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