Oswald’s Proficiency in the Russian Language

[W. Tracy Parnell]

10 minutes ago, Mathias Baumann said:

Tracy,

as James Norwood has pointed out Oswald also received a decent score in writing. So the test was certainly not all multiple-choice.

Do you know if it was partly multiple choice?

[Mathias Baumann]

12 hours ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Do you know if it was partly multiple choice?

Tracy,

it was YOUR assumption that the test was multiple choice. I was just pointing out that text production was also part of it. Reading and listening on the other hand may well have been multiple choice.

Here you can read more about multiple choice language tests used by the military: http://www.dliflc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Generic-Fam-Guide-MC-CBu-updated.pdf

You'll realize that it is virtually impossible to score well just by guessing...

Edited September 27, 2017 by Mathias Baumann

[Jim Hargrove]

Thank you for the link above, Mathias.  It's the first time I've seen anything that might directly relate to what type of material could have been in the exam Oswald took.

I assume you haven't found a similar link for a writing test, correct?  It would be fascinating to see that. 

[W. Tracy Parnell]

4 hours ago, Mathias Baumann said:

Tracy,

it was YOUR assumption that the test was multiple choice. I was just pointing out that text production was also part of it. Reading and listening on the other hand may well have been multiple choice.

Here you can read more about multiple choice language tests used by the military: http://www.dliflc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Generic-Fam-Guide-MC-CBu-updated.pdf

You'll realize that it is virtually impossible to score well just by guessing...

Well, I'm sorry Mathias but if it's multiple choice it is possible to guess. And he didn't score "well" he scored "poor." In any event, this is a current exam right? Was the exam that LHO took partly multiple choice for sure or is this just your assumption?

[Mathias Baumann]

3 hours ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Well, I'm sorry Mathias but if it's multiple choice it is possible to guess. And he didn't score "well" he scored "poor." In any event, this is a current exam right? Was the exam that LHO took partly multiple choice for sure or is this just your assumption?

Tracy,

my "assumption" is based on what James Norwood has posted:

Quote

Mathias,

You provide an excellent overview above.  Thanks!

Regarding Oswald's exam score on the  Department of Army's Russian language proficiency test, Lt. Col. Alison Folsom provided a breakdown of the results for the Warren Commission.  There were three components to the exam, suggesting that this was a comprehensive test.  Oswald's scores were as follows:   understanding (-5), reading (+4), writing (+3), with the composite +2 indicating that Oswald answered two more questions correctly than those that he missed on the exam.  So, the young man scored better than 50% on this challenging exam.

So the test also contained a writing part, i.e. text production, which shows that it wasn't all multiple choice.

But even if it had been all multiple choice I'd find your argument that Oswald "just got lucky" rather weak. First you wanted to convice me that Oswald was a language prodigy, now you say he just might have guessed well. It shows you have no credible explanation for Oswald's impressive results.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

46 minutes ago, Mathias Baumann said:

Tracy,

my "assumption" is based on what James Norwood has posted:

So the test also contained a writing part, i.e. text production, which shows that it wasn't all multiple choice.

But even if it had been all multiple choice I'd find your argument that Oswald "just got lucky" rather weak. First you wanted to convice me that Oswald was a language prodigy, now you say he just might have guessed well. It shows you have no credible explanation for Oswald's impressive results.

First, he got 2 more right than wrong and was rated poor so that is not impressive to me. I wouldn't say he was a language "prodigy." I think he had good oral skills in general and was able to pick up Russian after living there and speaking it for 2 1/2 years. If he had pursued it at a college level he could have has success as a translator or other job where he could have used his skills. Anyway, thanks for the information because I wasn't aware of the possibility that the exam was partly multiple choice before this.

[Mathias Baumann]

Quote

The DLPT5 is designed to assess the general language proficiency in reading and

listening of native speakers of English who have learned a foreign language as a second

language. The DLPT5 tests measure proficiency as defined by the Interagency

Language Roundtable (ILR) Skill Level Descriptions, levels 0+ – 4 (see Appendix A).

All DLPT5s will be delivered on the computer.

DLPT5s in many languages include both a Lower-Range test and an Upper-Range test.

The Lower-Range test measures ILR proficiency levels 0+ - 3, while the Upper-Range

measures ILR proficiency levels 3 - 4. Examinees will normally take the lower-range

DLPT5; those who receive a score of 3 on this test may be eligible to take the upperrange

test, depending on the policy of their institution. The DLPT5 will be used to

make operational readiness, incentive pay, and training decisions for civilian and

military language analysts in the United States government.

 

http://www.dliflc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Generic-Fam-Guide-MC-CBu-updated.pdf

This is interesting information I wasn't aware of. If we assume that Oswald got more than half of all answers right on a lower range test, it would roughly put him on level 1+. That would still be quite impressive. It took my American friend about 300 lessons to get there.

But it seems they didn't use the ILR scale back then and we don't know how 1950s test formats compare to the ones in use today. It appears for instance that writing is no longer part of the test.

By the way, I also found this interesting article on guessing on multiple choice tests: http://alohonyai.blogspot.de/2013/08/guessing-on-multiple-choice-tests.html 

 

 

Edited September 27, 2017 by Mathias Baumann

[Paul Trejo]

On 9/27/2017 at 12:19 PM, Mathias Baumann said:

...If we assume that Oswald got more than half of all answers right on a lower range test, it would roughly put him on level 1+.

That would still be quite impressive. It took my American friend about 300 lessons to get there...

Mathias,

In ESL training, we were taught that the age of a student is a significant measure of language learning.

For example, a child of three years of age could learn three, four or five languages with relatively little difficulty.

An adult, however, must study very hard to learn only one foreign language.

Oswald was still a teenager when he studied Berlitz nearly full time in 1959.

How old was your American friend?

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Quote

 

Edited September 28, 2017 by Paul Trejo
typos

[Mathias Baumann]

11 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Mathias,

In ESL training, we were taught that the age of a student is a significant measure of language learning.

For example, a child of three years of age could learn three, four or five languages with relatively little difficulty.

An adult, however, must study very hard to learn only one foreign language.

Oswald was still a teenager when he studied Berlitz nearly full time in 1959.

How old was your American friend?

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Paul,

he's in his 50s, so yes, of course the age is a factor too.

The minimum most people need to reach the lowest level seems to be 100 lessons. Source: http://www.russiancentre.co.uk/TRKI-levels.php

There are 6 TRKI levels available, which correspond to the Common European Framework of References for Languages (CEFR).

The lowest level is Elementary (also known as A1). As a rough guide, we consider students require about 100 hours of tuition before attempting this level. The next five levels are: Basic (A2); 1st Certificate (B1); 2nd Certificate (B2); 3rd Certificate (C1); 4th Certificate (C2). The highest level requires native proficiency.

All students taking the exam with RLC are given guidance on which level to sign up for. Internal students may speak to their teachers, who in turn may confer with our Senior Tutor if necessary, and external candidates are given a free face-to-face assessment with a Senior Tutor to determine which level of the exam is appropriate, and to recommend areas of revision or further study.

To request an RLC TRKI student pack with information in English on syllabus and vocabulary required for each of the lower three levels, please click here. On signing up for the exam you will be issued with a more comprehensive TRKI Preparation Pack, including past papers and detailed syllabus.

Or come along to our FREE information evening in February 2018 - sign up to our mailing list to receive updates on this. 

 

Number of hours required to reach each TRKI level

The Russian Ministry of Education publishes guidelines about the number of hours of study required to pass a particular level, which are shown in the table below. However, we believe all of the figures in this table should be treated as approximate: first, because they are designed for students who are studying Russian in Russia, and therefore tend to progress more quickly than those studying outside a Russian-speaking environment; secondly, a number of other factors (e.g. aptitude, frequency of study) clearly mean that they cannot apply equally to all students. 

Please also bear in mind that at the higher levels the hours of formal study suggested may appear quite small, but it is assumed that a significant amount of additional time will have been spent in a Russian-speaking environment.

 

TRKI Level	Hours per level	Total hours
Elementary	80–90	+/- 100
Basic	+150	+/- 250
1st Certificate	+345	+/- 600
2nd Certificate	+540	+/- 1100
3rd Certificate	+210	+/- 1300
4th Certificate	+150	+/- 1450

[Guest]

While it is a lot more fun if LHO's "proficiency" in Russian is a great mystery than if it's not, I would note the following:

1.  Karl Marx, a native German who lived most of his adult life in England, taught himself Spanish, Italian, Dutch, Scandinavian, Russian, and English.  When his writings became popular in Russia, he taught himself Russian in a period of approximately 6 months, primarily by reading Russian newspapers, at a level sufficient to correspond with Russian intellectuals.

2.  Russian is indeed a difficult language.  However, every single letter in every single word is pronounced.  With my truly minimal command of Russian, I can make a passable attempt at pronouncing any Russian word even if I have no idea what it means.  My Russian wife, on the other hand, has a hell of a time with English words even when she knows what they mean.

3.  When I first visited Belarus, my wife's relatives and friends were astounded at my "native" pronunciation and ability to follow at least minimal conversations.  Partly it was because I was able to trill my r's better than most Russians because I grew up saying words like "burrito" and "senorita."  Mostly, however, it was because I had spent several months listening to the Pimsleur Russian language CDs through Level 3.  Pimsleur is premised on the notion that most of our interactions with others depend on about 800 words.  If you learn those 800 words and some rudiments of grammar, you're going to be able to function at some minimal level within a culture.

4.  Most telling to me:  My wife is a native Russian speaker.  She spoke nothing but Russian from 1954 to 2008.  She is a graduate of the university in Minsk and held an administrative position in the city government.  I have had her read all of the samples of LHO's Russian writing I could find, as recently as this morning.  She LAUGHS OUT LOUD at the notion that anyone could think these show proficiency in Russian.  She says they are almost unintelligible and typical of an American who has no real understanding of the language; the mistakes are very basic.  She assures me that if I had spent any time at all immersed in the language in Minsk, I would do far better.

5.  When my wife arrived in America at age 54, she knew no more than ten words of English.  Solely through self-study and immersion in the culture, no formal training whatsoever, she now shops at Safeway and Walmart, is a naturalized citizen, and carries on long conversations with our friends.

I am not saying LHO's Russian abilities are not worthy of investigation.  Particularly striking are the discrepancies between those who thought he was a raw beginner and those who thought he was quite proficient (in speaking anyway).  I had some incidents myself that could explain this, but I won't bore you with them.  My point is, it appears to me that LHO's "proficiency" is being elevated to a greater mystery than it actually is because (1) that's just more fun, and (2) a greater mystery dovetails with the Harvey & Lee theory.

[Sandy Larsen]

34 minutes ago, Lance Payette said:

1.  Karl Marx, a native German who lived most of his adult life in England, taught himself Spanish, Italian, Dutch, Scandinavian, Russian, and English.  When his writings became popular in Russia, he taught himself Russian in a period of approximately 6 months, primarily by reading Russian newspapers, at a level sufficient to correspond with Russian intellectuals.

So you believe Oswald was a genius, like Karl Marx.

 

34 minutes ago, Lance Payette said:

4.  Most telling to me:  My wife is a native Russian speaker.  She spoke nothing but Russian from 1954 to 2008.  She is a graduate of the university in Minsk and held an administrative position in the city government.  I have had her read all of the samples of LHO's Russian writing I could find, as recently as this morning.  She LAUGHS OUT LOUD at the notion that anyone could think these show proficiency in Russian.  She says they are almost unintelligible and typical of an American who has no real understanding of the language; the mistakes are very basic.  She assures me that if I had spent any time at all immersed in the language in Minsk, I would do far better.

So you believe that Oswald was a bungling idiot, unlike Karl Marx.

And you believe that Peter Gregory was wrong when he wrote that Oswald was  "capable of being a translator and perhaps an interpreter." And that George de Mohrenschildt was wrong when he wrote of Oswald:

"Incidentally I never saw him interested in anything else except Russian books and magazines. He said he didn’t want to forget the language — but it amazed me that he read such difficult writers like Gorki, Dostoevski, Gogol, Tolstoi and Turgenieff — in Russian. As everyone knows Russian is a complex language and he was supposed to have stayed in the Soviet Union only a little over two years. He must have had some previous training and that point had never been brought up by the Warren Commission — and it is still puzzling to me. In my opinion Lee was a very bright person but not a genius. He never mastered the English language yet he learned such a difficult language! I taught Russian at all levels in a large university and I never saw such a proficiency in the best senior students who constantly listened to Russian tapes and spoke to Russian friends. As a matter of fact American–born instructors never mastered [the] Russian spoken language as well as Lee did."

 

If those Oswald writings are as bad as your wife says they are ("they are almost unintelligible and typical of an American who has no real understanding of the language") -- something I frankly doubt -- then I think it is likely that those writings were forged. Because I can't believe that so many people who testified of Oswald's proficiency in the language could all be wrong.

My guess is that Oswald made mistakes in grammar and spelling when writing in Russian, just as he did when writing in English, and that your wife is exaggerating.

 

[Paul Trejo]

5 hours ago, Mathias Baumann said:

Paul,

he's in his 50s, so yes, of course the age is a factor too.

The minimum most people need to reach the lowest level seems to be 100 lessons. Source: http://www.russiancentre.co.uk/TRKI-levels.php

Mathias,

This remains interesting.   If (and only if) one could reach the lowest level in Russian proficiency with 100 TRKI lessons -- AND if one lesson of the Berlitz method might correspond roughly to one lesson of the TRKI -- AND if Lee Harvey Oswald studied one lesson per day in 1959 -- then he could have mastered the lowest level of Russian language skill in 100 days -- or roughly 3.5 months.

According to Nelson Delgado, our student, Lee Harvey Oswald, studied Russian language roughly from February 1959 till September 1959 -- far more than 3.5 months.

So -- if (and only if) these estimates are reasonable, then it remains possible (and even plausible) that Lee Harvey Oswald reached the lowest level of Russian language skill entirely by self-teaching.

He was also a teenager at the time, so his brain was still supple enough.  Also, he did not need to be a genius to accomplish this.

Also -- it is interesting that Lance's wife laughs at Lee Harvey Oswald's writing errors in Russian.  English readers know that Oswald made many writing errors in English as well.  Oswald was certainly bright enough to teach himself Russian.  But that doesn't mean he was a genius.

Evidently, all he needed was a few months of dedicated time with the Berlitz method of language instruction.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited September 29, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Jim Hargrove]

Perhaps, instead of conflating Nelson Delgado's recollection that Oswald might have been interested in studying psychology at a University in Switzerland or in East Berlin with participation in an actual Berlitz language program, Mr. Trejo could provide one solitary shred of real evidence that Oswald obtained, paid for, or was given any type of Russian language training whatsoever while in the USMC.

Here's a few things Delgado DID say....

Mr. DELGADO ... and he always got a Russian paper, and I asked him if it was, you know, a Commie paper--they let you get away with this in the Marine Corps in a site like this--and he said, "No, it's not Communist; it's a White Russian. To me that was Greek, you know, White Russian, so I guess he is not a Communist; but he was steady getting that periodical. It was a newspaper. 
Mr. LIEBELER - In the Russian language? 
Mr. DELGADO - Right. 

Here's a White Russian newspaper printed in San Francisco, perhaps identical to the newspaper Delgado said Oswald "always got...." (Another soldier said he read a Russian newspaper from San Francisco.)

 

 

Can you imagine learning on your own to read a newspaper like the above?

----------------------------------

Mr. LIEBELER - You don't know whether the Russian newspaper that he got came from the Cuban consulate? 
Mr. DELGADO - No. He was getting that way before he even started corresponding with them. 
Mr. LIEBELER - Do you know whether Oswald ever received any books or pamphlets or materials in any language other than Russian---aside from English, of course? 
Mr. DELGADO - No. He had one book that was English, Das Kapital. I think it was Russian, a book, like I said. I go--by Russian when it's big block letters. 
And he had one book like that. He spoke Russian pretty good, so I understand. 
Mr. LIEBELER - How do you understand that? 
Mr. DELGADO - He tried to teach me some Russian. He would put out a whole phrase, you know. In return for my teaching him Spanish, he would try to teach me Russian. But it's a tongue twister. 

[W. Tracy Parnell]

6 hours ago, Lance Payette said:

My point is, it appears to me that LHO's "proficiency" is being elevated to a greater mystery than it actually is because (1) that's just more fun, and (2) a greater mystery dovetails with the Harvey & Lee theory.

Nice to see you posting again Lance and I think your assessment is right on.

[Jim Hargrove]

Here's that link to Prof. Norwood's article, which prompted this thread:

http://harveyandlee.net/Russian.html

Edited September 30, 2017 by Jim Hargrove