Your students or not?

[chrispillertkd]

Just asking. You don't have to get so defensive.

I was thanking you for your concern, Glenn. You've always been an exemplar of courtesy yourself on the board and have set a great example for others to follow so why you'd think I was getting defensive is beyond me.

Thanks again.

Pax,

Chris

 

[puunui]

Just becasue an instructor calls someone his student does not mean that the student is not also a student of the school and the Master. Yes someone my be a Jr. to the Master and Sr. to others but if that Sr. is responcible for teaching that Jr. then for the Sr. to say he is a student that I teach is no different than saying he is one of my students. Yes he is ultimately the Master student as would be said Sr. No one is trying to disrespect the Master with the statement it is simply something said to communicate that you teach said student on a regular basis.

Junior to the Master. If you are talking about a student of the Master, then you wouldn't refer to that student as a junior. He would be a student. The teacher/student relationship is different from the senior/junior relationship.

 

[puunui]

I was thanking you for your concern, Glenn. You've always been an exemplar of courtesy yourself on the board and have set a great example for others to follow so why you'd think I was getting defensive is beyond me.

Thanks again.

Pax,

Chris

whatever.

 

[puunui]

Wouldn't sa hyung mean forth form?

Daniel

maybe, but I never heard of that used within the context of senior and junior relationships.

 

[clfsean]

I've never heard the term sa-hyung or sa-je used before.

Sounds like what we use in CMA from the Cantonese dialect. I don't speak Mandarin to know what they use.

Sihing - older brother
Sidai - younger brother

Sijye - older sister
Simui - younger sister

 

[Flying Crane]

I've got a situation that will take a little explaining.

My Sihing (older brother) runs a class where he teaches mostly Taiji, mostly to older folks. He teaches some wushu to younger people, and he was originally my sifu (teacher) and taught me white crane. He took me to his sifu (my sigung) about two years ago, and sigung allowed me to join his group, with his students (my sisuk [?] uncles). I continued to call him "sigung" until about a year and a half later he told me clearly that he is my sifu, he is teaching me, i am learning things that my first sifu never taught me, and my first sifu is now my sihing, and my sisuk are now my sihing. OK, that got it straightened out for me.

I've got one student who I train in white crane. He is in Sihing's class, came in for the taiji and then wanted to train white crane with me. So he does, and I teach him. In all honesty, I'm teaching him the white crane, and sihing is not. Sihing trained white crane a long time ago and has largely been separated from it, he taught me what he could but knew I needed to train with his sifu to advance. So my student is really a student of Sihing's class, but I teach him, and Sihing only occasionally gives him pointers.

I respect my sihing and the fact that it is his class and my student came in to study under him originally. Since a lot of the instruction takes place at Sihing's class, I consider my student really to be Sihing's student. But really, I'm teaching him. I only refer to him as "my student" when outside the context of class, and when talking with people not connected to the class, like the people here on Martialtalk.

Underneath it all, everyone knows who is teaching who.

 

[JohnEdward]

I know Asian martial arts has student and master, and junior and senior structure. Be it cultural and centuries old in each art, it confuses me. Why does it have to exist, what was the purpose, and original context? Who is teaching who in martial arts really shouldn't be the Crown Jewel should it?

But students in general don't care that much who is teaching them. Unless, it is a famous teacher or fighter, i.e. a celebrity martial artist or someone really bad at martial arts for the most part in most places in the world.

Why then should it matter to the teacher to have propriety rights over the students? Isn't it about sharing knowledge and passing on that knowledge. I personally, have a loyalty to my instructor because he was my friend. But if he wasn't my friend then there wouldn't be any loyalty what so every.

That parallels any coach, school or university teacher, I ever had. Or anyone else who has instructed or gave me lessons. But in martial arts we create this "family" atmosphere, we have loyalties to instructors, we have instructors fighting over who teaches who. When this happens, students then are torn as a result of the politics of being unfairly put in the middle when teacher conflicts or attitudes arise.


Instructors are not salesmen that are fighting and clawing over each other's clients /students. I am confused because it exists, which I feel is an archaic convention placed out of context. There would be much less issues and politics if there wasn't importance placed upon propriety teaching rights and the stigma of being a teacher.

I am not scolding or admonishing anyone, I just am confused this structure causes so many conflicts why is it still kept?

 

[Thesemindz]

I know Asian martial arts has student and master, and junior and senior structure. Be it cultural and centuries old in each art, it confuses me. Why does it have to exist, what was the purpose, and original context? Who is teaching who in martial arts really shouldn't be the Crown Jewel should it?

But students in general don't care that much who is teaching them. Unless, it is a famous teacher or fighter, i.e. a celebrity martial artist or someone really bad at martial arts for the most part in most places in the world.

Why then should it matter to the teacher to have propriety rights over the students? Isn't it about sharing knowledge and passing on that knowledge. I personally, have a loyalty to my instructor because he was my friend. But if he wasn't my friend then there wouldn't be any loyalty what so every.

That parallels any coach, school or university teacher, I ever had. Or anyone else who has instructed or gave me lessons. But in martial arts we create this "family" atmosphere, we have loyalties to instructors, we have instructors fighting over who teaches who. When this happens, students then are torn as a result of the politics of being unfairly put in the middle when teacher conflicts or attitudes arise.


Instructors are not salesmen that are fighting and clawing over each other's clients /students. I am confused because it exists, which I feel is an archaic convention placed out of context. There would be much less issues and politics if there wasn't importance placed upon propriety teaching rights and the stigma of being a teacher.

I am not scolding or admonishing anyone, I just am confused this structure causes so many conflicts why is it still kept?

I think you make a lot of good points. I think it's a practice that has a lot of negative consequences. Instructors fighting over students, or threatening to withhold or remove rank, or trying to control who their students can work with or train with or teach. In many ways, it is just a technical school, and should be treated like that.

At the same time, I'm teaching people how to hurt and kill other people. I can't do that unless I trust them, at least some. And they can't learn unless they trust me not to hurt them in the process. I think from that natural trust level it is predictable that a kind of intimacy will develop. It is also natural to be grateful to our instructors for what they've shared with us, whether we bought that knowledge or not. From those two pillars, and the massive amount of time you're going to spend with your instructors, it doesn't seem all that unusual that close bonds would form.

As a student I felt a great deal of loyalty towards my seniors and my instructors. As an instructor I feel a great deal of loyalty towards my students. That can be a really positive force within a school. It can also be perverted and there's an entire forum here on Martialtalk called "horror stories" filled with examples of that. Many of us who've done martial arts for any length of time have seen it or heard of it happening. It's sad.

But that's humans for you. They can take anything beautiful and turn it to dross. I don't think there's anything wrong with creating bonds with the people you train with. We do something special. Those who don't practice will never really understand. But we have to make it something positive every time we step on the floor. We have to help each other, our juniors and our seniors. The Master and the Student learn together. It's a tradition passed down from teacher to student, hand to hand, generation after generation.

Could we do without it? Sure. Some schools already are and I don't think it makes their karate any worse. But I'm not sure we're necessarily better off without it.


-Rob

 

[puunui]

I know Asian martial arts has student and master, and junior and senior structure. Be it cultural and centuries old in each art, it confuses me. Why does it have to exist, what was the purpose, and original context? Who is teaching who in martial arts really shouldn't be the Crown Jewel should it?

It is not so much who is teaching who as to what your relationship is to others, and based on that relationship, what your duties and obligations are. It comes from Confucius, who focused on correct behavior, depending on what your relationship is to the other person. Teacher - student and senior - junior are two of the relationships discussed. Parent - child is another important relationship according to Confucius. It is a very important part of the Korean Martial Arts, and all asian martial arts really. Some say that it is the most important part.

 

[chrispillertkd]

Wouldn't sa hyung mean forth form?

Daniel

Not necessarily. "Hyung" is the word that boys call their older brother. I believe it and the word your refer to are homophones. You'd really need to hear them both pronounced by a native Korean speaker and see how they are spelled in hangul to be sure; "hyung" is just a transliteration, after all.

Pax,

Chris

 

[puunui]

"Hyung" is the word that boys call their older brother.

It's not limited to what "boys" call their older brother. In my circle, junior males call their male seniors "hyung" or "hyung nim", no matter what their age.

 

[chrispillertkd]

It's not limited to what "boys" call their older brother. In my circle, junior males call their male seniors "hyung" or "hyung nim", no matter what their age.

Odd that you didn't recognize the word as being part of sa-hyung, then.

Pax,

Chris

 

[puunui]

Odd that you didn't recognize the word as being part of sa-hyung, then. Pax, Chris

I didn't say that I didn't "recognize the word as being part of sa-hyung"; what I said was:

I've never heard the term sa-hyung or sa-je used before.

and

maybe, but I never heard of that used within the context of senior and junior relationships.

We don't say "sa-hyung", younger males to older males as brothers we just say hyung, or hyung nim. For younger females addressing older males, it is oppa.

The female term you posted, sa-je, I never heard that used either. For younger males addressing older females as sisters, it would be noona or noonim. For younger females addressing older females as sisters, it would be onni.

 

[chrispillertkd]

I thought you would've been able to puzzle it out, Glenn.

Pax,

Chris

 

[miguksaram]

Odd that you didn't recognize the word as being part of sa-hyung, then.

Pax,

Chris

I have never heard the term Sa-Hyung used in meaning older brother especially when you consider 'Sa' can have two meanings in Korea. One being '4' the other being 'death'. When referring to an older brother hyung is the correct term but, depending on your relationship, using the suffix '-nim' may also be utilized. For instance, when I address Glenn in private emails I refer to him as 'Hyungnim'. This is my way of recognizing him as a close associate and my senior. However, I have a good friend who I have known for many years and is older than me, I refer to him as just Hyung.

I would be interested in seeing the Kanji of the term 'Sa-Hyung'.

 

[puunui]

I thought you would've been able to puzzle it out, Glenn.

Puzzle out what, that I never heard the term sa hyung or sa je used before? I already knew that. Let me ask you this: Does the ITF use the terms sa hyung or sa je when referring to seniors? Is this something that you used in your own school when you had it or at your instructor's school?

 

[chrispillertkd]

No, I meant puzzle out the meaning of the word in the first place.

Pax,

Chris

 

[puunui]

No, I meant puzzle out the meaning of the word in the first place.

I don't care about puzzling it out. My comment only went to the fact that I never heard of those terms sa hyung and sa je being used in a Korean Martial Arts context. And frankly, it hasn't been established that the chinese characters for sa hyung and hyung or hyung nim are the same. That's why Jeremy asked to see the chinese character. Are you going to respond to him, given the fact that you are the only one who seems to use these terms, sa hyung and sa je?

 

[chrispillertkd]

I don't care about puzzling it out. My comment only went to the fact that I never heard of those terms sa hyung and sa je being used in a Korean Martial Arts context. And frankly, it hasn't been established that the chinese characters for sa hyung and hyung or hyung nim are the same. That's why Jeremy asked to see the chinese character. Are you going to respond to him, given the fact that you are the only one who seems to use these terms, sa hyung and sa je?

Nobody asked me to see the characters for the terms in question. Miguksaram said he'd be interested in seeing the kanji for them, but he didn't ask me for them.

I also didn't say I used them, just that you could.

Pax,

Chris

 

[puunui]

Nobody asked me to see the characters for the terms in question. Miguksaram said he'd be interested in seeing the kanji for them, but he didn't ask me for them.

In my opinion he did ask you, since you are the only one who uses those terms. Therefore you would be the only one who may know what the hanja (kanji is the Japanese term) looks like. I figured that you were ignoring his question, in the same way that you ignore mine.

I also didn't say I used them, just that you could.

I suppose that you could use those terms if you really wanted to, but perhaps not in front of native Korean speakers.