View Full Version : Thoughts on language
I just got done with my second French DLPT in which I declined in score from a 2+/2 to a...wait for it... 2+/1+. That means I get paid zilch for the next six months in hopes I can get the listening back up. I am that guy that checked the block on the last test and got complacent. Don't be me.
Don't let your language slip. I thought I was good and didn't put in any extra studying outside of school, and my listening score reflected that. Guys complain about the methodology of the test, whatever man, your score is a direct reflection of the effort that you put into it.
As far as I know going forward to get a 1/1 NCOER you will need a 1+/1+. Promotions will soon be tied to your language score. This means that you need to put in optimal effort during the Q and establish a strong base that you can improve upon, not maintain, throughout your career.
3/3 is achievable, and 3 in my class of 8 got there this year. The Groups are now putting money into their language lab and annual language training for everyone, and you need to take advantage of that and bring home some extra cheddar for mama to spend at the mall. In my opinion this is a welcome change and getting back to the roots in this way is a great step into the future. We are supposed to be language and cultural experts in our regions. 1/1 is a pitiful standard to set, but they had to start somewhere.
I will make an estimation that in five years, with the current slowed op tempo and focus on language, the average score for an SF operator will be 2/2. The change will only be brought on by it being tied to promotions and available time to commit to it. So I suggest you get ahead of the curve and put in the time!
Going to disagree with you brother. I recently changed from French to Russian as my Clang after 7months and a 6wk LET I was able to score a 2/2 on the OPI and in the 1+/2 range on the TORFL while on my LET. I took the DLPT days before my OPI and 1 week after my LET and I spent damn near every possible moment studying and preparing for my test and guess what I got on the DLPT 1/0+, the other 3 guys who also got 2/2 on the OPI scored 1/1, 0/0 or 0+/0. The DLPT is a test geared toward intel guys and translators if it was geared toward SF then it would be listening and speaking hmmm sounds like the OPI, which we only get FLIP pay for.
I will say it will be nice to see language become a priority again but only if they fully give us the resources to succeed at them, until then 1/1 will be a pain to maintain for guys that don't deploy to there target language countries. Because French did me so much good in Afghanistan :rolleyes:
I did the same thing after not using Arabic for 3 years.
Our language school has DLPT related classes that are geared for that test. Most of the guys do the OPI, but I am just not as good at speaking as I am reading and listening. As you know you have to train for the DLPT from the start because it is a completely different method. IMO the pay is backwards, I would much rather employ someone who can speak in the language than someone who can only listen and read it. In my group at least I can say it is once again a priority with at least 4 weeks a year dedicated to being in class.
I still see nonsensical mixed language teams that seem brought together for no reason at all (French/Russian/Arabic) on the same team. They need to do a one time mix up of each group and realign the teams with languages, and then align deployments with those teams. Sure it would hurt for a year or so, but in the long run it would be best for the force. Maybe a SGM can fill me in on why assignments are done the way they are.
If I were an Ambassador in the Congo I would have much more confidence in a team with a good level of French across the board. We continue to set guys up for huge obstacles when they don't speak a lick of the native language. Until those things are set up, I don't really see guys getting too motivated.
The Reaper
12-19-2014, 19:57
A major problem is that language requirements change.
Prior to 9/11, I do not think we even taught Pashto or Dari. Probably not a lot of Chinese, either.
Lots of Russian and Eastern European language training though. The first teams into Northern Afghanistan did not speak the language and finally had to speak Russian (which they were not trained for, but a couple of guys had been in Russian slots before) with the Alliance as that was the only language they had in common.
Do we change soldier's languages to meet the emerging requirements, or keep older, less necessary languages on the books?
How many guys can we get to learn a new language to a 2/2 standard every five years? Some will never learn an additional language beyond their native tongue to that standard, no matter what the investment.
And who can say what the needs will be in ten years?
Makes me glad to have been a 7th Group guy who spoke Spanish. :D
TR
Peregrino
12-19-2014, 21:11
Makes me glad to have been a 7th Group guy who spoke Spanish. :D TR
Me too!
Language is painful. Dedicated Special Forces Soldiers will recognize that language competence is as important as weapons and MOS skills and they'll invest the effort required to become proficient in their assigned language. Those guys will reap the rewards further down the road. Opportunities for fun, travel and adventure will abound as capabilities currently being developed mature. The ones who don't get on board will suffer because assignments, schools, promotions, and bonuses will be linked to test scores. It will be tough because there's nothing fair about who gets CAT I and who gets CAT IV, about who benefits from a CAT I language spoken in friendly tropical paradises and who gets stuck with a language only spoken in a country they'll never get to visit short of wartime deployment so they can never benefit from immersion opportunities, etc. etc. Add that not every SFG(A) dedicates the same effort to their language program (leadership issue!) and expectations (shaped by the current training model designed to get a 1/1 on the OPI) are unrealistic, it's no wonder frustrations are overwhelming whatever minimal enthusiasm exists. Add that the Regimental program which is designed and funded to SUSTAIN the 1/1 for the CLANG assigned/taught in SWCS is now being forced to provide initial acquisition training for new languages (using sub-standard contracted instructors on a grossly abbreviated schedule [12 weeks to teach a CAT IV from 0 to 1/1? GET F***ING REAL!]). I could go on for pages. All it would do is piss me off and frustrate you guys. Besides - I would run out of bourbon before I finished. The only good thing is we have a phenomenal team running the Regimental Language Program. (Those of you waiting for language pay should check your pay stubs in a month or so for validation!) They've gotten admin contractors into all the language labs and they're doing their best to ensure the contracts servicing your requirements are the best we can get given the f'ed up contracting system. A lot of things have to change for it to get better and - bluntly - it will NEVER be perfect. Too many hotspots (that are always changing), each with its own language, not enough SF Soldiers to cover everything, and never enough time to train them in the appropriate language when a new crisis explodes. Oh well - enough pissing and moaning for one post. :(
Me too!
The only good thing is we have a phenomenal team running the Regimental Language Program. (Those of you waiting for language pay should check your pay stubs in a month or so for validation!) :(
Well that will be amazing considering I am owed a years worth of back language pay. Sad to say this is the Norm for most of my BN at least. Better get that 1/1 or no schools for you, get that 1+/1+ or no excellence on your NCOER, but don't worry we will pay you sometime :rolleyes:
Sorry for venting but I feel language is a huge portion of our job and would love to see more put into a program that truly could make you fluent and not just study for a test.
Peregrino
12-20-2014, 14:08
Well that will be amazing considering I am owed a years worth of back language pay. Sad to say this is the Norm for most of my BN at least. Better get that 1/1 or no schools for you, get that 1+/1+ or no excellence on your NCOER, but don't worry we will pay you sometime :rolleyes:
Sorry for venting but I feel language is a huge portion of our job and would love to see more put into a program that truly could make you fluent and not just study for a test.
No - You are well within your rights to vent. I'm amazed at the amount of patience exhibited across the Regiment when it comes to language pay. The system is set up for intel weenies; everything we do in SF is an exception to policy/regulation and our growth w/increased emphasis on language is happening years faster than the Army/DoD can change to keep up. The leadership is aware of the problem - especially the ones who've led from the front and gotten their own test scores current - they're owed back pay too. Hopefully we've addressed the pay issue so that most of the backlog has been resolved. To do it we had to send a team of contractors to DFAS to sit next to the one LOLITS who handles our language pay and hand jam thousands of records. We're praying this won't be a quarterly bandaid but nobody familiar with the problem is holding their breath. What we are hoping is that most of you owed back pay will see it about the same time the CC bills for Christmas show up. (You won't get to touch it but the wives will be happier!)
Mr Weiss
12-20-2014, 17:05
I attended a civilian language school with two gentlemen from 5th Group who both had a considerable amount of team time. They did really well on the OPI afterwards from what I hear. Is this common for SF soldiers to attend such schools or do they usually get stuck in a miliary school?
Peregrino
12-20-2014, 17:51
I attended a civilian language school with two gentlemen from 5th Group who both had a considerable amount of team time. They did really well on the OPI afterwards from what I hear. Is this common for SF soldiers to attend such schools or do they usually get stuck in a military school?
Provided they meet prerequisites, there are a number of avenues for SF Soldiers to pursue advanced language training. They include military and civilian schooling and language immersion opportunities in friendly foreign countries.
it took until july of 14 to get paid back to feb 13
The 1/1 for schools doesnt impact me any more - the next course I go to will be retirement transition. Anything else that the army would want me to go to...
...well, I'd blow the DLPT to gt a 0+ to keep the army from sending me to any of the courses that they would consider sending me to between now and retirement.
...thats right gents, get a 1/1 or else. We'll pay you when we get around to it you no langugae speaking shit bags
BTW - we reserve the right to change your CLANG as we see fit.
...went to Arabic?
fuck you, youre going to Africa were they speak french
...learned french so you could keep up?
ha... fuck you - we are sending you to a place in Haiti were they speak creole and spanish
...finally got your head around getting a 1/1 on two langugages?
well, FUCK you again, yoou need to learn pashtu or dari
...hahahahaha YOU DID WHAT? You're trying to learn Dari?
mother fuck you buddy, you are going to go to school to learn Russian
We treat the language program like Gunny Highway treated PT shirts
...and then wonder why we have problems with the program
Or who knows... maybe I am wrong
Host nation immersion works - better for some than others, though. I'll never forget DH going into a cheese shop and asking for 500g of sliced "cash register" instead of sliced cheese. But German was pretty easy for me - Thai, on the other hand, not so much. That whole intonation and pronunciation thing and all... ;)
Richard
They sure expect alot from you guys in the language department. Is C3PO in charge?
The Reaper
12-20-2014, 20:33
They sure expect alot from you guys in the language department. Is C3PO in charge?
Are you looking for the Comedy Zone, or the exit?
TR
I really think Host nation immersion is key to really understanding language, with 3rd Group doing the language swap still it makes it very difficult to do that. I was lucky and my new language required a LET nothing like living it 24/7 with a host family. Cant see group footing the bill for every team guy going on a 6 week LET.
I recently was able to take a Russian Slang class at NCS and it was great training, currently looking at Middlebury for some advance language training
I really think Host nation immersion is key to really understanding language, with 3rd Group doing the language swap still it makes it very difficult to do that. I was lucky and my new language required a LET nothing like living it 24/7 with a host family. Cant see group footing the bill for every team guy going on a 6 week LET.
I recently was able to take a Russian Slang class at NCS and it was great training, currently looking at Middlebury for some advance language training
Well IMO it is good to see and hear that Groups, especially 3rd Group, is getting back into LET. Nothing better to learn a language than living and breathing it. One of my biggest issues with guys that were Pashto, Dari and Urdu language speakers. Being in AFG they should have done a lot better in their OPI.
Rebuilding Language skillsets will be a lot like rebuilding our UW Skills.
The problem is with shrinking budgets, even LET is tied to an arbitrary rating...
...wait until folks start getting told you need to have a 1/1 to even go on a LET trip.
Its coming.
Already the case you must have a 1+/1+ to go on a LET, kind of agree with that, our current language programs can get you to a 1+/1+ level without the additional cost of the LET. I would rather see the limited funds used that way.
The problem is with shrinking budgets, even LET is tied to an arbitrary rating...
...wait until folks start getting told you need to have a 1/1 to even go on a LET trip.
Its coming.
I agree with guys not improving in Pashtu and Dari, I picked up what I could while there as a non speaker. My team mates who had those languages came back with a much improved skills then hit a wall above the 1+ pushing 2 level. our current language training does not focus enough on the mechanics of the languages.
WarriorDiplomat
12-22-2014, 14:11
Already the case you must have a 1+/1+ to go on a LET, kind of agree with that, our current language programs can get you to a 1+/1+ level without the additional cost of the LET. I would rather see the limited funds used that way.
I agree with guys not improving in Pashtu and Dari, I picked up what I could while there as a non speaker. My team mates who had those languages came back with a much improved skills then hit a wall above the 1+ pushing 2 level. our current language training does not focus enough on the mechanics of the languages.
We as a regiment do not do a good job of predicting language requirements and sustainment for future areas we will be sending soldiers to. I am on my 3rd language from 10th Group first was Turkish then it changed to German and now French and now we are getting involved with the Turks again 5th or 10th?? not sure since Turkey never made it into the EU. I am of the opinion that the language rating is nothing more than a selling point to congress as a capability than an actual competency they let it go for so long as a nuisance to our DA training during GWOT.
We as a regiment do not do a good job of predicting language requirements and sustainment for future areas we will be sending soldiers to. I am on my 3rd language from 10th Group first was Turkish then it changed to German and now French and now we are getting involved with the Turks again 5th or 10th?? not sure since Turkey never made it into the EU. I am of the opinion that the language rating is nothing more than a selling point to congress as a capability than an actual competency they let it go for so long as a nuisance to our DA training during GWOT.
Completely agree, and currently feeling this first hand.
We as a regiment do not do a good job of predicting language requirements and sustainment for future areas we will be sending soldiers to. I am of the opinion that the language rating is nothing more than a selling point to congress as a capability than an actual competency they let it go for so long as a nuisance to our DA training during GWOT.
I think your point over our, DA, USASOC, USASFC and others justification to Congress and Senate oversight committees. This point will be the issue with trying to pull the Regiment back towards a UW mindset and off the DA. Without Group leadership pushing it down, no hell USASFC with over sight on the number on Concepts, CNTs and JCETs coming for that 180 day approvals to track, show, etc who is UW focus and meeting the 1st SFC Guidance. Without leadership pushing it, language and UW will never change for us.
We have every Company (ODA Level and Up) to soon to be 1st SFC General only knowing, think, planning DA style missions for the 10 years. This has been our problem for many years.
WarriorDiplomat
12-26-2014, 07:12
I think your point over our, DA, USASOC, USASFC and others justification to Congress and Senate oversight committees. This point will be the issue with trying to pull the Regiment back towards a UW mindset and off the DA. Without Group leadership pushing it down, no hell USASFC with over sight on the number on Concepts, CNTs and JCETs coming for that 180 day approvals to track, show, etc who is UW focus and meeting the 1st SFC Guidance. Without leadership pushing it, language and UW will never change for us.
We have every Company (ODA Level and Up) to soon to be 1st SFC General only knowing, think, planning DA style missions for the 10 years. This has been our problem for many years.
Absolutely, though SWCS has integrated UW concepts into every phase we still have DA minded cadre tainting the process.
Lest we forget gents, Special Forces does have five doctrinal missions: UW, FID, SR, CT, AND DA. UW will always be first among equals, but the others still matter----particularly to a Combatant Commander who does not want to hear that his regionally-aligned Special Forces Group "doesn't do windows (e.g. anything other than UW)."
WarriorDiplomat
12-26-2014, 10:14
Lest we forget gents, Special Forces does have five doctrinal missions: UW, FID, SR, CT, AND DA. UW will always be first among equals, but the others still matter----particularly to a Combatant Commander who does not want to hear that his regionally-aligned Special Forces Group "doesn't do windows (e.g. anything other than UW)."
DA does not topple governments or regional influential organizations or defeat non state actors such as in operations such as FID,COIN and UW. We need to drop DA as a doctrinal mission especially since we have Infantry, Ranger Bn, SEAL's, Force Recon, MARSOC, MEF's and Tier 1 units all doing the same thing and they are specialist. DA is however integrated within our expertise when training host nation or guerrillas to defeat the enemy especially when we teach them commando operations consisting of Raids, Recons and Ambushes in order to attain a strategic goal. CT should be dropped as a doctrinal mission since COIN/FID and UW are all essentially operations that either sponsor or counter terrorism/guerrilla type aggressors. Again we have a national force and several "specialist" dedicated to this specific mission. SF is not task organized for DA we are task org'd as a battalion staff as force multipliers in line with COL Volckmann's missions in the P.I. organizing, training and advising all aspects of the conflict.
Certainly we have learned by now that DA/kinetic does not work against VTB Violent True Believer organizations where the population is caught in the middle.
I respectfully disagree. From a Combatant Commanders perspective (the 'end user' of Special Forces), it makes little sense to maintain a force structure as large as ours that does not possess a full-spectrum capability. And while I agree that the Regiment should continue to emphasize UW as its core mission, we risk irrelevancy if it becomes our sole focus. When the balloon goes up and a TSOC Cdr needs SF to do 'x' that does not involve indigenous forces, we cannot opt out because it's not in our self-prescribed wheelhouse.
Peregrino
12-26-2014, 12:13
WD & Bb - You guys bring to mind the balance pole a high wire "artist" uses to walk a tightrope - and a tightrope is exactly where we find ourselves today. You both make legitimate points that support the Regiment's relevance. Stay flexible, the chasm is getting deeper, the other side isn't in sight, and the competing/conflicting/often mutually exclusive demands (with scraps for resources) on the Regiment are directly analogous to the winds and sway imperiling the "artist". Quick thinking and the ability to shift the balance pole is all that is going to keep us on the wire - falling off isn't an option, there is no safety net. :lifter
Me too!
... who benefits from a CAT I language spoken in friendly tropical paradises and who gets stuck with a language only spoken in a country they'll never get to visit short of wartime deployment so they can never benefit from immersion opportunities, etc. etc. ...(
As someone who just took DLPT and OPI in Farsi for the first time, I gotta give an Amen there!
UWOA (RIP)
12-30-2014, 13:08
I did the same thing after not using Arabic for 3 years.
Our language school has DLPT related classes that are geared for that test. Most of the guys do the OPI, but I am just not as good at speaking as I am reading and listening. As you know you have to train for the DLPT from the start because it is a completely different method. IMO the pay is backwards, I would much rather employ someone who can speak in the language than someone who can only listen and read it. In my group at least I can say it is once again a priority with at least 4 weeks a year dedicated to being in class.
I still see nonsensical mixed language teams that seem brought together for no reason at all (French/Russian/Arabic) on the same team. They need to do a one time mix up of each group and realign the teams with languages, and then align deployments with those teams. Sure it would hurt for a year or so, but in the long run it would be best for the force. Maybe a SGM can fill me in on why assignments are done the way they are.
If I were an Ambassador in the Congo I would have much more confidence in a team with a good level of French across the board. We continue to set guys up for huge obstacles when they don't speak a lick of the native language. Until those things are set up, I don't really see guys getting too motivated.
Because, while a team may be oriented for a particular area, you never know where you may end up actually going. While there was one Group actually assigned the Middle East AOs, every Group ended up with boots on the ground there. With several languages available on a multi-language team you have a better chance at having at least one teammate who can communicate with the target audience (witness the statement of Russian being used to communicate with the Northern Alliance). At least that's my drift and why there were several languages on my team in the 70's and 80's ... Spanish, Norwegian, German and ... drum roll ... English :o.
.
I respectfully disagree. From a Combatant Commanders perspective (the 'end user' of Special Forces), it makes little sense to maintain a force structure as large as ours that does not possess a full-spectrum capability. And while I agree that the Regiment should continue to emphasize UW as its core mission, we risk irrelevancy if it becomes our sole focus. When the balloon goes up and a TSOC Cdr needs SF to do 'x' that does not involve indigenous forces, we cannot opt out because it's not in our self-prescribed wheelhouse.
I understand what you are saying about working for a Combatant Commander, TSOC or even a USEMB. But being SF, as Peregrino pointed out, you have to be that chameleon or that military term Gumby. Being able to change between our military facets (CT, FID, COIN, SR, DA, & UW) to meet those Commanders or Leaders "NEEDS." Yet the way we talk to them is very different based of those "NEEDS," YOu talk to a Batt Cmdr different from a General or from a Conventional Line Commander to a DoS or USEMB "worker." Knowing your Operational Environment is what makes us different, and knowing how to play with people or talk to them is what makes us different. Just being that DA knuckle Dragger doesn't always go over well. I've seen it and being SF and know how to use elicitation style techniques works wonders. Most Conventional Company and Above Commanders know what our capabilities are, and how or what full-spectrum capabilities we can bring to warfare. But being that SF Tm Sgt or ODA Commander, and being able to talk around the needs and bring your ODA's full-spectrum capability and not just focusing on your ODA's Great DA/FID Skills is what matters.
IMO most Conventional Army Military Leaders, MOST LEADERS, they can full Mentor and develop their Troops to be great leaders. No knowing how to lead, knowing how to employ the full-spectrum capability of an ODA and how to plan and train for it. How can you really talk about it to a Combatant Commander? Guys fall back onto what they know. For me that is our problem both in SF and Conventional Army Leaders at all levels today. Their inability to be real leaders.
WarriorDiplomat
01-01-2015, 19:01
Absolutely MG.... DA, CT IMO needs to go back to being a subset mission of an operation underneath our umbrella specialties of UW, COIN and FID. The way tier 1 approaches CT is different than the way we approach it we serve different purposes and that should not be forgotten. Our contribution to fighting the enemy is paid for through our activities which happen left of phase 1 and ends once a conflict is handed over. Without our expertise and development of nets there is no GCC the SECDEF will allow to put escalating levels of presence and capability in any trouble country without the years of development we do to prepare the way. From capable indigenous to an in depth knowledge of who the good guys and bad guys are and what the infrastructure can support someone has to shape the picture for the GCC's decision making. Can you imagine flying over any country knowing that there is no capability to recover the technology or people? Can we say SECDEF denial?? Our activities are the most critical of what it takes to establish the ground work for any full spectrum requirement.
Now to expand on where I believe DA fits…..it is a capability where an ODA can conduct it if no other better suited resources are available. The criteria should be if no DA assets are available, the mission is time sensitive and we are unable to conduct the mission with host nation due to the host nation lack of capability or some other constraint forcing us to conduct it unilaterally. Can we do it?...yes! Are we specialist…no! a SFAUC-C once every 18 mos for proficiency puts us as qualified and capable but not preferred. Again we are not task organized as a DA unit per sey. (Blue Light) CIF’s on the other hand are and perhaps the DA/CT doctrinal mission capability actually lies within this GCC assigned unit but not a standard ODA. SF as a unit cannot get jealous every time a SEAL or Marine unit conducts a mission in the littorals and then re-focus our energy into competing with units selected, organized and trained to conduct DA. The idea that what we do will become irrelevant to a GCC because we aren’t conducting every SOF mission that comes down the pipe and gains media attention is a sad day for a unit who is prized for its quiet professional reputation performing missions in the shadows with little to no attention. I am certain that a GCC fully understands the value of a host nation being able to conduct its own security and its contribution to the overall effort by denying a conflict access to its borders further containing the issue.