<p>Basically, I'm a polisci major (with an international relations subfield, you could say) and since I've already completed so much of my major, I have plenty of room for random electives (yes, yes, I know, lazy liberal arts major blah blah blah - I've heard it all). Also, I'm taking three poli sci classes (the limit per semester) and have completed almost all my gen ed requirements. I'm very interested in languages (studied Spanish, spent a summer in Colombia, studied Russian, spent a summer in Russia), and this semester I'm taking advanced Russian, which will go towards my elective hours. </p>
<p>But I still have space for one more elective this semester, which brings me to my current dilemma... before yesterday, I was signed up for Intro to European Studies, a class which I've heard is interesting but light on coursework and an easy A. But last night, I randomly got the idea to register for intro Japanese, which puts me one hour short of the credit-hour limit for my university. I did this because I feel like the ability to speak any Japanese would be more marketable and more rewarding than an easy A European Studies class. Besides, my interest in languages feeds off my interest in international relations. </p>
<p>My concern is that people (i.e. scholarship committees) will see this and think I have no focus in my major and just went through college trying out random classes. I'm applying next semester for a highly competitive Semester in DC program at my university, so I'm trying to make sure my schedule looks as good as possible. The Japanese option will no doubt be more rigorous (class 5 days and 6 hours a week), but the European Studies option I guess fits better with my major, even though it'd be an elective too. So my question is just this - would Japanese or European Studies be the better option in this case? </p>
<p>Thanks in advance for your help. Sorry if this is unreadable, I have a 101 fever. </p>
<p>PS: Just in case someone cites this as a reason why I shouldn't take Japanese, I think my level of Russian is high enough that taking two language classes in one semester shouldn't be a huge problem.</p>
<p>PPS: excuse all the unnecessary parentheses and dashes.</p>
<p>Take what you want to take. You have no clue what a scholarship committee is thinking. They certainly won’t overanalyze each and every course you choose to take.</p>
<p>Japanese is very hard (regardless of what others say about it, it is). Do you think you can handle two languages this semester? If so go for it, if not take the other class.</p>
<p>Speaking “any” Japanese isn’t more marketable. Being “conversant” or “fluent” in Japanese is marketable. If you want to take Japanese, you better take enough to know more than the typical “My name is…” and “I like chicken. What do you like to eat?” I have taken an equivalent of 3 1/2 years of college-level French and I’m only “conversant” on my resume. It would be a lie to put “fluent”.</p>
<p>There are varying degrees of fluency for every language. For a native English speaker, it takes a lot longer to attain fluency in Japanese than it is for French. For a native Korean speaker, it’s the opposite. For native fluency, one does have to be fully immersed in the targeted language (ex. spending years in Paris or Tokyo). It’s nearly impossible to become fluent technically if you don’t spend a couple years in the country because there’s a LOT of informal speech and phrases that you don’t necessarily learn in an academic setting.</p>
<p>I had a graduate tutor who learned French for 6 years at Indiana University (very good reputation in the French department) and has never been to France before. It was evident that there were certain things that she didn’t know that another graduate tutor (native Parisian of 19 years) knew.</p>
<p>If anyone tells you that they’re fluent in a language after taking it for a couple years in college… they’re lying. I’ve come across so many people say that they’re “fluent” when they’re FAR from it. I would never tell someone that I’m fluent even if I had 5 years of French under my belt. I would certainly know a lot of French, but hardly enough to be considered fluent.</p>
<p>Yeah, I agree with Vihzel that it’s probably impossible to consider oneself fluent in a language without having spent time in a country where it is spoken or at least being surrounded by native speakers of the language.</p>