Foreign Service

A computer’s operating system is the interface between the hardware and the user. When you type on the keyboard or click the mouse, the operating system sends the appropriate commands to the computer hardware. The operating system, or OS, is what makes it possible to operate and interact with a computer.

Most of us use one operating system. Windows and Mac OS are the two most common ones. There other operating systems out there, too. Unix is the OS that most internet servers run on. Whichever OS you use, most of us only need one.

Some people need to work with multiple operating systems. Website developers, for example, need to test their websites on every popular OS to make sure that it works correctly everywhere. Those people have two choices: either they have a different computer for every OS that they use, or they can use something called a virtual computer.

Virtual computers allow you to run multiple operating systems on the same computer hardware, at the same time. For example, I use a Mac at home, but sometimes I need to use Windows. There is a program called Parallels that allows me to run Windows inside Mac OS. It works very well. I boot up my computer, then run Parallels, which is a computer program. Parallels then boots up Windows inside Mac OS. I can actually run Windows and Mac OS at the same time. It’s very convenient.

However, convenience has a price. An operating system is a complicated program. It uses the computer’s CPU and memory. If you have two operating systems running at the same, time, the computer’s hardware has to work extra hard. The common experience of  virtual computers is that it is slow. It works, but it works slower than if you were only running one operating system.

What does this have to do with my brain? Well, it feels like I’m running a virtual language system in my brain. I’m currently in the process of learning Vietnamese. I’m not good enough yet to operate in Vietnamese naturally. It feels like Vietnamese is a separate operating system in my brain, running parallel to English. Whenever I have to work in Vietnamese, my brain has to allocate system resources (brain cells) that I was already using to do things like breathe, or walk and chew gum at the same time. The result is that my brain works slower in Vietnamese than in English.

Usually, when someone asks me a question, I can respond very quickly. A conversation with me in English might go something like this:

You: How are you?

Me: I’m great. I had a delicious breakfast, and I’m ready to get to work.

You: Good to hear. What would you like to do?

Me: I was thinking about tackling that project we didn’t quite finish last week.

In contrast, the same conversation in Vietnamese might go something like this:

You: How are you?

Me: …

You: I said how are you?

Me: … good. thanks. …

You: Uh, OK. So what do you want to do now?

Me: …

You: I said what do you want to do now?

Me: … uh … uh … continue work?

I would not want to have a conversation with my Vietnamese brain. Too painful. I don’t know how my teachers can stand me. They have the patience of Job. They need it.

Eventually, through a process called automaticity, I will get faster. I won’t need to consciously devote as much cognitive resources to using the language. There is only one way to achieve that: practice.It isn’t something that you can cram for at the last minute. It takes constant work. You have to build up the ability to use the language without thinking about it. It’s boring and it’s hard and it hurts. But it’s the only way to get there.

I have not been writing very much here lately. It’s not because I haven’t been doing anything. It’s because I’ve been doing too much of something. That something is: studying Vietnamese.

I am in language class full-time, Monday through Friday. We typically have class for five hours a day. After that, we have a lot of homework to do. I regularly spend 3 to 4 hours per day outside of class working in various homework projects and language practice activity. Last weekend, we basically studied all day on Saturday and Sunday.

One of our classmates requested time to practice making sentences and work on the mechanics of the language. He thought we needed the opportunity to play around with the language, make sure that we could use what we were learning. The program director was very responsive and added 3 hours per week for that, on an optional basis. Being a bit masochistic, I take advantage of that opportunity, too. So, on many days, I am in language class for 6 hours a day.

Language study at the Foreign Service Institute is much more intense than other classroom learning. For one thing, we are in a small class of four students (which is actually large by FSI standards).

Also, we have three different teachers who rotate in and out throughout the day. Sometimes it feels like they are tag-teaming us. One teacher exhausts us, then she tags out and another teacher, fresh and rested, jumps into the classroom to work us over again. Sometimes I imagine them conspiring among each other. “Yes, I really confused the hell out of them with that grammar point. Their self-confidence is shaky now. They’re vulnerable. You can make them cry for sure if you make them practice it again.” Then the next teacher leaps into the classroom and makes us cry.

Several months ago, before I started language study, someone who has gone through the process already said that language study is like the movie “Groundhog Day.” Every day, he went to the same classroom with the same teachers and did the same thing. I had that feeling for the first time this past Tuesday. I woke up, looked at the class schedule for the day, and realized that I was going to be in the same classroom, with the same students and teachers, working on the same language, all day.

But this week was different. On Thursday and Friday this week, we had our first formal progress evaluation. We have been studying for eight weeks already. The expectation is that we have proficiency at level one on the ILR scale in speaking, listening and reading. That’s about the level that a college student would be expected to reach after two years of study.

If you compare the number of hours that we were in class with the number of hours that a college student would be in language class, I have already studied Vietnamese for more hours then a college student would study in an entire academic year. Crammed into eight weeks.

I’ll repeat myself: language study at the Foreign Service Institute is intense.

I stressed a bit about the test. After all, this is my job, and I want to perform well. Also, I have to admit that I am, like some of my coworkers, competitive and proud. A sizeable part of my self-worth is based on how smart I think I am. I’m not proud of that, I’m just being honest with myself.

My wife stressed more than I did. The stakes are a bit higher for her. If I don’t do well on the test, they will double down and work with me more. But her situation is different. She isn’t an officer. She is what is known as a “eligible family member.” The government will only allow her to continue to study if there is space in the class, and if she shows that she is making a good effort to learn. Since she wants to get a job at consulate in Vietnam, she knows that language skills are important, so she really wants to stay in the class.

The progress test was spaced out over two days. We did the reading part one day, and the speaking/listening part the second day. I have said before that I’m very impressed with the quality of language instruction here, and the testing program is equally impressive. They really know what they’re doing here.

We did well. The teachers gave us feedback on the spot, pointed out what we did well, and identified goals for us to work toward. Next week we will continue classes, and it will be another series of Groundhog Days until the next progress evaluation.

The words of Dale Cooper apply: “I have no idea where this will lead us, but I have a definite feeling it will be a place both wonderful and strange.”

If you see people walking around the grounds of the Foreign Service Institute this week with their heads bowed and muttering to themselves, don’t worry. They aren’t mentally disturbed. They are just preparing for their language tests.

My destination is far away, and in an unclear fog. An apt allegory for my current life.

They take language teaching at FSI very seriously. We spent much of our first day of class in orientation and pre-training. The director of FSI, reminded us that the taxpayers are spending a LOT of money to give us language, and that we have a big responsibility not to waste that. She also reminded us that we will have to work hard if we want to get higher than a basic level of proficiency. Language skills are another tool that diplomats use, and the better that we can speak our target languages, the better diplomats we will be.

We also took several diagnostic tests. One was the (in)famous Modern Language Aptitude Test, affectionately referred to as the MLAT. We also took a learning style diagnosis. As someone with a background in education and applied linguistics, I participated in these tests with good-faith seriousness, but with a grain of salt. The bottom line is that the students with a positive attitude and who work hard will succeed, and those who put in a half-hearted effort will not do well, regardless of our respective aptitudes. Nevertheless, it was a good start to this long-term learning effort.

After two weeks of training, we have a good grasp of the sound system, a working vocabulary of about 200 words, and some basic grammar. The textbook is organized by function. Every chapter centers on communicative functions, like greetings, introductions, and asking for information.

At the rate we’re going, we are getting the equivalent of a college semester every three weeks or so. I am scheduled to be in language for 39 weeks. The amount of instruction that I will get works out to be more than I would get in a four-year degree program.

It’s a lot of work. My wife and I put in at least three hours of homework every night, sometimes four hours a day. That’s after five hours of class instructional time. Our brains are worn out.

Lucky for us, we don’t have the distractions of a family life. We don’t have to get kids off to school, help them with their homework, attend PTA meetings, and deal with drama at home. I take my hat off to working parents who are going through this. One of my friends is especially amazing: a single parent with two young kids, learning another difficult Asian language. she is  amazingly smart, and I know that she will do great. But it can’t be easy. I salute you: A!

It’s nice to be a student again. But this is an intense experience.

 

Shortly after finishing my PhD, my wife and I did a home-improvement project that involved replacing the toilet in our house. I had a greater feeling of accomplishment from that project than I felt upon completing my PhD. Why? Because a toilet is something that one can use every day.

Vietnamese class started this week. For the next 39 weeks, my full-time job will be to learn the Vietnamese language. Why 39 weeks? You ask. Good question, I answer.  My wife is in class, too, as an “EFM.” “EFM” stands for “eligible family member.” Eligible for what, you ask? Good question, I answer.

Language training here at the Foreign Service Institute is intense. We are in class for five hours per day. There are about 20 students in the Vietnamese section. We will all work in the consulate in Ho Chi Minh City. This week we had some classes all together, learning the basics of the sound system. Then we broke out into our small groups of three or four for in-depth work. In addition to class time, there is homework and time in the language lab. This is a full-time job.

I was a bit anxious about starting language. I haven’t learned a new language in over 20 years. I’ve spent most of my adult life working on my Chinese proficiency. So the idea of jumping head-first into learning a new language was unnerving. But more importantly, I don’t want my Chinese to suffer. My wife and I still talk in Chinese together, as we always have, so at least my everyday language will probably not erode. But I’m still worried about my reading ability.

But even with the negatives, this phase of my life is an interesting intellectual challenge. I did my PhD in linguistics, focusing on second language acquisition. I’ve been interested in adult language acquisition for a long time. Mostly, I have focused on the teaching side. I haven’t experienced the student side for a long time.

For an adult, language learning is a cognitively challenging task. An adult’s experience of learning a language is probably fundamentally different from a child’s learning a first language. There are some serious challenges to adults who try to learn a second language. While all children learn their native language perfectly, most adults who try to learn a second language fail to achieve more than basic functional ability. This is probably because our brains work differently at this stage in life. Although diplomats are intelligent and highly motivated, most of us will be disappointed with our progress in language learning.

I have some advantages over my classmates, I think. This first week we focused on the sound system. Vietnamese has some different consonants from English, and the vowel system is different from English in many ways. That’s where my advantage is. Because of my background in theoretical linguistics, I can grasp the differences a bit easier than my classmates, at least conceptually. Also, Vietnamese is a tonal language. Chinese is as well, of course, and so even though Vietnamese tones are different from Chinese tones, at least I know how to listen for tones. A few people have never learned any foreign language, let alone a tonal language. They wear worried expressions on their faces a lot.

There are several Chinese speakers in our class, including a few native speakers. When they make mistakes pronouncing tones, I usually can tell the reason for their mistakes. First language has an influence on the second language. That’s why adult non-native speakers have foreign accents.  I probably make a lot of the same mistakes, but when the teacher points them out, I can correct for the mistake easier. At least at the initial stages of learning, I predict that I will have less pain and frustration.

So far, language learning has been an interesting intellectual experience. Like all “good” language learners, I am testing hypotheses about the language as I develop my “interlanguage.” I like to think that my interlanguage is more linguistically informed. I like the experience of applying the theoretical knowledge that I have about language, to the task of language learning. Time will tell how useful my linguistic background will be. In the words of the famous philosopher Han Solo, “Great, kid. Don’t get cocky.”

I am currently in long-term training at the Foreign Service Institute near DC. That’s also the location where they do language testing for the State Department. Yesterday, I took a Chinese language test.

I worked very hard on my Chinese language skills during my two-year tour in China. I took advantage of the post language program, taking private lessons with a language teacher. I tried very hard to improve my reading, especially the simplified characters and different prosaic style that they use in Mainland China. I read a LOT of newspapers, magazines, and books. I think that my language skills improved quite a bit.

Next week I will start learning a new language. I know something about language acquisition and bilingualism. At my age, language learning is a cognitively challenging process. I decided that it would be better for me to take another Chinese proficiency test first, before the new language starts to squeeze out the old. Also, the language test scores are only valid for five years in my job. My original Chinese score was due to expire before I have to bid for my next job. If I want to leverage my Chinese skills to get my next job assignment, I need to have a valid score on file.

Due to non-disclosure requirements, I’m not allowed to divulge details about the test itself. But I can share that my score was disappointing.

Language ability is on a spectrum. It isn’t meaningful to say whether or not you can speak a language. Rather, the question is what you are able to do in the language. The Foreign Service doesn’t use the word “fluent.” Instead, like most government departments, it uses something called the Interagency Language Roundtable proficiency scale to refer to how well a person knows a language. It’s similar to the ACTFL scale that is used in education, but the ILR sale goes higher.

Compared to my performance on the test three years ago, I thought that I did very well this time. The reading wasn’t challenging at all. I stumbled a bit on the speaking, because the examiners threw in a lot of idioms that I am not familiar with. Still, I was satisfied with my performance. I thought that I had killed it.

That’s why I was disappointed with my score: 3+/3+. That is, 3+ on the speaking/listening, and 3+ on the reading. My last score was 3/3, so I improved over the last time I tested. But I was hoping for a 4/4 this time.

There’s a Chinese idiom to describe how I’m feeling: 心灰意冷: heart of ashes, cold of spirit. The fact that I know that idiom tells me that I should have been scored higher. This was discouraging.

This isn’t the end of the world, though. In the grand scheme of things, testing lower than you had hoped isn’t a big problem. The score is plenty high enough to get any job that I want. If I can rein in my oversized ego, I’ll be able to get past this disappointment and move on.

I’m in “public diplomacy” training now, in preparation for my next job in Vietnam. The training is enjoyable, and it’s clear that my next job will be different from my last job.

Coincidentally, I just finished this interesting book: “Dirty Diplomacy.” The author was the ambassador from the UK to Uzbekistan starting in 2003.

This guy had an amazing experience before he got fired. He did some wonderful things that an ambassador should do. He traveled around the country in the attempt to learn what was really happening in the country. That helped him to be an effective advocate for British businesses operating in Uzbekistan. It also made his reports back to Britain more accurate.

He also learned about the terrible government corruption and human rights violations in the country. And he had the courage to call out the host government on the abuses. He wasn’t a very diplomatic diplomat. But even though he publicly embarrassed the host government, the result was that the president of the country seemed to respect him more.

He also did some things that an ambassador shouldn’t do. He made some unwise choices with his personal life that would definitely get me in trouble if I did them. In fact, I would probably lose my job if I did some of the things that he did.

The author described the inner workings of the British foreign service. It was fun for me to compare the workings of the UK Foreign Office and the U.S. State Department.

Then last weekend I re-watched the movie “Good Night and Good Luck.” The film tells the back story of the famous media battle between Edward R. Murrow and Joseph McCarthy.

The movie is more relevant to me now because of what Murrow did later in life. He left television journalism and became the Director of the United States Information Agency in 1961. That agency later became part of the State Department. It became the “public diplomacy” area of specialization, which is my current specialty.

Between training, reading books and watching movies, I’m overdosing a little bit on diplomacy. Time to branch out and do something different. Maybe I’ll go hiking.