>>>As a result of acquiring my Osaka accent I've often heard is that "my face and my accent don't match" :) Specially because I'm black!!!hehehe
Bottom line, the problem in Japan, China or Korea (I visited there and still had people talking to me in English when I was talking in Korean)is the ASSUMPTION that foreigners don't speak their language.
Assumption is a word I can't separate from because even though a Brazilian I can't play soccer, don't like samba/carnival (I'm from RIO) and NEVER listen to Bossa...
Sorry from deviating from the subject but apart from the linguistic aspect,many people assume things about us based on nationality,looks, height (I'm 6.2 but can't play basketball), you name it.
Haha, then I'm afraid that could be the case also in the SAR. The main reason is speakers of national langs, instead of int'l langs, often assume people won't know their languages. If I end up in Europe as a tourist/student, I could also sound surprisingly fluent, considering my look and background. HK people don't usually speak English very well - well, the handover does take its toll - and are just as foreign as others of the same descent in the eyes of many others. My speculation is: imagine if I were that person in your case, without the understanding mind of the real me, that person of typical Napoleon stature just "can't" hear what you are saying, esp. if you tend to speak too fast.
>>I notice that (like anyone) he is more interested in some languages than others. I've been watching to see if he studied Hebrew. I noticed that he was interested in Arabic and languages that have some influence from Arabic.
Like what I heard, like university subjects, they are of different sorts and the more scholarly people tend to choose "languages of civilizations" rather than ordinary, modern ones. This is essentially a much more difficult path to "embark on", and I'm afraid it's pretty much limited to scholars of Arts subjects only. The difference between these polyglots are simply their areas of interest. I'm also into this scholarly path, but when "the Chinese are dealing with the problem of getting full" (this is on the national agenda, really), I do believe the paths are roughly twofold only: if you learn an ordinary, modern, and fairly popular language, like English, you would either go for a holistic (this is a formal word) approach - literature, other subjects you would want to read up about, and colloquial usage - or for a general approach without much scholarly stuff.
But, back to the topic, to prove your linguistic ability to ordinary native speakers, it's natural to consider your own socializing habits. With path (2), I'd need much more time for real interactions and virtually without the "luxury" of reading a lot of literature. Both Farber and Kaufmann have spent a lot time on real interactions with this (2) - diplomatic missions, business, making foreign friends... I'd really speculate how much socializing the Prof. would do with his huge "repertoire", since, as he said, he wouldn't watch a lot of TV but, rather, use languages more for his career. I do see the point of socializing, in any case, as long as you are learning a modern language, but what's the point if I can't even travel? (Yeah, I'm having problems getting full, at least financially) Some more serious Chinese guys were saying audiobooks are darn boring and "you" should listen more to songs and make more foreign friends (many of them were abroad as students) - but hey, even if you ask me, Xie the undergraduate, to practice any language I know with you, I won't really pick you up much on your accent. This (2) demands much more speaking and real interactions, and is almost something that only diplomats and rich tourists and whatnot can do.
But then, in my context: darn, I think, not to mention something as popular as German, English is also darn hard to learn if I only take this (2). If I want to study in an Anglophone country, I need, I don't know, maybe some 10 times the money I need in Germany or even any random Chinese city. A path (2) would be a catch-22 for me. I do think (1) would take precedence for budding students before they are ready/have the money to take (2).
>>>Stereotypes that tend to associate a "foreigner" with a person from the West and "foreign language" with English can be regarded as a significant factor in this contradiction.
I'd do the same if you meet me in person. As I said above, besides pragmatic and cultural presuppositions (this is linguistics), I personally just can't talk comfortably to any random foreign guys who are just a mile taller than I am. I see (not meet) loads of foreigners almost everyday at university, but I just won't lose that feeling. So, yeah, I should stand out as a more understanding person in a homogeneous cultural circle, but I'm still not used to that.
Bottom line, the problem in Japan, China or Korea (I visited there and still had people talking to me in English when I was talking in Korean)is the ASSUMPTION that foreigners don't speak their language.
Assumption is a word I can't separate from because even though a Brazilian I can't play soccer, don't like samba/carnival (I'm from RIO) and NEVER listen to Bossa...
Sorry from deviating from the subject but apart from the linguistic aspect,many people assume things about us based on nationality,looks, height (I'm 6.2 but can't play basketball), you name it.
Haha, then I'm afraid that could be the case also in the SAR. The main reason is speakers of national langs, instead of int'l langs, often assume people won't know their languages. If I end up in Europe as a tourist/student, I could also sound surprisingly fluent, considering my look and background. HK people don't usually speak English very well - well, the handover does take its toll - and are just as foreign as others of the same descent in the eyes of many others. My speculation is: imagine if I were that person in your case, without the understanding mind of the real me, that person of typical Napoleon stature just "can't" hear what you are saying, esp. if you tend to speak too fast.
>>I notice that (like anyone) he is more interested in some languages than others. I've been watching to see if he studied Hebrew. I noticed that he was interested in Arabic and languages that have some influence from Arabic.
Like what I heard, like university subjects, they are of different sorts and the more scholarly people tend to choose "languages of civilizations" rather than ordinary, modern ones. This is essentially a much more difficult path to "embark on", and I'm afraid it's pretty much limited to scholars of Arts subjects only. The difference between these polyglots are simply their areas of interest. I'm also into this scholarly path, but when "the Chinese are dealing with the problem of getting full" (this is on the national agenda, really), I do believe the paths are roughly twofold only: if you learn an ordinary, modern, and fairly popular language, like English, you would either go for a holistic (this is a formal word) approach - literature, other subjects you would want to read up about, and colloquial usage - or for a general approach without much scholarly stuff.
But, back to the topic, to prove your linguistic ability to ordinary native speakers, it's natural to consider your own socializing habits. With path (2), I'd need much more time for real interactions and virtually without the "luxury" of reading a lot of literature. Both Farber and Kaufmann have spent a lot time on real interactions with this (2) - diplomatic missions, business, making foreign friends... I'd really speculate how much socializing the Prof. would do with his huge "repertoire", since, as he said, he wouldn't watch a lot of TV but, rather, use languages more for his career. I do see the point of socializing, in any case, as long as you are learning a modern language, but what's the point if I can't even travel? (Yeah, I'm having problems getting full, at least financially) Some more serious Chinese guys were saying audiobooks are darn boring and "you" should listen more to songs and make more foreign friends (many of them were abroad as students) - but hey, even if you ask me, Xie the undergraduate, to practice any language I know with you, I won't really pick you up much on your accent. This (2) demands much more speaking and real interactions, and is almost something that only diplomats and rich tourists and whatnot can do.
But then, in my context: darn, I think, not to mention something as popular as German, English is also darn hard to learn if I only take this (2). If I want to study in an Anglophone country, I need, I don't know, maybe some 10 times the money I need in Germany or even any random Chinese city. A path (2) would be a catch-22 for me. I do think (1) would take precedence for budding students before they are ready/have the money to take (2).
>>>Stereotypes that tend to associate a "foreigner" with a person from the West and "foreign language" with English can be regarded as a significant factor in this contradiction.
I'd do the same if you meet me in person. As I said above, besides pragmatic and cultural presuppositions (this is linguistics), I personally just can't talk comfortably to any random foreign guys who are just a mile taller than I am. I see (not meet) loads of foreigners almost everyday at university, but I just won't lose that feeling. So, yeah, I should stand out as a more understanding person in a homogeneous cultural circle, but I'm still not used to that.