From: Brian Phillips (deepbluehalo@earthlink.net)
Date: Sat Jan 12 2002 - 17:06:56 MST
From: Orlando Moltisanti
<Hey Yash, here's a reason why your maths tongue thing might be a good idea,
this quote refers to the introduction of east asian maths terms into an IAL
- - maybe if a language was more amths orientated then we really would learn
better and quicker. I know it has nothing to do with "embedding" maths
concepts, but I thought I say about it anyway:
"Moreover, mathematical words might be introduced from East Asian languages.
Irene Miura and Yukari Okamoto have established that number values in
Chinese, Japanese and Korean are better understood, because the counting
system relates directly to the meaning of numbers: hence, eleven in Japanese
is "ten-one", twenty is "two-ten", thirty-one is "three-ten-one". The
language is also better at explaining fractions: e.g. in Japanese one third
is "san bun no iti" meaning "of three parts one". It is well known that East
Asian students consistently surpass their British and American counterparts
at maths. The difference is so great that it cannot solely be the result of
superior discipline, motivation or teaching; it must also reflect the nature
of their languages. The vocabulary of the international language will no
doubt be influenced by such findings.">>>
Um.. excuse me.
I will certainly grant the possibility that Oriental languages might
be more convienent for dealing in mathmatical concepts...
HOWEVER... you just wandered into *my* professional
territory...
"It is well known that East
Asian students consistently surpass their British and American counterparts
at maths."
This statement is essentially true but would need to be more precise
to be defended successfully.
< The difference is so great that it cannot solely be the result of
superior discipline, motivation or teaching;>
This is also essentially correct
< it must also reflect the nature
of their languages.>
This is a vast leap and a MAJOR assertion.
It is also HIGHLY counter-intuitive in light
the general consensus among psychometry experts
that East Asians score better than British or Americans
on precisely the same "g factor" loaded tests that
show a strong (like 0.6-0.8 heritability factor!).
Note well that the passage you described is
looking for explanations purely on the environmental
side of the nature/nurture divide.
<The vocabulary of the international language will no
doubt be influenced by such findings>
Sapir-Whorf is a nice thought, but the strong version
is something no one takes seriously (witness the basic
colors research) and even the weak Sapir-Whorf
hypothesis is *at best* a suggestion.
Remember... Laadan has how many speakers?
regards,
brian
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:39 MDT