You're the one that introduced a standard of "extremely fluency" which is highly unlikely to become an official requirement as it is obviously not necessary for day to day living or integration into society. What is more realistic and what I was basing my judgment on was a familiarity with basic (phrase-book level) conversation/writing (maybe 100 or so common kanji) skills.I also agree that calling long-term residents freeloaders just because they may not have learned to be extremely fluent. The definition just doesn't fit, as others have explained.
Whether through standard schooling, business or overseas stays, clearly enough have learned enough English to make those who haven't learned a whit be able to comfortably "live off their charity, generosity and hospitality" (Freeloading metaphorically applied). That was my point. And please stop complaining about their conversational ability until yours is comparable in Japanese.Elizabeth wrote: Ahem. They may have studied for that long, but they certainly didn't learn anywhere near enough to be called conversationally fluent. As a teacher, I can attest to that.
Tell me what is the difference between "decided" and decided to consider in English...
In Japanese, it must be a huge difference...
no oneWho's being assimilated???
Yes, exactly. Making a good faith effort for long term residents to be as inoffensive and well accepted by the community as possible is I'm sure what these preliminary examinations from the government are attempting to correct. I am referring to the ones I think we've all encountered that don't apologize for bothering whoever they are about to barge into, ask in Japanese if the person speaks English and proceed to chat away like it is their God given right to be perfectly understood. Bad enough in tourists. Completely unacceptable for everyone else.The initiative is clearly designed to weed out individuals who haven't got a clue about the Japanese language and create an unnecessary burden on the bureaucratic processes in Japan because they can't understand the simplest of things. I'm sure Elizabeth's comments were directed at those individuals, the ones who make zero effort to learn and expect to be catered to in English or whatever their native tongue is wherever they go.
Again, the issue at hand isn't whether foreign residents should learn Japanese (I think we've all agreed on that), but whether it should be required by law.
Yes, otherwise we wouldn't have so many opinions on it, Homerduff. This proposed policy, even in its embryo stage, has far-reaching negative impact potential. Personally, I think the whole announcement was far too premature.Is this news article so 'breaking' ?
And perhaps this is already an initial step towards planning for that inevitable day when greater numbers of unskilled workers will be required to offset the low birth rate labor shortage. Language is after all perhaps the most necessary and direct way to ensure the smooth integratation of any immigrant group into the greater social fabric and economy. Relax some visa requirements enabling manual labor admittance while strengthening others such as language. Certain incentives on the other end could also be offered for keeping highly fluent, high skilled workers in the country permanently.I also don't understand the idea of pushing foreigners to become more Japanese when their is no chance at present of them ever being accepted as such. Japan is heading steadily towards a situation where they will need foreigners more than they will need Japan. Interesting times.
Fair enough.You're the one that introduced a standard of "extremely fluency"
I prefer not to make that call just yet, Elizabeth. Neither of us knows what the 2 ministries will ask for. However, it is often wise to play Devil's Advocate, so I do.which is highly unlikely to become an official requirement as it is obviously not necessary for day to day living or integration into society.
Personally, I think they will be asking for far more than this, but let's just wait and see. Who knows how long it will take before we see more from the MOJ on this anyway? Six months? A year? Two? Five?What is more realistic and what I was basing my judgment on was a familiarity with basic (phrase-book level) conversation/writing (maybe 100 or so common kanji) skills.
Now you are the one going to extremes here, by implying a huge number (majority?) have not learned one iota of Japanese despite long-term stay. I don't disagree that many have not learned much, but to say zilch is far too extreme. Also, you seem to be ignoring the fact that since no language requirement has been imposed, it has not stopped long-term residents from doing their rightful thing of paying taxes, paying for schooling of children, paying for insurance, etc. That's not freeloading, living off charity, or anything else. Japanese know it is hard to learn their language anyway, and they don't even expect foreigners to learn it here. You know the stories about people who attempt to speak it, yet get shocked responses back from the locals.Whether through standard schooling, business or overseas stays, clearly enough have learned enough English to make those who haven't learned a whit be able to comfortably "live off their charity, generosity and hospitality" (Freeloading metaphorically applied). That was my point.
Please stop telling me what I can or cannot post here. You are not the moderator and it doesn't take anyone perfectly fluent in Japanese to discuss this issue.And please stop complaining about their conversational ability until yours is comparable in Japanese.
Whether it is hard or not, whether the natives respect you back by responding in Japanese, whether it has any practical effect at all is completely irrelevant to the good manners and basic decency that foreigners SHOULD show towards their host country by attempting to actively learn the language. Again a different issue from the role of government intervention or infrastructure necessary to its effective implementation.Elizabeth responded: Now you are the one going to extremes here, by implying a huge number (majority?) have not learned one iota of Japanese despite long-term stay. I don't disagree that many have not learned much, but to say zilch is far too extreme. Also, you seem to be ignoring the fact that since no language requirement has been imposed, it has not stopped long-term residents from doing their rightful thing of paying taxes, paying for schooling of children, paying for insurance, etc. That's not freeloading, living off charity, or anything else. Japanese know it is hard to learn their language anyway, and they don't even expect foreigners to learn it here. You know the stories about people who attempt to speak it, yet get shocked responses back from the locals.
Good rule. Too bad for those English native business men who may be dead scared of learning 1 new language. At the age of 12 (and let's say all average 12 years old students in Belgium), I was already familiar with 3 languages.
Good rule. Too bad for those English native business men who may be dead scared of learning 1 new language. At the age of 12 (and let's say all average 12 years old students in Belgium), I was already familiar with 3 languages.
. I doubt very much the government is going to end up implementing a rigorous, high stakes test of Japanese ability that ends up throwing any well trained employees out of the country. It all seems designed to produce a more flexible system of tradeoffs and incentives...
Would you say so, if your own original country introduced a similar law (if it hasn't already)? Race and language are not the same thing.Could it be that are trying to reenstate the pure Japanese race, whatever that means?
By trying to get rid of the poison me as a foreigner, and at the same time, give a huge incentive to the Japanese pure couple to reprocreate?
Nah!!!
I'm not arguing with the first part. I am arguing the second. What's your stand on the latter, other than to say there will likely be no rigorous test?Whether it is hard or not, whether the natives respect you back by responding in Japanese, whether it has any practical effect at all is completely irrelevant to the good manners and basic decency that foreigners SHOULD show towards their host country by attempting to actively learn the language. Again a different issue from the role of government intervention or infrastructure necessary to its effective implementation.
the good manners and basic decency that foreigners SHOULD show towards their host country by attempting to actively learn the language
Would you say so, if your own original country introduced a similar law (if it hasn't already)? Race and language are not the same thing.
\Thanks for your somewhat self-satisfied opinion. Belgium is hardly unique in that respect... although it does have an advantage in that the country has two equally important official languages.
So do you think somebody who has contributed to Japanese society for years should lose his/her livelihood and family as a consequence of failing a language test?
Yes, otherwise we wouldn't have so many opinions on it, Homerduff. This proposed policy, even in its embryo stage, has far-reaching negative impact potential. Personally, I think the whole announcement was far too premature.