Cheng Zhong Su wrote:
> I wrote:
> > I.e. if you add four tones to an existing languages,
> > it enables you to make
> > shorter words, which can be remembered more
> > reliably, but who is to say that
> > because you have more different syllables to choose
> > from, the chance for
> > recalling on of them correctly doesn't become
> > smaller?
> Answer: A linguist read the 'time table' of math in
> English 42 seconds, in Chinese 30 secomds. At the end
> of 30th second, I believe both English reader and
> Chinese reader are different in mind.
I have absolutely no idea what you are trying to say here. But if I
understand correctly, you should be able to learn proper english quite fast,
so go start!
> And there is another different, the English school didn't want
> student learn the chemical element's table in heard.
> Why, because it's too long, but the Chinese school
> want student learn it in heart, for it's not hard job
> for them. We know once you know the table, you know
> most properties of all elements.
But if you're not involved in chemistry, you do not need it. And most people
will learn such things as they work with them. It is nonsense spending half
your life learning stuff you might never use. It is up to individuals to
learn by heart that which they expect to use on a daily basis.
> While a English student need to looking for book to find the position
> of that element. Do you want this happen forever?
I really don't care actually.
Maarten