Quote:
Originally Posted by Bechorg
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
.
.