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.