Rod, at 11:32 on May 31 1995, you wrote to Bill Grimsley...

RS> And they dont have the bizarre variation you get with english,

BG> Won't wash, Rod.

RS> Fraid so.

Well Rod, if nothing else, you're certainly predictable.  |-)

BG> I'm not talking about incorrect tense, nor even specifically 
BG> grammar (although Christ knows that's bad enough these days), but 
BG> misspelling the root word, due to either laziness, or a simple 
BG> inability to learn by rote, and if it's the latter, they're fucked 
BG> as programmers.

RS> Still mangling the story completely. 

Nope, approaching it a different POV perhaps, but not mangling it.

RS> The problem with most english spelling is the weird exception stuff, the 
RS> surprisingly complex rules on when you use 'ie' and when you use 'ei', the 
RS> weird variation in the spelling as you pluralise the word, 

Sure, but that's more or less common to all languages (gender specific
stuff is even worse), but it's not what I'm really talking about.

RS> the variety where you get an 'sc' in obscene but not in obscession. 

ROFL!  Oh Christ, I have tears running down my face.  That's the funniest
line I've ever seen you use.  I bet you even programmed your OLX spelling
checker to accept "obscession" too.  |-)

Composed again, and yeah, "census" and "consensus" are
another weird pair.  Nobody ever suggested that learning English spelling
was easy, but at least Europeans have fewer difficulties than Asian
languages which have no equivalent alphabet.  Even cyrillic Russian and
Arabic must be difficult.

BG> Says nothing useful about correct spelling in general though.

RS> Pity you were talking about programming and whether lousy english
RS> spelling says a damned thing about effectiveness as a programmer.

I know, but I have this nasty habit of digressing from continually
discussing the same topic ad infinitum once our respective points have been
made.

BG> As you wish.  I'll just agree to disagree then.

RS> You can do whatever you like, you know fuck all about programming
RS> anyway, so what you believe doesnt matter a stuff really |-)

True, and I reckon I'm a much happier person because of it too.  |-)

RS> Your original said 'I cant imagine', the explanation is obvious.

Yeah, I understand what you're saying, and agree with a large part of it,
but still don't fully agree that a poor speller can be a great programmer.

BG> The spelling was merely an example of what appears to be the Asians' 
BG> totally different mindset and attitude towards learning in general.

RS> It proves SFA about anything much.

BG> Rubbish.  It proves that they try harder.  And generally succeed.

RS> You dont even know that, your particular example doesnt
RS> actually prove a damned thing about anything much.

Wish I had some hard stats, but have you ever looked in the SMH or CM Uni
results lists, and seen the large number of Asian names listed?  I'd hazard
a pretty good guess that on a per-capita basis, they do considerably better
than Australian students do overall.

RS> Doing well at spelling is primarily a result of a particular
RS> type of memory. Sure, if you dont have a very good memory for
RS> it, you can help with dedication, but thats not what those
RS> winners of competitions like that are usually, its normally
RS> just that they have the sort of memory that favours that task.

BG> It's not just spelling bees Rod, this applies across the board.

RS> Pity you fucked up using the spelling example then |-)

No, it was exactly that, just an example.  The whole thread started when I
commented upon the results of that particular competition, but it applies
across the board.  Very noticeable in the predominantly Chinese community
schools like Sunnybank, which had one of the highest (if not the highest)
overall Qld average TE score last year.  Pretty impressive actually.

BG> The simple OBSERVED fact is that the ethnic minorities (and
BG> especially asians) frequently just try harder, simple as that.

RS> Some do, some dont. The italians sure dont do too well at 
RS> spelling |-)

I suppose you'd notice that down your way too, and I'd agree (the Greeks
aren't much better either).  However, I did actually qualify my previous
assertion with "especially Asians", and it's demonstrably
correct.

BG> Maybe possible loss of face comes into it, I don't know.

RS> Nope, its got SFA to do with it.

BG> I wouldn't be too sure about that.  It's actually very true. 

RS> Its a western urban myth.

What, not a conspiracy theory?  Oh well, that's something I guess.  |-)

BG> Example, my local pharmacist has employed a Vietnamese Buddhist
BG> pharmacology student for a couple of years, and she not long ago
BG> graduated with honours (and married at the same time), and she
BG> told me more than once that it was extremely important for her
BG> to do well, so as not to shame her parents or family.  That's 
BG> just one example, but it proves that your SFA comment doesn't apply.

RS> Bullshit it doesnt. 

Last I heard, SFA means NONE.  I have given a specific known example. 
Ergo, SFA no longer applies.  Or is that just another Grimsleyan brain
fart?

RS> You might try explaining why the Vietnamese gangs in Cabramatta dont appear 
RS> to worry to much about that stuff.

Or the tens of thousands of Vietnamese who despise these gangs, and who do
worry about that stuff.  No black and white here Rod.

RS> The success of asians in school stuff in general is just a combination of 
RS> two things, they tend to have a higher IQ than the dregs of our society,

BG> True, no argument with that at all.

RS> and they have the usual immigrant approach of trying harder and have a lot 
RS> more emphasis in their sub society on that sort of achievement.

BG> Sure, that's basically what I'm suggesting anyway.

RS> Nope, you were making a comment about 'loss of face'.  Thats not what 'loss 
RS> of face' means.

The stuff above about Vi Tran not wishing to shame herself and/or her
family sure sounds like avoiding loss of face to me.

RS> The same thing happened with the jews in previous generations,
RS> particularly just after the war. The expectation that you will
RS> try hard to get decent results to get somewhere in a academic
RS> sense is a large part of it. It makes a HELL of a difference
RS> to how kids perform in highschool say.

BG> Yep, and their inherent attitudes almost ALWAYS come from their
BG> parents, either directly or indirectly.  So why the fuck are you
BG> arguing the point when we're essentially saying the same thing?

RS> Coz its got sweet fuck all to do with 'loss of face' thats why.

Another minor digression.  I really think we're more or less agreeing in
principle on the same (or similar) things, but viewed from different
perspectives.  

Either that, or you're just intentionally being obnoxious.  |-)

Regards, Bill
@EOT:

--- Msgedsq/2 3.10 alpha