September 2014 IDC Board

[PettyOfficerCJ]

I do know that it is the Simplified version of it...... That is what I prefer. I am a Mandarin Chinese linguist. At the Defense Language Institute we are taught that because the focus of the language course is mainland China. We also learned to read Traditional just so that we could recognize it. I personally cannot stand reading Traditional characters. I think that they're too convoluted. I love how simple, clean, and direct the simplified ones are.......but that's just my own opinion. I have friends who absolutely love Traditional. While finishing my Master's degree (before I went into the military), I decided to take some of my university's undergraduate Chinese courses in the side. My University taught Simplified as well, so from the beginning of my introduction to Chinese I have been predisposed to Simplified. For dealing with mainland China, I find it best. When I was on a study/immersion trip in Beijing and Xi'an, many of my teachers at the college there could barely read the traditional. It maybe that it's more common in Taiwan and the southern parts of China.

Your OR was wrong when he told you that the DLAB would show language proficiency. It shows aptitude for learning languages, not proficiency in any one language. (Basically, they give people who want to enlist as linguists the DLAB to see if they have the potential to pass a language course at DLI.) As the Navy uses enlisted, not officers, to be linguists, the boards won't care whether you would be successful at DLI. Naval officers rarely go to DLI for language training, and the few that do are officers that have been in a while and have been selected for the Foreign Area Officer program, with maybe a Seal officer here and there. In fact, if a linguist becomes an Officer, they are no longer required to maintain their DLPT scores (the test that does measure proficiency) and they will rarely, if ever, use their language for their job.

I put it out there because I think that a lot of ORs and applicants are confusing the DLAB and the DLPT...... that's understandable though.

 

[Skikopey]

I do know that it is the Simplified version of it...... That is what I prefer. I am a Mandarin Chinese linguist. At the Defense Language Institute we are taught that because the focus of the language course is mainland China. We also learned to read Traditional just so that we could recognize it. I personally cannot stand reading Traditional characters. I think that they're too convoluted. I love how simple, clean, and direct the simplified ones are.......but that's just my own opinion. I have friends who absolutely love Traditional. While finishing my Master's degree (before I went into the military), I decided to take some of my university's undergraduate Chinese courses in the side. My University taught Simplified as well, so from the beginning of my introduction to Chinese I have been predisposed to Simplified. For dealing with mainland China, I find it best. When I was on a study/immersion trip in Beijing and Xi'an, many of my teachers at the college there could barely read the traditional. It maybe that it's more common in Taiwan and the southern parts of China.

Your OR was wrong when he told you that the DLAB would show language proficiency. It shows aptitude for learning languages, not proficiency in any one language. (Basically, they give people who want to enlist as linguists the DLAB to see if they have the potential to pass a language course at DLI.) As the Navy uses enlisted, not officers, to be linguists, the boards won't care whether you would be successful at DLI. Naval officers rarely go to DLI for language training, and the few that do are officers that have been in a while and have been selected for the Foreign Area Officer program, with maybe a Seal officer here and there. In fact, if a linguist becomes an Officer, they are no longer required to maintain their DLPT scores (the test that does measure proficiency) and they will rarely, if ever, use their language for their job.

I put it out there because I think that a lot of ORs and applicants are confusing the DLAB and the DLPT...... that's understandable though.

Yeh I figured as much...however, I always cringe when I see a simplified character. Reason being, a kanji is basically a picture and to take away from that picture significantly diminishes the meaning of that picture and therefore, may be simpler to write but definitely not more direct or simpler to understand as a picture says a thousand words. Imho. Moreover, China has done away with the reason behind simplifing all the kanji in the first place, making all the work behind simplifying every character even more pointless...and I think you can agree it would have been a pity to do completely away with this beautiful, historical, most complex and ingenious writing system ever invented.

I know the current Intel director O-6 for Japan region went to the DLI after he had been in for a while...not a FAO though.

 

[Phoenix84]

Isn't it a little early to be discussing personal philosophy and the evolution of language?? LOL JK.

 

[usmctonavy]

Isn't it a little early to be discussing personal philosophy and the evolution of language?? LOL JK.

Enough of this language nonsense....Now, who wants to build a tow-thomas-biquadratic filter or perform some convolutions!...anyone?

 

[Phoenix84]

Enough of this language nonsense....Now, who wants to build a toethomas-biquadratic filter or perform some convolutions!...anyone?

My brain just exploded.... Thanks.

 

[PensacolaBayou]

Now, who wants to build a toethomas-biquadratic filter or perform some convolutions!...anyone?

I looked that up and I still have no idea what it is.

 

[usmctonavy]

I looked that up and I still have no idea what it is.

Sorry, I had misspelled; its tow-thomas-biquadraitc filter; anyways, its a BiQuad filter...but by using Op-Amps, resistors and caps you can create a stable bandpass filter (butterworth); Convolution was thrown in because you can use a convulved signal with such a filter. They really are fun to build, not so much finding the transfer functions.

Edit: BiQuad: You should have quadratics in the denominators with in the "S" domain--when finding the appropriate transfer functions

 

[usnavymle]

Sorry, I had misspelled; its tow-thomas-biquadraitc filter; anyways, its a BiQuad filter...but by using Op-Amps, resistors and caps you can create a stable bandpass filter (butterworth); Convolution was thrown in because you can use a convulved signal with such a filter. They really are fun to build, not so much finding the transfer functions.

Edit: BiQuad: You should have quadratics in the denominators with in the "S" domain--when finding the appropriate transfer functions

No.

 

[A_Longo88]

Not gonna lie ... I only read the first sentence of the language posts. Ain't nobody got time fo dat!

 

[usmctonavy]

No.

 

[Popo Jijo]

So here we all are...

 

[usnavymle]

...talking about languages 'n tow-thomas-biquadraitc filters 'n things...

 

[Popo Jijo]

If only.....

 

[usnavymle]

Question fro @RUFiO181: If you mark Intel as your third option, do they just not consider your package for that designator (like the SWO boards)? My preferences make it pretty clear that I want into the commissioned IDC (IW/SWO-IW/INTEL), but I wasn't sure if it worked the same way.

 

[psulaw0929]

I understand and no, it wasn't directed at you. Some IDC applicants are bothered by the 97% SWO board selection and are passing off the selectees as a bunch of guys who couldn't get selected anywhere else.

In case it was directed at me, I was critical of the standard set by the Navy, not the applicants themselves. They may all have 4.0s and 80s on the OAR for all any of us know. I have the utmost respect for SWO. They drive the ships and are the epitome of naval officers in my opinion.