Jump to content

rongo

Contributor
  • Posts

    6,254
  • Joined

4 Followers

About rongo

  • Birthday 07/19/1975

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

5,052 profile views

rongo's Achievements

Grand Master

Grand Master (14/14)

  • Reacting Well Rare
  • Dedicated Rare
  • Very Popular Rare
  • First Post
  • Posting Machine Rare

Recent Badges

6k

Reputation

  1. Open CFR (not a gauntlet thrown down to you personally) on this. A lot of people say or think this, but I've never seen myself where this idea comes from from Joseph Smith and his successors. If anything, there is the Brigham Young school of thought where every earth has its savior and tempter. Interested in any sources anyone knows of. ETA: If there are multiple saviors for different worlds (firstborn spirit sons of different wives, under the Orson Pratt/Brigham Young idea), then it seems probably that each world is probably about like all of the others, on average.
  2. According to Brigham Young and Heber C. Kimball (probably getting it from Joseph Smith, in my view), sons of perdition will have their intelligence ripped apart from their spirit matter and physical matter, and will start over at the very beginning. If this is true, then I don't think they will bow the knee. I'd like to think that some of them have reconsidered and are repentant, but I don't know if that spares them from that fate.
  3. 1) Where do the Brethren live? 2) How long have they lived there? 2a) Who are their neighbors? 3) What does their weekly schedule look like? 4) What do their weekends look like? 5) How long have their weeks/weekends looked like this? 6) How many fly first class vs. coach? I'm not saying they're completely out of the loop, but for most of the Q12 and FP, they haven't even had to sit through a Sunday School or quorum lesson for decades, with a few exceptions. Their day-to-day opportunities for gospel conversations with normal people and not dignitaries or at a stake conference are not the same as they are for, say, a school teacher or a construction worker or a company employee somewhere. And haven't been for many years.
  4. But that doesn't use or reference Jesus Christ just as much as "Mormon" . . . How is Latter-day Saint really better?
  5. No --- Elder Gifford Neilson spoke several conferences ago.
  6. @Amulek made the point a while ago that there is no suitable, workable term for "Mormonism" (system of beliefs and culture) and "Mormons" (members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints). We noticed that even Elder Anderson in his talk immediately switched to "Latter-day Saints" to refer to members. It's a conscious effort to stamp out any use of or reference to "Mormon," but the replacement terms exclude reference to Jesus Christ just as much as the hated "Mormon" does. And, ironically, we have D&C 107 saying that the Melchizedek priesthood isn't called "The Priesthood after the order of the Son of God" to avoid too frequent mention of Him . . . I use the full name of the Church whenever possible, but I also use whatever term is most natural and non-awkward in real time communication with real people. I get the feeling that the "anti-Mormon-usage" people don't talk to non-members about the Church very often, if at all. This includes general authorities, whose anecdotes (Elder Nash excepted ) usually involve high-profile, exotic guests of state --- not normal, everyday people.
  7. When discussing things that would embarrass or hurt them (such as adult leaders discussing youth who are extremely problematic for various reasons). Obviously, that conversation wouldn't happen in front of those youth or to their face. The approach directly to the specific youth would be very different, but it doesn't make it hypocritical, mean, or two-faced that an "executive session" conversation would be very different.
  8. No worries, it's not a hijack. And your point is very well taken. This is a discussion board, and while you are correct that we wouldn't discuss these things to some of these youths' faces in this manner, there have to be times and places where such things can be discussed. Where people can be frank and speak their minds. We don't bat an eye about this in other settings, like attorney-client privilege. There are very good reasons why, for example, the principle of executive privilege exists. Executive leaders wouldn't ever be frank and honest in discussion if they had to act as though everything were being recorded, and the transcript available to anyone and everyone. There have to be times and places where people can freely and honestly express their thoughts and feelings without fear. We do love the youth, but if a spade can never be called a spade in frank discussion, then certain important things will never be said by anyone, and frustration/concerns/issues will never really be discussed. This isn't hypocrisy or lack of true love for those being discussed, it's a necessary part of the diplomacy of talking about such things.
  9. Finnish is a very difficult language. It's part of the Finno-Ugric language family, and is close to Estonian and Hungarian. It is completely different from the Germanic Nordic languages. Norwegian, Swedish, and Danish are mutually intelligible (like Swiss, Austrian, and German dialects --- they can be difficult for others to understand, but they can be understood). Icelandic, because of its isolation, is not really intelligible, but some can be understood in reading.
  10. An elder from Köln used this as a prooftext that Kölnisch is the Adamic language. They say "isch" instead of "ich."
  11. Yours was probably Johann Wondra, or Max Zimmer if it was older than that. Luschin's Book of Mormon was fantastic, and his translation of Talmage sounded and felt like Talmage. He was a gifted translator. Some members weren't happy that he was President of the Swiss temple, because he had Nazi sympathies (many good members did then). The one Luschin passage that we talked about, and which I ask people about when languages come up, is Moroni 10:5. He phrased it positive ("ask God if these things are true"), when the original and almost all other languages say "if these things are not true." A Spanish elder in our mission pointed out that there is a subtle psychological difference in praying to know if things are true vs. are not true. I think God answers, either way, but it was an interesting point. Luschin also rendered Adam and Eve Ish and Isha (man and woman in Hebrew), which was ideosyncratic. But overall, his German text was more true to the English than the older Wondra or Zimmer versions, in my view.
  12. He spoke to a lot of Swedes and Danes in Norway. He says Danish is harder than Swedish to understand. He and the exchange student had no problem communicating over a half-hour conversation. Icelandic is apparently not intelligible by the other three Nordic Germanic languages.
  13. "Jesus der Christus" (Immo Luschin translation; yours was probably Johann Wondra, or maybe Max Zimmer) was also very helpful in modeling advanced, sophisticated grammar. Germans were very impressed with anyone who was good at subjunctive 1, adjective endings, etc. I have heard often that natives think I am Swiss as well. At least I wasn't an obvious Ami ("der spricht als hätte er einen Kartoffel im Mund"). German, Spanish, and French are easier to find "Gesprächspartner" than other languages. My son's Norwegian is really good. He reads a lot (he sent home box loads of books from used bookstores) and listens to the radio, but it's hard to find people to talk to. I had him call me during my 4th hour class so he could speak Norwegian with my Swedish exchange student (and he spoke Swedish). It actually worked really well for both of them. Finding people to practice with will take effort, though.
  14. I'm not sure about the home MTC/online MTC. My son was in Norway long before Covid hit, but he had the pre-MTC online stuff. He, and others didn't find it very helpful. My parents also had online MTC instruction in Polish and Czech before their missions, and they weren't very keen on it as far as helping them. The kids who have full online or part online MTC haven't seemed like they gained the same language "proficiency" as when it was 8-10 weeks of full in-person --- either to me, or to them, based on how they felt about it. I put quote marks around "proficiency," because the MTC doesn't approach that. It does give missionaries a solid foundation in a matter of a couple of months. The real language proficiency takes off in the field, to the extent that missionaries put effort into it. It doesn't seem to me that modern missionaries still study and practice grammar and more complex usage daily as part of their morning study, but there is a big difference between those with average mission proficiency and those who seek to really become good at it. I've taught German for six years, and if I could do it over, I would have started with German 20 years ago. Such a blast! --- and, I get really good students who choose to take it. It's fun watching highly-motivated students take off and soar to great heights (I have gold, silver, and bronze medalists every year on the National German Exam, and I've had students selected by the German government for all-expenses paid summer trips to Germany. Pre-Covid, of course). I will say that the MTC system (the "grüne Ungeheur," or "green monster" --- maybe other languages had different colored books?), which was developed by RMs for missionaries, has proven to be a very good, logical way of learning grammar, usage, and vocabulary. I use that (sans religious content) with my students, for an hour a day instead of 8-10. I think the "MTC way" is good for its purpose --- getting missionaries ready to enter the field. Naturally, everyone talks really fast in real life, but you rapidly get used to it, pick out words and phrases, and it gets better and better over the coming weeks. Eventually, you start dreaming in the language, and you stop translating in your head and it's instant and effortless. I tell my students, when we're doing audio or video exercises, that this is exactly what it's like if they were to be air-dropped in and left to their own devices. You don't understand everything at first, so you pick out what you know and work with that. Kids get excited when they can hear and recognize things --- especially in hard dialects. My uncle was an Arabic linguist in the army, and he passed for Syrian when he had a dark tan. He also served French-speaking. I should ask him how he would compare MTC vs. military language training. I really like this talk from BYU professor Dillworth Parkinson: https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/dilworth-b-parkinson/received-need/ He makes several points that related to this discussion. "To be perfectly honest, teaching a foreign language to adult learners is just about as frustrating as learning one is. We are a profession with an almost spectacular level of failure. Large numbers of bright-eyed, excited students enter our classes every semester, eager to “learn Arabic” or some other language, but despite our best efforts something doesn’t click with a good percentage of those students, and they end up quitting at some point well shy of reaching their goal . . ." "Direct teaching and learning of the facts about the language has limited usefulness in actually learning the language. This realization dawns on students slowly, and at first it can even anger them. When they have put in hours memorizing vocabulary and grammar rules, they really expect there to be an immediate payoff, but it doesn’t happen that way . . . it goes well beyond that to being able to understand and use the language like a native speaker does in real time and in authentic cultural situations . . ." "Students often feel frustrated and feel they are not making progress. The students who eventually do make the break to a kind of fluency, however, are the ones who throw themselves into these activities and simply try to communicate with abandon, working around and through their frustration until a breakthrough finally comes. There is a kind of mystery involved here: moving from a theoretical knowledge to a practical one, figuring out how to develop those habits of tongue, mind, and heart that allow them to function as native speakers do. It is not a direct process . . ." "The second frustration of adult language learning I would like to refer to is the dawning realization that comes to honest learners—even after they are very good at the language—that there is an almost infinite amount left to learn. Even very fluent speakers are constantly made aware of how imperfect their accent is, how many words they still don’t know, how awkward their constructions are, and how unnatural their production is. The gulf between even a very proficient speaker and a native speaker seems huge . . ." "One of the clearest results of language teaching research is that when a student becomes satisfied with what he knows, when he feels he “knows the language,” he almost immediately ceases to make progress. We call this the “returned-missionary syndrome.” Missionaries become fluent and proficient in their language in a very limited sphere. Unfortunately, many of them decide somewhere deep within their souls that they know enough that they don’t need to know any more. They come home and enter our classes and don’t make progress; they already know enough. They are seemingly oblivious to all the things they don’t know, both in the overt know-that sense and in the know-how sense—becoming more like a native speaker . . . Returned missionaries who manage to keep in mind how little they know and how much they have still to learn end up being the ones who make the most ultimate progress and find the most joy in the journey. Being reminded of the huge gulf between one’s own language abilities, no matter how advanced, and those of a native speaker appears to be a prerequisite for further progress." ---
  15. This is different. Hairstyles, dress habits, growing leg hair, asking to be called "Simon" instead of "Samantha." This isn't the tomboys of yore. They also date each other, carousel-style.
×
×
  • Create New...