<p>We're not saying he shouldn't major in history - we're just pointing out that there are other majors that may accomplish the same things. While Chinese history classes may be taught in English, if he has any intention of ever doing original research he's going to have to learn Chinese. If it's just something he thinks would be fun on the way to law school it's probably less imperative.</p>
<p>The chances of doing ancient Chinese history without being told to learn the language are pretty slim. In this country, while modern Chinese history has been usually taught in History departments (which do not require that a student learn Chinese in order to study Chinese history), most premodern Chinese history has been taught in departments of East Asian languages and civilizations which were set up primarily to teach the language and literature of the countries of East Asia. The study of Ancient History has been closer to old-style sinology than to the more social science-y aspect of the study of modern history. These departments require learning the language as part of the requirements of the major; two years at some, three at others.</p>
<p>At Harvard, for example, Professor Michael Puett is an expert on Ancient Chinese history; Prof. Peter Bol is an expert on Tang through Ming; they are both in the Dept. of East Asian Languages and Civilizations. The historians of modern China are in the department of History.</p>
<p>I agree with Marite - I can't imagine studying the history of ancient China without studying the language along with it. And by that I mean studying Classical Chinese as well as Modern Standard Chinese. </p>
<p>'History' is one of the key genres of Classical Chinese writing - it may be closer to literature in the Western sense of the term but there is no doubt that the most detailed pictures of life in ancient China emerge from these books, and not all of them have been translated. For example, as part of the my ancient Chinese history classes last year I had to study part of Sima Qian's 'Historical Records', which was written around 91 BC, and was the basic model for subsequent Chinese historiography until the 1800s. And there is no complete translation.</p>
<p>The history research you do at the undergraduate level does not require working knowledge of Chinese. It is helpful, but in no way required or encouraged. The amount of research and study you do as an undergraduate does not reach the level of detail and sophistication that requires non-English sources. At Berkeley, we have a 30-50 thesis requirement in addition to 10-15 research papers for other classes. Instructors here have been very accomodating for those (like myself) who are not sufficiently proficient in Chinese.</p>
<p>If the OP is truly interested in doing graduate study in the field, then s/he <em>should</em> definitely study Chinese language as an undergraduate in preparation for graduate-level research, not in preparation for undergraduate study.</p>
<p>Professors in the East Asian Languages and Cultures dept here focus more on literature (prose, poetry, classics) than on social phenomena. Not all historical data comes from textual sources. If you want to learn, for example, about the warrior aristocracy during the Shang period, then you look towards the history department, not the East Asian Languages department. There's overlap and it looks like the OP has quite a bit of time left to explore...</p>
<p>Depends which school you go to. If you really want to focus on ancient Chinese history, as opposed to Chinese history in general, you will be very strongly encouraged to study Chinese at some of the schools with which I am familiar. At Harvard, if you want to know about the Shang period, you take classes in the Dept of East Asian Languages and Civilizations. The senior thesis will require the use of primary source materials, and for ancient Chinese history, there's not a lot that's available in translation.
Why would one not want to study Chinese but want to study Chinese history beats me. No one would countenance a student wanting to focus on French or German history who did not know French or German. Chinese has ceased to be a rarely taught language and there are many in-country language immersion programs available.</p>
<p>I guess it depends on the undergrad. My history major roommate spent the summer before her senior year scouring birthrecords in Brittany for her senior thesis on 17th century emmigration from France to Canada. She had to speak fluent French to do what she did.</p>
<p>I realize that your options, even as an undergrad, will be limited somewhat (but not to a level that should concern you) if you don't have good working knowledge of the language. ...my point being that a current lack of proficiency in the Chinese language should not prevent you from jumping into Chinese history sooner. (Learn the history as you are learning the language, not after) The language skills take time to build. Here, they offer a year of Classical Chinese. The class teaches you everything you need to know about the grammar, but to learn all the associated vocabulary needed for reading classical texts takes practice.</p>
<p>U of MN Chinese major here. I can't imagine studying Chinese history as an undergraduate without taking Chinese language classes along the way. All the professors at my alma mater who teach courses in Chinese history have Chinese language proficiency, which they began developing as undergrads or at younger ages.</p>
<p>Yea, I once met a student from China who studied American History in a Chinese University. He doesn't know a word in English. It was kinda funny listening to his view on US history. He has some pretty peculiar views too.</p>
<p>I suppose it depends more on the time period that one wants to study - for modern Chinese history there are a multitude of books in English, Japanese and European languages. But for ancient history, the fact remains that many of the books are written in Classical Chinese without translation. And while one may be able to 'get by' with commentaries and so on, I would have thought that a lack of primary sources would hurt.</p>
<p>Of course you can learn a lot of Chinese history without speaking Chinese (or any other language besides English). It is a very popular, important field, there are a ton of first-rate books in English, and English-speaking professors give classes in English throughout North America, the U.K. and Ireland. I took courses in modern Chinese history in high school and college and a course in Chinese law in law school, and I've read books and articles since then. I couldn't identify a character to save my life. (Neither could my excellent high school teacher. But my college and law school teachers sure could.) </p>
<p>I can't imagine concentrating in Chinese history with that limitation. Whether you're talking about ancient history or modern history, you would never be able to do original research, never be able to consider a text or interview without trusting some other person's translation. You could learn a lot about Chinese history, but you would never quite touch acting like a historian, and there would be a huge wall between you and the subject that interests you most. It would be like trying to be a music historian without knowing how to read music, and without knowing any music theory. You could do it, but you could never do it really well. So why would you want to do that?</p>
<p>If you want to study Chinese history, you want to learn Mandarin, at least. It doesn't have to be learned first, or instead, or anything like that. If you are an undergraduate, concurrently is fine. It takes a long time; you probably would not be in the ballpark of working proficiency until near the end of your college career anyway. But don't blow it off. Undergraduate work won't make you an expert in anything, but it should at least give you the tools to become expert in something. I, for one, would look askance at someone who was willing to settle for less than that from his or her undergraduate major. If you don't want to learn Chinese, get a full tool set in some other discipline rather than a half-set in Chinese history.</p>
<p>Mathmom or anyone
My son knows japanese, chinese and korean language very well. he does many asian ECs(asian archery etc..) and wants to major in east asian studies at HYP. If he declares this on the application do you think it will help him or not? is this major competative at these selective colleges?</p>
<p>I can't speak for every college, but Harvard couldn't care less what your intended major is.</p>
<p>J mom, is your son a Westerner who has learned all those languages? That would still be an unusual (not unknown, but unusual) student profile, and it's worth a shot for applying at competitive schools.</p>
<p>I would think that a young man who is fluent in Japanese, Chinese and Korean will be viewed very positively since it is such an unusual combination. Make sure that it is commented by an independent source as well, and make sure in his assay to comment on how he will use that in his future goal. </p>
<p>When I applied many decades ago as an international student, my fluency in Italian, French, English and Chinese (in that order) got me into every schools here, including MIT although my quantitative skills was way below the usual students there at that time.</p>
<p>I agree with Padad that a student who is fluent in three East Asian languages will have an advantage, especially so if the student's area of interest is East Asia. Granted that students do change majors all the time, there will be a presumption that such change may still involve East Asia in some fashion. Thus, the student may end up majoring in Anthropology, Government, History, the Study of Religion, Sociology, etc... for which a knowledge of one or more East Asian languages will be of demonstrable benefit.</p>
<p>As for the idea that one can begin learning Chinese in graduate school, an applicant without Chinese applying to History programs would not make the first cut.</p>
<p>thank you all for your opinions. actually we are Korean. My son goes to international school. He is also studing Latin vergil independently and will take AP coming May. I just was wondering how westerners(adcoms) will view a student knowing 3 main eastern lang when he apply. He will show that he is pretty good at these through taking AP and satlls.</p>
<p>J mom - might it be worth having your son do the HSK? It's the Hanyu Shuiping Kaoshi (Test of Chinese language level) and it's the Chinese equivalent to the TOEFL. It's extremely well regarded, both in the West and by the Chinese government, as it's a government backed qualification that is used by Chinese universities and businesses to test the fluency of their non-native students and workers. If your son is fluent, it will be a breeze. </p>
<p>Just a thought....</p>
<p>I should probably be clearer, Harvard doesn't care what your intended major is in the sense that some schools do - places where you actually apply to certain subschools within the larger school. On the other hand a strong interest and passion for a certain academic area, with essays and recommendations that reinforce it, could be looked on as very positive.</p>
<p>laylah thank you for your thought. after he takes AP test in chinese coming may he is thinking about taking the HSK. however getting to level 8 is extremely hard they say.</p>