4 ms·

South Korean 15-year-olds rank No. 2 in the world in reading Unmentioned is that written Korean was designed by an accomplished linguist (around 1500), making

South Korean 15-year-olds rank No. 2 in the world in reading Unmentioned is that written Korean was designed by an accomplished linguist (around 1500), making it very easy to learn. This in contrast to English, a bewildering mashup of incompatible spelling & phonetic rules made up by happenstance.

agumonkey 13y ago
Korean looks cryptic at first, but it's fairly principled and the 'learn korean in 8 min' slides floating on the web not long ago was not a joke. Also, Asian counting system is very regular, allegedly easing the learning for young pupils. ps: I found english very easy, unlike french which is probably only meant for world class writers.
argumentum 13y ago
English bashing is so easy its tiring. There's a reason English is a "bewildering mashup", because it developed organically taking input from all around the world. It is quite arguable that this is it's greatest strengths as a language. This is due not only to the British Empire but also the fact that they essentially let language develop on its own. Unlike say, France (which had a similarly expansive empire), which tightly controlled the French language and still does to this day.
- lkbm 13y ago
  So, basically you agree with the OP?
- Dewie 13y ago
  Yeah, there is a reason English is the way it is. Who said there wasn't? Saying that 'there is a reason' doesn't really rebut anything (you agreed with it anyway), and I kind of expected a rebut with the antagonistic opening sentence. > , because it developed organically taking input from all around the world. It is quite arguable that this is it's greatest strengths as a language. Having a lot of loanwords is one thing: not having any sane and simple rules for spelling and phonetics is quite another. If 'organic' spelling is it's greatest strength, then it seems like a language more suited for spelling bees# then for communication. #I doubt you'll find something like a Spanish spelling bee: from what I've seen of its diction, a Spanish spelling bee would be too trivial. Like making a competition out of tic-tac-toe.
  - argumentum 13y ago
    English is a great language in that it (almost uniquely) decouples rules from meaning, thus giving it great flexibility. This is in my opinion it's greatest strength. The way something becomes an acceptable part of the English language has less to do with following some arbitrary set of constraints, than what becomes accepted by actual human beings who use the language to communicate with other actual human beings. There are more ways of saying any particular thing in English than most if not all other languages, and while you may view this as a weakness, I rather appreciate being able to decide what sounds good on my own. https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm There is also a larger point to be made. If English was such a hindrance why is the world like it is today? Language is one of the most important components of society, so if English really sucked, we'd probably be using some other language on HN. Please explain why, despite what you consider it's shortcomings, English is and will be the lingua franca of the world for the foreseeable future? My ancestors are from India, and I've visited there from time to time. Anyone with anything to contribute there speaks English, even if as a second (or third or fourth) language. If someone doesn't, that person isn't usually educated or hardly even literate. Indian languages developed from the same roots as European ones, which is why the term Indo-European exists#. Yet somehow, amongst all the possibilities, the most successful Indians use English. There is something to be said for that. # http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European_languages http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European_languages
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
    - Dewie 13y ago
      > English is a great language in that it (almost uniquely) decouples rules from meaning, thus giving it great flexibility. This is in my opinion it's greatest strength. What does this mean? > The way something becomes an acceptable part of the English language has less to do with following some arbitrary set of constraints, than what becomes accepted by actual human beings who use the language to communicate with other actual human beings. You mean the way most languages evolve? You're gonna have to have a pretty authoritative enforcement of the use of a natural language to keep it from evolving at all. If someone wants "proper" English, they also have the Oxford Dictionary. > There are more ways of saying any particular thing in English than most if not all other languages, and while you may view this as a weakness, I rather appreciate being able to decide what sounds good on my own. That might be great for an English connoisseur (hey, there's another word for a potential spelling bee), but not so much for someone who is learning the language. And learning languages was what the person you originally replied to was talking about. > There is also a larger point to be made. If English was such a hindrance why is the world like it is today? Language is one of the most important components of society, so if English really sucked, we'd probably be using some other language on HN. Please explain why, despite what you consider it's shortcomings, English is and will be the lingua franca of the world for the foreseeable future? I guess by "larger point" you mean a historical point, which has nothing to do with the linguistical properties of a language. No-one has said that English sucks to such a degree that it couldn't have gained traction as an international lingua franca, but nice try with the straw man. But that doesn't mean that it is a arguably sub-par in some ways, in this case the original complaint was about the seemingly random phonetics and spelling of the English language. > My ancestors are from India, and I've visited there from time to time. Anyone with anything to contribute there speaks English, even if as a second (or third or fourth) language. If someone doesn't, that person isn't usually educated or hardly even literate. Indian languages developed from the same roots as European ones, which is why the term Indo-European exists#. Yet somehow, amongst all the possibilities, the most successful Indians use English. There is something to be said for that. # http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European_languages http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European_languages Yeah, there is something to be said for that: the British Empire (which you've already mentioned and other historical developments. Or what do you hint at with the last line, that the English language itself played a key role in the cultures and civilizations that made English an international language? That they wouldn't have been as successful if they spoke something like Romanian? Meanwhile you've said nothing about the original complaint, which is the spelling and phonetics of the language, but if you want to talk about history I guess that's cool, too.
nandemo 13y ago
The Korean orthography is indeed very regular, but that's irrelevant: reading for 15-year-olds doesn't mean deciphering spelling, but rather reading comprehension. Also note that no. 1 is Shanghai (why not "China", I wonder?), and Chinese orthography is a much more bewildering mashup than English.
- ctdonath 13y ago
  It is relevant, as reading for American 15-year-olds DOES mean deciphering spelling. Odd anecdote: this became notable in the recent hyped Zimmerman trial when a 19yo witness couldn't read a letter she claimed to have written - it was in cursive. The usefulness of cursive (as an obsolete notation) aside, any high schooler should at least be able to read it, and any witness should be able to read any standard script. As for Shanghai, I have to wonder if the cost of living in some areas necessitates literacy more than other areas. If you can't read, you can't produce value commensurate with the high price of existing there: survival dictates read or get out.
- wisty 13y ago
  > Also note that no. 1 is Shanghai (why not "China", I wonder?) 1) Shanghai is a very developed part of China (along with Beijing, and a few other big cities). 2) I'm pretty sure they rigged it. There's various ways the teachers could have rigged the test, and I doubt there was any effort by the local schooling system to keep them honest.

agumonkey 13y ago

Korean looks cryptic at first, but it's fairly principled and the 'learn korean in 8 min' slides floating on the web not long ago was not a joke. Also, Asian counting system is very regular, allegedly easing the learning for young pupils. ps: I found english very easy, unlike french which is probably only meant for world class writers.

argumentum 13y ago

English bashing is so easy its tiring. There's a reason English is a "bewildering mashup", because it developed organically taking input from all around the world. It is quite arguable that this is it's greatest strengths as a language. This is due not only to the British Empire but also the fact that they essentially let language develop on its own. Unlike say, France (which had a similarly expansive empire), which tightly controlled the French language and still does to this day.

lkbm 13y ago
So, basically you agree with the OP?
Dewie 13y ago
Yeah, there is a reason English is the way it is. Who said there wasn't? Saying that 'there is a reason' doesn't really rebut anything (you agreed with it anyway), and I kind of expected a rebut with the antagonistic opening sentence. > , because it developed organically taking input from all around the world. It is quite arguable that this is it's greatest strengths as a language. Having a lot of loanwords is one thing: not having any sane and simple rules for spelling and phonetics is quite another. If 'organic' spelling is it's greatest strength, then it seems like a language more suited for spelling bees# then for communication. #I doubt you'll find something like a Spanish spelling bee: from what I've seen of its diction, a Spanish spelling bee would be too trivial. Like making a competition out of tic-tac-toe.
- argumentum 13y ago
  English is a great language in that it (almost uniquely) decouples rules from meaning, thus giving it great flexibility. This is in my opinion it's greatest strength. The way something becomes an acceptable part of the English language has less to do with following some arbitrary set of constraints, than what becomes accepted by actual human beings who use the language to communicate with other actual human beings. There are more ways of saying any particular thing in English than most if not all other languages, and while you may view this as a weakness, I rather appreciate being able to decide what sounds good on my own. https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm There is also a larger point to be made. If English was such a hindrance why is the world like it is today? Language is one of the most important components of society, so if English really sucked, we'd probably be using some other language on HN. Please explain why, despite what you consider it's shortcomings, English is and will be the lingua franca of the world for the foreseeable future? My ancestors are from India, and I've visited there from time to time. Anyone with anything to contribute there speaks English, even if as a second (or third or fourth) language. If someone doesn't, that person isn't usually educated or hardly even literate. Indian languages developed from the same roots as European ones, which is why the term Indo-European exists#. Yet somehow, amongst all the possibilities, the most successful Indians use English. There is something to be said for that. # http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European_languages http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European_languages
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - Dewie 13y ago
    > English is a great language in that it (almost uniquely) decouples rules from meaning, thus giving it great flexibility. This is in my opinion it's greatest strength. What does this mean? > The way something becomes an acceptable part of the English language has less to do with following some arbitrary set of constraints, than what becomes accepted by actual human beings who use the language to communicate with other actual human beings. You mean the way most languages evolve? You're gonna have to have a pretty authoritative enforcement of the use of a natural language to keep it from evolving at all. If someone wants "proper" English, they also have the Oxford Dictionary. > There are more ways of saying any particular thing in English than most if not all other languages, and while you may view this as a weakness, I rather appreciate being able to decide what sounds good on my own. That might be great for an English connoisseur (hey, there's another word for a potential spelling bee), but not so much for someone who is learning the language. And learning languages was what the person you originally replied to was talking about. > There is also a larger point to be made. If English was such a hindrance why is the world like it is today? Language is one of the most important components of society, so if English really sucked, we'd probably be using some other language on HN. Please explain why, despite what you consider it's shortcomings, English is and will be the lingua franca of the world for the foreseeable future? I guess by "larger point" you mean a historical point, which has nothing to do with the linguistical properties of a language. No-one has said that English sucks to such a degree that it couldn't have gained traction as an international lingua franca, but nice try with the straw man. But that doesn't mean that it is a arguably sub-par in some ways, in this case the original complaint was about the seemingly random phonetics and spelling of the English language. > My ancestors are from India, and I've visited there from time to time. Anyone with anything to contribute there speaks English, even if as a second (or third or fourth) language. If someone doesn't, that person isn't usually educated or hardly even literate. Indian languages developed from the same roots as European ones, which is why the term Indo-European exists#. Yet somehow, amongst all the possibilities, the most successful Indians use English. There is something to be said for that. # http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European_languages http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European_languages Yeah, there is something to be said for that: the British Empire (which you've already mentioned and other historical developments. Or what do you hint at with the last line, that the English language itself played a key role in the cultures and civilizations that made English an international language? That they wouldn't have been as successful if they spoke something like Romanian? Meanwhile you've said nothing about the original complaint, which is the spelling and phonetics of the language, but if you want to talk about history I guess that's cool, too.

nandemo 13y ago

The Korean orthography is indeed very regular, but that's irrelevant: reading for 15-year-olds doesn't mean deciphering spelling, but rather reading comprehension. Also note that no. 1 is Shanghai (why not "China", I wonder?), and Chinese orthography is a much more bewildering mashup than English.

ctdonath 13y ago
It is relevant, as reading for American 15-year-olds DOES mean deciphering spelling. Odd anecdote: this became notable in the recent hyped Zimmerman trial when a 19yo witness couldn't read a letter she claimed to have written - it was in cursive. The usefulness of cursive (as an obsolete notation) aside, any high schooler should at least be able to read it, and any witness should be able to read any standard script. As for Shanghai, I have to wonder if the cost of living in some areas necessitates literacy more than other areas. If you can't read, you can't produce value commensurate with the high price of existing there: survival dictates read or get out.
wisty 13y ago
> Also note that no. 1 is Shanghai (why not "China", I wonder?) 1) Shanghai is a very developed part of China (along with Beijing, and a few other big cities). 2) I'm pretty sure they rigged it. There's various ways the teachers could have rigged the test, and I doubt there was any effort by the local schooling system to keep them honest.