Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!husc6!necntc!culdev1!yg From: yg@culdev1.UUCP Newsgroups: comp.ai,sci.lang Subject: Re: Language Learning (anecdotes) Message-ID: <1786@culdev1.UUCP> Date: Wed, 25-Nov-87 14:08:33 EST Article-I.D.: culdev1.1786 Posted: Wed Nov 25 14:08:33 1987 Date-Received: Sun, 29-Nov-87 01:45:27 EST References: <1966@uwmacc.UUCP> <12400009@iuvax> <1117@uhccux.UUCP> <2059@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> Organization: Cullinet Software, Westwood, MA, USA Lines: 30 Xref: utgpu comp.ai:1098 sci.lang:1629 Summary: Why is it that people claim that languages in Asia do not distinguish between an L and an R? In article <2059@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu>, paul@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Paul W. Placeway) writes: > > Actually, the 'L'/'R' statement isn't entirely true. Most speakers > who have not been exposed to a language that distinguishes between L > and R (ie. Asian) don't distinguish them. ^^^^^ I guess THIS was the reason for my previous objection - why is it that it is assumed that languages in Asia do not differentiate between an L and an R? > > The main point is that (1) 'L'/'R' is a learned CP skill, and (2) many > CP skills do _not_ crystalize: adults can learn them. Some people, of > course, do learn better than others, however. > > -- Paul Placeway Agreed. - Yogesh Gupta. Ti sh is to ma ke in ew sh ap py