьную форму. Девочки ходят в белых рубашках и юбках, а мальчики в костюмах.


В систему школьного образования также входят бесплатные так называемые "Школы-магниты" - школы для одаренных детей. Как правило, эти школы имеют одну специализацию (art, science и т.д.). Места в них распределяются либо на конкурсной основе и тестировании, либо тестировании и последующей лотереи. Количество мест в таких школах строго ограничено. Поступить туда могут дети из соседних школьных округов, не относящихся к этой школе.

Менее 5% родителей обучают детей на дому, по утвержденной образовательной программе. Они это делают из религиозных убеждений, из-за физических отклонений ребенка или желания оградить детей от наркотиков, оружия и алкоголя, которые также являются большой проблемой некоторых американских школ.

5. Большинство детей пользуется школьным автобусом, чтобы добраться до школы.
School-Bus

6. Каждое утро он собирает детей по району и привозит всех к школе до начала занятий.
school_bus

7. Уроки в школах заканчиваются в одно и тоже время. После окончания занятий школьный автобус развозит детей обратно по домам.


Эта услуга предоставляется бесплатно, кроме детей, которые проживают на расстоянии менее 3,5 км от школы (5-6 км для учеников старшей школы). Они должны добираться самостоятельно.

Школьное образование делится на три этапа (на каждом этапе детям приходится менять школу): начальная, средняя и старшая школа.
1) Начальная школа (elementary school) - с 1 по 5 класс (6-11 лет).

8. К поступлению сюда дети начинают готовиться за год (в 5 лет) в специальном подготовительном отделении (preschool) или старшей группе детского сада (kindergarden). Во время подготовки к поступлению в начальную школу детей учат читать и писать.
Preschool3

9. После уроков они радостно разбегаются по домам.


10. В конце, дети сдают тест, по результатам которого их принимают в начальную школу.
Elementary_school2

11. Все предметы ведет один преподаватель и дети не перемещаются из класса в класс. Средняя наполняемость класса - от 20 до 30 детей.
Elementary_school

12. Как правило, у детей в начальной школе очень мало домашней работы. Всю основную работу они делают в классе.
Elementary_school1

Школа выдает бесплатные учебники, которые дети не могут забирать домой. Уроки проходят с 7:30 до 14:25 часов. Обучение в начальном школе заканчивается выпускным итоговом тестом. На основании которого, детей переводят в среднюю школу.

2) Средняя школа (middle school) - с 6 по 8 класс (11-13 лет). Здесь ученикам предоставляется бОльшая свобода и нагрузка одновременно.

13. Они частично могут выбирать предметы для изучения по своему усмотрению в дополнение к базовым. Ученикам разрешается брать книги на дом. Объем домашней работы значительно больше по сравнению с начальной школой. Также, на этом этапе происходит деление учеников на продвинутые и обычные классы.
High_school_students

14. Из-за того, что в средней школе дети переходят из класса в класс, каждому выделяется собственный шкафчик для хранения вещей. Ученики не ходят по школе с рюкзаками, а берут необходимые учебники перед каждым классом.
Lockers

15. Уроки проходят с 8:15 до 15:10 часов. По окончанию обучения, школьники сдают итоговый тест, с результатами которого поступают в старшую школу.
Middle_school

3) Старшая школа (high school) - с 9 по 12 класс (14 - 18 лет) больше напоминает колледж или университет. Как правило, в старших школах учится гораздо больше школьников, чем в предыдущих, а сами школы состоят из комплексов зданий, библиотек, спортивных площадок и парковок.

16. Государственная старшая школа American Canyon High School, штат Калифорния.
AMERICAN-CANYON-HIGH-SCHOOL

17. Она была построена в 2010 году и занимает площадь около 18 гектаров.
AMERICAN-CANYON-HIGH-SCHOOL1

18. Здесь учится 1400 школьников с 9 по 12 класс.
AMERICAN-CANYON-HIGH-SCHOOL4

19. Иногда, на территории старших школ располагаются также средние и начальные, образуя целый школьный город (school distict). Например, The Edwardsville Community Unit Scgool District в штате Иллинойс.
Edwardsville-School-District3

20. Спортивному образованию уделяется огромное внимание. Отсюда столько бейсбольных и футбольных полей, теннисных кортов, бассейнов и как следствие - олимпийских чемпионов.
Edwardsville-School-District

21. Для получения диплома, школьникам необходимо посетить определенное количество обязательных к изучению дисциплин. Все остальные, они могут выбирать самостоятельно, исходя из своих интересов. Уроки проходят с 9:00 до 15:55 часов.
High_school_student

В конце последнего года обучения, все школьники пишут единый для всех тест на знание базовых дисциплин SAT или ACT. На основании его и будут зачислять в университет. Чем выше балл, тем больше шансов попасть в хороший университет. Школьники, желающие поступить в престижный университет, начинают готовиться к итоговому экзамену за несколько лет.

22. Интересно что в штатах Нью-Йорк, Калифорния, Иллинойс и Вирджиния, планшеты постепенно вытесняют привычные книги.
Ipad

23. Почти все школьники уже работают на планшетах.
iPad1

Американское школьное образование далеко не лучшее в мире и имеет много недостатков. Например, недоступность качественного образования для бедных. Во многих американских школах отсутствуют мировая история и мировая литература, а в некоторых и география. Базовые предметы, такие как химия, физика, биология изучают всего один год, в том время как, например, российские школьники учат их по несколько лет. Финансовый кризис 2008 года лишь усугубил эту ситуацию: многих учителей сократили или заменили менее квалифицированными, временными.

Парадоксально, но в отличие от школьного, высшее образование в США - одно из лучших в мире, почти все платное, и неверотно дорогое (особенно для иностранных студентов).
Коммьюнити колледж (community college) - 2-х годичное профессиональное высшее учебное заведение. Внимание: Коммьюнити колледж и колледж - не одно и тоже! В коммьюнити колледже также можно найти десятки, а часто даже сотни разных учебных программ. Но так как обучение происходит всего 2 года, по окончанию выдается диплом о средне-профессиональном образовании и присваивается степень associate degree (а не bachelor's degree, как в колледже или университете). Коммьюнити колледжи есть в каждом городе и довольно популярны. В основном из-за стоимости обучения, которая в разы ниже (обычно около $2000-5000) чем в колледже или университете.

24. Santa Monica College, штат Калифорния.
SMC!

25. Основан в 1929 году. Здесь учится около 32 000 студентов.
SMC

Кроме того, для поступления в community college не нужно сдавать вступительные экзамены, достаточно предоставить школьный аттестат с результатом теста SAT или ACT. Большинство коммьюнити колледжей связаны с крупными и известными университетами. Это значит, что отучившись 2 года в коммьюнити колледже, студент может перевестись сразу на 3 курс университета, сэкономив значительную сумму денег.

Университет или колледж - 4-х годичное высшее учебное заведение. В США колледж и университет это одно и тоже с одним небольшим отличием. Во многих (но не во всех) колледжах отсутствуют научно-исследовательские программы и докторантура. Во всем остальном, колледж - это полноценное высшее учебное заведение, дающее степень бакалавра (bachelor's degree).
В свою очередь, колледжи и университеты делятся на государственные и частные. Государственные финансируется властями штата и ориентированы на местных студентов (резидентов штата). Для студентов из других штатов конкурс и цена зачастую намного выше.

26. Государственный университет Калифорнии (UC) основан в 1868 году. Имеет 10 кампусов (отделений), бюджет $22,7 миллиарда и обучает 236 000 студентов одновременно. Кампус университета в Лос-Анджелесе (UCLA) занимает целый город.
2374469309_75f4cbe30a_o

27. В UCLA учится около 40 000 человек. В 2012 году он занял 13 строчку в мировом рейтинге ВУЗов (по версии Times Higher Education).
UCLA

Как правило, стоимость обучения в государственных университетах и колледжах гораздо ниже чем в частных. Но, количество студентов в одной группе превышает показатели частных в несколько раз. Отсюда и недостаток государственных университетов/колледжей - из-за больших групп, студент не всегда получает достаточного внимания профессоров.

Частный университет/колледж финансируется на деньги спонсоров. К частным университетам относятся самые престижные вузы США - Стенфорд, Калифорнийский технологический (CalTech), Массачусетский технологический университет (MIT), все 8 университетов "Лиги Плюща" и др. Проходной балл во многих частных университетах, из-за их престижности, выше чем в государственных.

28. Университет Stanford, штат Калифорния.
Stanford_University

Прием студентов в колледж/университет осуществляется на основании пяти документов: результат итогового школьного тестирования (ACT или SAT), средний школьный балл, взятый за конкретный период обучения (GPA), заполненная анкета, эссе и рекомендательные письма от учителей. Большинство студентов пробуют поступить в несколько университетов сразу - от 3 до 10. Как правило, эти университеты разбросаны по стране и многие студенты уезжают учиться в другие штаты. Обычно студента принимают в университет в целом, а в последующие годы он выбирает специальность. Реже студентов набирают на конкретный факультет. Интересно, что в США очень распространены программы кредитования студентов, которые часто включают не только деньги на обучение, но и на ареду жилья, еду и карманные расходы. Надо понимать, что за годы обучения, суммы долга получаются огромными.

29. Американские студенты очень серьезно относятся к образованию. Они уделяют учебе огромное количество времени, особенно внеклассной работе.
416529336_xfg9q1

Обучение в университете очень гибкое. Студент может сам составлять свое расписание, выбирать предметы к изучению (кроме обязательных по специальности), изменить выбранную специальность в процессе обучения, добавить к основной специальности несколько дополнительных, а то и вовсе получить диплом по нескольким направлениям сразу. Каждый курс состоит из определенного числа кредитов (unit) - количества часов, отведенных на посещение занятий по предмету каждую неделю.
Важная особенность образования в США - это научно-исследовательская деятельность и практика во время обучения. Прослушав лекции, студенты, как правило, изучают это на практике. В итоге, после окончания университета у них есть практический опыт работы по специальности.

30. Студент - дантист работает под присмотром врача.
Student_practice

Первая ступень высшего образования в США - бакалавриат (bachelor's degree). В первые два года все студенты слушают общие предметы, одинаковые для всех. На третьем курсе выбирают специальность или несколько (Именно на третий курс университета/колледжа иногда можно перевестись из комьюнити колледжа). В дальнейшем, обучение идет только по предметам специальности. Обучение длится 4 года. После получения степени бакалавра, студенты могут продолжить обучение и поступить в магистратуру (master's degree). Это вторая ступень высшего образования. Там они учатся еще 2 года. Большая часть времени отводится аудиторным занятиям. В процессе обучения студент должен подготовить большое исследование по выбранной специальности (master's thesis). Последняя ступень - это докторантура (Ph.D.). За 3-6 лет, в зависимости от специальности и выбранной нагрузки, студенты получают докторскую степень. В течение первых двух лет обучение проходит в классах и на семинарах. Следующий год или более посвящается собственному исследованию или диссертации.

Источники фото № 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12,13, 14, 15, 16-18, 19-20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
©