kan@cs.columbia.edu (Victor Kan) (03/13/89)
Why was this mini-discussion on comp.arch? Since I don't know where it belongs, here goes. Literacy in a foreign language for PhDs is not just some arbitrary, nice idea for a magic solution to the world's problems as Lawrence Foard suggests. Foreign language requirements (FLRs) are meant to give undergraduates in the liberal arts an appreciation for other cultures and to make the students better human beings. But at the PhD level, FLRs are intended to provide students with the ability to read important works in their original form. Granted, technical research papers don't have the same level of linguistic complexity as Cervantes' Don Quixote. But technical translations can suffer just as much as literary ones, particularly in clarity and truth. Consider this hypothetical example: ----- Let's say Dijkstra's 1965 "Co-operating Sequential Processes" work was written in Dutch. The translators at Academic Press in London translate it into English, retaining P and V as the semaphore operations. CS PhD students in the U.S. read this translation, get confused and wonder "What the hell do P and V mean with respect to mutual exclusion?" If the students had no experience with foreign languages, they would might beat themselves over the head trying to figure it out. Then some wise guy who knows Dutch says P is short for wait and V is short for signal in Dutch. BOOM! it's perfectly clear to everyone that P means if I can't have access, then I'll wait in the queue, while V means signal the next process in the queue that I'm done. ----- I'm not suggesting that everyone learn every language so they won't be confused by translations. But knowing a little about many languages or a lot about one foreign language will certainly make a PhD student more receptive to foreign works. I'm in favor of FLRs for PhD students. I intend to be a PhD student someday and I know four languages, at varying levels of fluency. Unfortunately, none of the FLRs I've seen would accept those four languages. Looks like I'll have to learn French. Yuck!!!!! Victor
lexw@idca.tds.PHILIPS.nl (Lex Wassenberg) (03/13/89)
In article <134@cs.columbia.edu> kan@cs.columbia.edu (Victor Kan) writes: > >Consider this hypothetical example: >----- >Let's say Dijkstra's 1965 "Co-operating Sequential Processes" >work was written in Dutch. The translators at Academic Press in >London translate it into English, retaining P and V as the >semaphore operations. CS PhD students in the U.S. read this >translation, get confused and wonder "What the hell do P and V >mean with respect to mutual exclusion?" If the students had no >experience with foreign languages, they would might beat >themselves over the head trying to figure it out. Then some wise >guy who knows Dutch says P is short for wait and V is short for >signal in Dutch. BOOM! it's perfectly clear to everyone that P >means if I can't have access, then I'll wait in the queue, while >V means signal the next process in the queue that I'm done. >----- Well Victor, although I will not claim that I'm a wise guy, I *am* Dutch and I can say to you that P is *not* short Dutch for wait, and that V is *not* short Dutch for signal. However, during a course I followed last year I heard a completely different explanation of how Dijkstra came to his P and V operators. I don't know whether it's correct or not, but here it is: During the time that Dijkstra wrote the paper mentioned above, he was working in Eindhoven, the home town of the Philips company (maybe he was even working for Philips?). He was thinking about suitable names for the "wait" and "signal" operators but couldn't think of any good names. His room was at the top of a flat next to the soccer stadium of Eindhoven. When he looked out of the window, he saw the stadium with on top of it in big letters the name of the club that had it their home stadium. The name of the club was PSV (Philips Sport Vereniging, Dutch for Philips Sport Union. Maybe you know the name, it's the club that won the Europe Cup last year, and is playing next wednesday against Real Madrid for the same cup of this year). Since Dijkstra had his semaphore already given the name "S", he decided that the P and the V would make a nice triplet together with the S. As I said, I don't know whether it's true or not. Apparantly, Dijkstra himself is the only one who can say anything about this topic with authority. But during the course, we discussed it several times (we were with 16 Dutch guys) and nobody could give any satisfying explanation for the P and V abbreviations, so we decided that that the story might be true. P.S. [no V. :-) ] I know comp.arch is not really suited for this story, but where else should I post it, as the article I was reacting to was also posted here? ________________ / / ___ _____/ Lex Wassenberg, Philips TDS / / /__ \/ ___/ Apeldoorn, The Netherlands / / ___/ /__ lexw@idca.tds.philips.nl / / /____/\___/ / /____________/ It's said that only 10 people on the whole world understood /_______________/ Einstein. I'm so brilliant that no-one understands me at all.
frank@zen.co.uk (Frank Wales) (03/13/89)
[I'm directing follow-ups to misc.misc, unless you think of something better.] In article <134@cs.columbia.edu> kan@cs.columbia.edu (Victor Kan) writes: >Literacy in a foreign language for PhDs is not just some >arbitrary, nice idea for a magic solution to the world's problems >as Lawrence Foard suggests. I don't think he did go quite that far... >Foreign language requirements (FLRs) are meant to give >undergraduates in the liberal arts an appreciation for other >cultures and to make the students better human beings. A laudable goal, and I am glad that I can speak a foreign language (albeit with a rusty vocabulary ;-)). >But at the PhD level, FLRs are intended to provide students with the >ability to read important works in their original form. I can't agree with this at all. If it is important research, it will get translated, and the translations aren't *that* bad, certainly not in the refereed journals. >But technical translations >can suffer just as much as literary ones, particularly in clarity >and truth. If this is the case, a follow-up clarification will appear (unless no-one else finds the ambiguities you do, which would seem unlikely). >Consider this hypothetical example: >[example of P and V deleted] I have to say that knowing the origins of P and V doesn't help me remember which is which; I also have to say that I don't believe it matters. I remember by functionality -- if I *need* to know which is P, I look it up. To read and understand the important works and developments in virtually any scientific and technical discipline, a good knowledge of English is enough. >I'm not suggesting that everyone learn every language so they >won't be confused by translations. But knowing a little about >many languages or a lot about one foreign language will certainly >make a PhD student more receptive to foreign works. Unfortunately, foreign works aren't written in "foreign", but in French, German, Japanese, Russian, etc.. Knowing a little about German won't help you read an engineering paper from Dortmund. Speaking it fluently won't help you read a CS paper from Lausanne. I know a number of fine researchers whose knowledge of other languages is effectively zero -- are you going to tell me that they are somehow crippled because of this? Or, worse, that they ought to be? >I'm in favor of FLRs for PhD students. I'm in favour of requirements which are relevant to the study being undertaken. >I intend to be a PhD >student someday and I know four languages, at varying levels of >fluency. Unfortunately, none of the FLRs I've seen would accept >those four languages. But you know four languages already! Isn't this enough? Or do only certain languages count these days? >Looks like I'll have to learn French. What a terrible thing. :-) By the way, regarding that summary line... >Summary: they're quite useful and should be required Well, juggling is very useful (hand-eye coordination), physical fitness is important (longevity and stamina), and demonstrable management smarts are becoming increasingly important in society today, so why not only allow athletic dextrous MBAs into PhD programmes? [The point is, a lot of things are "quite useful," but that doesn't mean they're "absolutely essential."] -- Frank Wales, Systems Manager, [frank@zen.co.uk<->mcvax!zen.co.uk!frank] Zengrange Ltd., Greenfield Rd., Leeds, ENGLAND, LS9 8DB. (+44) 532 489048 x217
lfoard@wpi.wpi.edu (Lawrence C Foard) (03/14/89)
In article <134@cs.columbia.edu> kan@cs.columbia.edu (Victor Kan) writes: > >Literacy in a foreign language for PhDs is not just some >arbitrary, nice idea for a magic solution to the world's problems >as Lawrence Foard suggests. > >[reasons to learn a foreign langauge] > >I'm in favor of FLRs for PhD students. I intend to be a PhD >student someday and I know four languages, at varying levels of >fluency. Unfortunately, none of the FLRs I've seen would accept >those four languages. Looks like I'll have to learn French. >Yuck!!!!! > >Victor It would be nice to know a foreign langauge but it would also be nice to know a computer langauge, relativity, electonics, geology, astronomy, cooking, yoga, biology, advanced math, machining, carpentry, zoology, weather forcasting, typing, navigation, parachuting, etc. It is quite possible that all of these things would come in useful at some time in ones life, but they should not be required to get a Degree. I am for encouraging diversity in education but not for attempting to force it. The problem with attempting to force people to learn X because it is good for them is that not every one is able to learn X, or they would waste years learning X. I know a number of computer langauges and could learn another in a week or so but I do not expect that every one in the world will be able to do the same. Oh by the way: Which one is faster Vaxstation 3500 25Mhz 386 with weitek (sp?) coprocessor Is IMSL and Maxima available for zenix on an 80386? -- Disclaimer: My school does not share my views about FORTRAN. FORTRAN does not share my views about my school.
henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) (03/15/89)
In article <1304@wpi.wpi.edu> lfoard@wpi.wpi.edu (Lawrence C Foard) writes: >It would be nice to know a foreign langauge but it would also be nice to know >a computer langauge, relativity, electonics... Actually, for computer science and electronics-type electrical engineering it would make sense to require Japanese. Not just any foreign language, but specifically Japanese. (The test of whether the requirement is there because it makes sense, or just to be another hurdle to jump, is whether you're allowed to choose a totally useless course to meet it.) Of course, the faculty should be required to learn it first. :-) -- Welcome to Mars! Your | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology passport and visa, comrade? | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
steve@hubcap.UUCP ("Steve" Stevenson) (03/15/89)
The best argument that I can think of for requiring the study of language is the importance language has in our business. I've been in industry and academia and what I find most often is that those who know only their native language are inable to deal with structure and critical analysis of what is said. Teaching compilers to those who know nothing about language is a real downer. Even worse is listening to arguments by MS's who can't even form a proper sentence and whose vocabulary would make Ernest Hemingway's day. I'm sure that curricula need to be updated in many areas, but there are somethings which are needed to hone the mind for its job --- the fact that it is inconvenient is too bad. It's like teaching first aid: ya never know when it will come in handy. -- Steve (really "D. E.") Stevenson steve@hubcap.clemson.edu Department of Computer Science, (803)656-5880.mabell Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634-1906
pl@etana.tut.fi (Pertti Lehtinen) (03/16/89)
Here in Europe situation is quite different, because here nearly every nation has its own language. Also among smaller countries the necessity of language studies is even bigger. For example most research papers are never translated to finnish, so we have to be able to read them in english or some other language. Here studies in foreign languages are required for M.Sc. I have been studying english since I was 10, so some experience has gathered. So for us learning foreign languages isn't only nice for knowledge and understanding of other people, but necessity. Pertti Lehtinen pl@tut.fi pl@tut.fi ! -------------------------------- ! Pertti Lehtinen ! Alone at the edge of the world ! Tampere University of Technology ! -------------------------------- ! Software Systems Laboratory
curry@garth.UUCP (Ray Curry) (03/16/89)
In article <1304@wpi.wpi.edu> lfoard@wpi.wpi.edu (Lawrence C Foard) writes: >In article <134@cs.columbia.edu> kan@cs.columbia.edu (Victor Kan) writes: >> >>Literacy in a foreign language for PhDs is not just some >>arbitrary, nice idea for a magic solution to the world's problems >>as Lawrence Foard suggests. >a computer langauge, relativity, electonics, geology, astronomy, cooking, >yoga, biology, advanced math, machining, carpentry, zoology, weather >forcasting, typing, navigation, parachuting, etc. > It is quite possible that all of these things would come in useful at some >time in ones life, but they should not be required to get a Degree. I am for When I was in college, the language requirement for PHD candidates was that you had to have the ability to read a scientific paper and get some portion of what was being said. You did not have to be fluent in the language, but the languages of choice were limited to those where scientific publications were common. French, and German with Russian a fair third were the languages of choice. Since the terms used were mostly transliterated into the other languages, the requirement was generally satisfied by a one quarter class in reading such publications. German of course was by far the easiest. To some extent the ease of meeting the requirement may have been the reason for it being dropped. I took Russian in high school and took it in a regular class in college to meet my requirement but was the only one I knew that did. Everyone else took the one quarter quicky.
dave@whoops.celerity (Dave Smith) (03/16/89)
In article <1989Mar14.165213.204@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: >In article <1304@wpi.wpi.edu> lfoard@wpi.wpi.edu (Lawrence C Foard) writes: >>It would be nice to know a foreign langauge but it would also be nice to know >>a computer langauge, relativity, electonics... > >Actually, for computer science and electronics-type electrical engineering >it would make sense to require Japanese. Not just any foreign language, >but specifically Japanese. (The test of whether the requirement is >there because it makes sense, or just to be another hurdle to jump, is >whether you're allowed to choose a totally useless course to meet it.) > >Of course, the faculty should be required to learn it first. :-) The faculty should have to learn English, first. David L. Smith FPS Computing, San Diego ucsd!celerity!dave "Repent, Harlequin!," said the TickTock Man
bitbug@vicom.COM (James Buster) (03/17/89)
In article <267@celerity.UUCP> dave@whoops.UUCP (Dave Smith) writes: -In article <1989Mar14.165213.204@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: --In article <1304@wpi.wpi.edu> lfoard@wpi.wpi.edu (Lawrence C Foard) writes: ---It would be nice to know a foreign langauge but it would also be nice to know ---a computer langauge, relativity, electonics... -- --Actually, for computer science and electronics-type electrical engineering --it would make sense to require Japanese. Not just any foreign language, --but specifically Japanese. (The test of whether the requirement is --there because it makes sense, or just to be another hurdle to jump, is --whether you're allowed to choose a totally useless course to meet it.) -- --Of course, the faculty should be required to learn it first. :-) - -The faculty should have to learn English, first. Touche! But on the subject of Japanese... I presume, Henry, that you know how f^&*#%$ hard Japanese is to learn. Even people that you otherwise might think were pretty smart can take several years of *full-time* study to read Japanese at a level sufficient to read the simplest technical article, let alone one on complex, state-of-the-art subjects. By that time, you would think you would be done with your PhD, not just finishing your language requirement. So while Japanese may make sense, I think that its difficulty precludes making it a *requirement*. -David L. Smith -FPS Computing, San Diego -ucsd!celerity!dave -"Repent, Harlequin!," said the TickTock Man -------------------------------------------- James Buster Mad Hacker Extraordinaire ...!ames!vsi1!bitbug bitbug@vicom.com --------------------------------------------
lbo@ztivax.UUCP (Dr Lothar Borrmann) (03/18/89)
In article <210@wc8.idca.tds.philips.nl> lexw@idca.tds.PHILIPS.nl (Lex Wassenberg) writes: > >Apparantly, Dijkstra himself >is the only one who can say anything about this topic with authority. But during >the course, we discussed it several times (we were with 16 Dutch guys) and >nobody could give any satisfying explanation for the P and V abbreviations, so >we decided that that the story might be true. > I read Dijstra's papers some years ago and I remember that he himself gives the explanation (probably in the paper about "The THE Multiprocessing System"). I don't have the paper at hand, but I remember the meaning (as the Dutch words are similar to German). P is the abbreviation of the Dutch word for 'test' V is the abbreviation of the Dutch word for 'increment' Hope this helps. _____________________________________________________________________________ Lothar Borrmann Email: Siemens AG EUnet lbo@ztivax.uucp Corporate Research and Technology or ...!unido!ztivax!lbo ZFE F2 SYS 3 Otto-Hahn-Ring 6 Internet lbo@ztivax.siemens.com D-8000 Muenchen 83 West Germany _____________________________________________________________________________
henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) (03/18/89)
In article <1571@vicom.COM> bitbug@vicom.COM (James Buster) writes: >I presume, Henry, that you know how f^&*#%$ hard Japanese is to learn... I've barely glanced at Japanese, so I can't really say I know. (Russian was enough of a hassle...) >... while Japanese may make sense, I think that its >difficulty precludes making it a *requirement*. I think this translates to "language requirements don't make sense in computers and electronics at English-language universities". While I don't deny that interesting work takes place in other languages, I can't immediately think of any that is one-tenth as important as English and Japanese. (This may all change in twenty years... but I doubt it.) -- Welcome to Mars! Your | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology passport and visa, comrade? | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
robert@blake.acs.washington.edu (Gedankenleere) (03/18/89)
All this crap about foreign language requirements making a better, more understanding, more tolerant human beings out of most of those who take foreign language have no hard, large-scale supporting data to back it up!!! Neither do the perpetual claims that it allows you to learn English better!! If you want people to better understand others' cultures they we should be requiring American ethnic studies, or comparitve world ethnic studies where you, as a student can PERSONNALY interact with people of other ethnic groups, or if infeasable, be confronted directly (perhaps through play acting,or some such devices, more effective than mere text reading or dry lecture) with the world views, concerns, perceptions (of You and your culture), of people from these other cultures!! Virtually all the time spent in a foreign language class is on mechanics of grammar, vocabulary, composition, idomatic speech patterns, NOT only direct confrontation or examination of your (and theirs) cultural perceptions and prejudices!! (make that: NOT ON instead of NOT only") It is my strong belief that the people in the humanities have brainwashed themselves and many of the rest of us in swallowing these claims whole, unchallenged, without any real critical scrutiny!! pardon the spelling errors and syntax errors, I don't have time (or the correct editor ) to go back and pretty this stuff up.
wunder@hp-ses.SDE.HP.COM (Walter Underwood) (03/18/89)
I presume, Henry, that you know how f^&*#%$ hard Japanese is to learn. Even people that you otherwise might think were pretty smart can take several years of *full-time* study to read Japanese at a level sufficient to read the simplest technical article, ... Technical Japanese is much easier than conversational Japanese. You don't need the honorifics for technical stuff. I'm taking a Japanese course right now. The goal for the course is to be able to read technical works and travel alone in Japan after 1.5 years of study. It is 3 hrs/wk, and moving at about an undergraduate college pace. We are about 6 months into the course. 1.5 years continuous study equals about four semesters. I studied German through the fourth semester course in college, and this seems to be pretty comparable in difficulty and progress. "Japanese is difficult" is a myth. Japanese is easy to pronounce, has two irregular verbs, and a sanctioned vocabulary of about 2000 kanji. You'll learn more than 2000 words to be fluent in almost any other language. One hint -- don't fool around with roomaji; start learning hiragana (Japanese phonetic script) the first day. Learning Japanese with roman letters is about as useful as learning English with hiragana. Back to the subject -- yeah, require Japanese. wunder
hans@nlgvax.UUCP (Hans Zuidam) (03/19/89)
[This discussion belongs in soc.culture.misc, not here. ++hz] [For one reason or another I felt a strong urge to put each paragraph in another language but I could control myself ;-)] Funny thing that this discussion is about 'foreign' languages. I always thought there were only *other* languages (insert your own amount of smilies here). One of the things I noticed in this discussion is that it hardly concerns itself with the real reason you learn an other language for: better inter- action with people. As you may (or may not) know, most of your professional life (and private life for that matter) consists of interaction with other people. When you do speak an other language it is much easier for to convince someone who has that language as her/his native tongue. You should interpret 'convince' as 'sell' or 'have them do something for you' or 'have them do what you want', etc. In article <1253@blake.acs.washington.edu> robert@blake.acs.washington.edu (Gedankenleere) writes: >All this crap about foreign language requirements making a better, more >understanding, more tolerant human beings out of most of those who take >foreign language have no hard, large-scale supporting data to back it up!!! I do not need such data. I understand what you write and I am more tolerant towards your view. So it helped for at least one person ;-). >Neither do the perpetual claims that it allows you to learn English better!! Yes, it does allow you to speak your own language better. Because if you would take the trouble of learning a few other languages, you will notice there are a lot of simmelarities in languages. >Virtually all the time spent in a foreign language class is on mechanics of >grammar, vocabulary, composition, idomatic speech patterns, NOT only direct >confrontation or examination of your (and theirs) cultural perceptions and >prejudices!! (make that: NOT ON instead of NOT only") It is true that during classes you do not see much of the other cultures. But then again, that is not what those classes are for. When you travel, that is when you will get in contact with those other cultures. If, then, you do not speak (or even try to speak) their language, you will indeed never get 'in touch' with those other cultures. Of course Americans are in a bad position in this respect. They have to go quite some lengths to see some real 'foreign' cultures. I never met someone who thought I spoke bad german or french. They always liked the fact that I at least *try* to speak their language. That is also what bothers a lot of people about Americans: you regularly meet ones who do not even try to speak the language of the country they are visiting. For the people of the country they are visiting it is felt as if the American says something like: 'hey, you do not understand my english, how stupid of you.'. This puts people off. Please note that I do not say that all Americans (or even a significant portion of them) are like this. But it does put people off, especially people, like taxi drivers, porters, customs officers and so on, who did not have a Phd education. Hope this motivates you a bit to start a course on the Dutch language ;-). Hans -- Hans Zuidam E-Mail: hans@pcg.philips.nl Philips Telecommunications and Data Systems, Tel: +31 40 892288 Project Centre Geldrop, Building XR Willem Alexanderlaan 7B, 5664 AN Geldrop The Netherlands
gsarff@landru.UUCP (Gary Sarff) (03/20/89)
In article <1989Mar17.190907.2845@utzoo.uucp>, henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: >In article <1571@vicom.COM> bitbug@vicom.COM (James Buster) writes: >>I presume, Henry, that you know how f^&*#%$ hard Japanese is to learn... > >I've barely glanced at Japanese, so I can't really say I know. (Russian >was enough of a hassle...) > >>... while Japanese may make sense, I think that its >>difficulty precludes making it a *requirement*. > >I think this translates to "language requirements don't make sense in >computers and electronics at English-language universities". While I >don't deny that interesting work takes place in other languages, I can't >immediately think of any that is one-tenth as important as English and >Japanese. (This may all change in twenty years... but I doubt it.) >-- I've had Russian too and all those different cases for words, some of them nicely irregular, make things rather difficult, even for Russians. I was shocked when I learned that all the number words have to be declined in seven different cases, 3 genders (m,f,neuter) and singular, plural. My Russian teacher, who was a REAL little old lady from Leningrad, said even most Russians don't bother to do it above then number five or so because it is too hard. She said, be glad you aren't learning Hungarian, it has 25 cases. Japanese was worse but for different reasons, mainly the writing, which they borrowed from the chinese, it is pretty much for us westerners rote memorization of MANY thousands of arbitrarily shaped pictograms if we want to be able to read anything but children's books, (note: I am not talking about the phonetic alphabet they have, but the ideographic one.) I remember when German was the thing to learn for your PhD, I was constantly told I was/should take German in College so I would be ready. Of course my parents were _required_, as probably everyone was then, to take Latin in High School _and_ college, in addition to some other foreign language like french,spanish or german, the Latin was supposed to be "useful" in everyday life and later scholarship. Things do change, and I wouldn't be suprised to see new ideas about the languages to know in twenty years. We have had Latin, French, German, and now English touted as the thing to know, maybe then it will be Japanese. Or Arabic. 8-) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Do you have any Venezualan Beaver cheese?" -- The Cheese Shop, Monty Python I've often wondered why no one makes cheese from cat's milk?
dave@stcns3.stc.oz (Dave Horsfall) (03/22/89)
In article <1253@blake.acs.washington.edu>, robert@blake.acs.washington.edu (Gedankenleere) writes: | All this crap about foreign language requirements making a better, more Quite right. This "crap" should have been taken out of comp.arch ages ago. It's rapidly becoming the sewer that comp.unix.idiots sorry comp.unix.wizards currently is. Followups undoubtedly belong in a group that Oz doesn't import, so edit the Followup-To: line accordingly. -- Dave Horsfall (VK2KFU), Alcatel STC Australia, dave@stcns3.stc.oz dave%stcns3.stc.oz.AU@uunet.UU.NET, ...munnari!stcns3.stc.oz.AU!dave Self-regulation is no regulation
leivian@dover.azsps.mot.com (Bob Leivian) (03/24/89)
>>>I presume, Henry, that you know how f^&*#%$ hard Japanese is to learn... >> >>I've barely glanced at Japanese, so I can't really say I know. (Russian >>was enough of a hassle...) >> >>>... while Japanese may make sense, I think that its >>>difficulty precludes making it a *requirement*. >> I am currently taking some Japanese classes and its not all that bad. If you learn an alphabet of 50 some chars (times 2, though unfortunatly not unlike our upper and lower case -- 'A' and 'a' are about as similiar as hiragana KI and katakana KI) you can 'spell' and pronounce all words There are only around 2 thousand KANJI (alot but not MANY thousands) There are only two tenses, no plural or 'gender' (however there is 'male' and 'female' speech -- but you can still get you point across but you run the risk of sounding 'sissy' or 'brazen' if you get it wrong) There is the honorific/humble stuff that is hard to get right, but not necessary to read tech. stuff. Alot of words are English, pronounced in Japanese syllabales -- this might cause problems if you are not English speaking.
beyer@houxs.ATT.COM (J.BEYER) (03/27/89)
In article <937@dover.azsps.mot.com>, leivian@dover.azsps.mot.com (Bob Leivian) writes: > >>>I presume, Henry, that you know how f^&*#%$ hard Japanese is to learn... > >> Note that little children have learned Japanese, Latin, and other foreign to us languages. Not exceptional kids, either, but those present-day kids that live in Japan, and the historical kids that lived in the Roman Empire. It can be done. -- Jean-David Beyer A.T.&T., Holmdel, New Jersey, 07733 houxs!beyer