Slashdot Mirror


Bilingualism Delays Onset of Dementia

Dee writes with word of a Canadian study indicating that lifelong bilingualism delays the onset of dementia by 4 years. The scientists were reportedly "dazzled" by the results. From the article: "The researchers determined that the mean age of onset of dementia symptoms in the monolingual group was 71.4 years, while the bilingual group was 75.5 years. This difference remained even after considering the possible effect of cultural differences, immigration, formal education, employment and even gender as influencers in the results. "

472 comments

  1. Wow by wbean · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wow, does that include Fortan and Cobal? (Couldn't be C# because it requires lifelong fluency.)

    1. Re:Wow by malsdavis · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This isn't the first report to note mental health benefits from knowing another language, there have been many studies done on the matter, I remember recently reading a report which showed bilingualism (along with ambidexterity among other things) helps prevent/delay Alzheimers.

      While on the face of it, the various studies would seem to imply that programming languages help in this way, I doubt they are quite as beneficial as a natural language due (among other things) to the comparatively minuscule vocabulary and grammatical flexibility that programming languages generally use.

      The general indications are though that all brain usage assists to ward off mental health degeneration however so the good news for Slashdotters is that just being a nerd helps in itself!

    2. Re:Wow by bob65 · · Score: 1

      Not sure if being a nerd automatically implies higher than average brain usage though.

    3. Re:Wow by arodland · · Score: 1

      Well if size of vocabulary and available complexity are the deciding factors, then Perl should be the best at keeping you from going out of your mind :)

    4. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      10 PRINT "I am the machine of life! We shall discuss when you die"
      20 PRINT "Enter your age!"
      30 INPUT %AG
      40 PRINT "Do you know multiple languages? y/n"
      50 INPUT $BI
      60 IF $BI = "y" GOTO 90
      70 IF %AG > 70 GOTO 40
      80 GOTO 30
      90 IF %AG 70 GOTO 190
      200 GOTO 150 Hmm, it seems as tho Cobal nore Fortan have any effect beyond that they are in fact languages, on the bright side, we now also know what causes senile people, as well as religous quacks.
    5. Re:Wow by Andrew+Kismet · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well if size and complexity are the deciding factors, then Perl should be the best at keeping you going out of your mind :)
      Fixed.

    6. Re:Wow by cp.tar · · Score: 1

      If you're able to comprehend even the most obscure Perl programs at a glance, you already are out of your mind.

      And you'll never forget it.

      --
      Ignore this signature. By order.
    7. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      COBAL !? you are already with symptoms of senility. is COBOL

    8. Re:Wow by arivanov · · Score: 1

      Neah...

      You just go out of your mind in another completely different and wonderfull way...

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    9. Re:Wow by quigonn · · Score: 1

      Looking at most of the postings here, the contrary seems to be right.

      --
      A monkey is doing the real work for me.
    10. Re:Wow by malsdavis · · Score: 1

      Thats because nowadays Slashdot is a mainstream bitching site for wanna-be nerds. The real nerds no longer visit Slashdot as they don't enjoy just reading constant politics, legal and "in-other-news" stories. Seriously, how long since Linux kernel patches have even been mentioned on Slashdot?

      I bet most the people who read Slashdot now don't even know what the Linux kernel is, let alone how to modify it!

    11. Re:Wow by Gabrill · · Score: 1

      Que do usted mean? Yo don't comprende how dos languages halto dimensia?

      --
      Always going forward, 'cause we can't find reverse.
    12. Re:Wow by Ed+Avis · · Score: 1

      IIRC, back in the days when every Linux 2.1.x point release got a headline on Slashdot, most of the comments consisted of whining about whether Slashdot should carry such stories, they should go on Freshmeat instead, and so on.

      --
      -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
    13. Re:Wow by Chapter80 · · Score: 1
      Wow, does that include Fortan and Cobal?
      Cobal? Common Business Oriented Language?

      Scarey to think that someone on Slashdot doesn't know that it's spelled with two O's. Not to be a spelling Nazi, but this is Computer Science stuff. We should know it! (...Unless you aren't bilingual and English isn't your language. There, now it's relevant to the thread.)

    14. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Might have been intentional, notice that FORTRAN is mispelled also?

    15. Re:Wow by MattPat · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's OK, according to the study, as long as he's fluent in Cobol and FORTRAN, he doesn't need English! :)

    16. Re:Wow by plumby · · Score: 1

      He could be referring to Cobal-1000 .

      "To treat pernicious anemia, you will have to use this medication [Cobal-1000] on a regular basis for the rest of your life."

      Or maybe it was just a typo...

    17. Re:Wow by indifferent+children · · Score: 3, Funny

      A compiler is the ultimate spelling and grammar Nazi.

      --
      Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it. --Mark Twain
    18. Re:Wow by Z1NG · · Score: 1

      Slashdot is a mainstream bitching site for wanna-be nerds. The real nerds no longer visit Slashdot as they don't enjoy just reading constant politics, legal and "in-other-news" stories.
      You do realize that makes you a bitching wanna-be nerd, right? That's like me saying, anyone worth listening too wouldn't right this comment.
    19. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Two weeks of Spanish 101 doesn't cut it. And wtf is "halto?" Is that like steero the caro?

    20. Re:Wow by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      Yes, but it isn't all those with a bad reputation that deserve it. GNAT lets me capitalise the way I want, and it gives helpful error messages, even suggesting possible misspellings. While other compilers which should not be named are ed-like in their unhelpfulness, or downright misleading.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    21. Re:Wow by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I doubt it. A lot of the studies on dementia have boiled down to: if your brain is more flexible, you develop symptoms much more slowly. People with more education tend to exhibit symptoms much more slowly, people who know extra languages exhibit symptoms much more slowly.

      What it boils down to is, if your brain is wired to do things in more than one way, you're more likely to be able to cope for longer when dementia starts throwing up road blocks. So, in that sense, I'd expect programming skills to be useful, due to the amount of problem solving ability that comes with coding.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    22. Re:Wow by Elad+Alon · · Score: 1
      Wow, does that include Fortan and Cobal?
      Cobal - no. Cabal - I'm not at liberty to say.
      --
      News for merdes. Shit that matters.
      Ask me about my sig.
    23. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, but being bilingual in programming languages seems to delay the loss of virginity by about 4 years.

    24. Re:Wow by Teddy+Beartuzzi · · Score: 1

      HA! A weak trap attempt. You thought I'd post correcting 'right' to 'write', but I'm too smart to fall for that, then I'd just be yet another bitching wannabee...

      D'oh!

    25. Re:Wow by Chapter80 · · Score: 1

      Ha, no I didn't notice that FORTRAN was misspelled (must have been early!). I did notice that I misspelled scary though! ah... typos are OK, but I think the industry has fallen from Grace if we have forgotten the origins of COBOL (and the old punch card hopper).

    26. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Senile 'dementia' is a PSYCHOLOGICAL problem, and nothing else. It is brought about by an elderly person realising they are old and going to die, being unable to face their loneliness, which they have spent their entire lives avoiding, and trying to get other people to 'look after them'. That is all there is to it. My hypothesis is proved by the FACTS, which is the way that people with 'dementia' act - strangely enough, they always act in ways that mean that somebody else has to look after them! Even though they're physically capable of looking after themselves.

    27. Re:Wow by malsdavis · · Score: 1
      You do realize that makes you a bitching wanna-be nerd, right?

      Not really, I'm stating about who the website is now primarily aimed at, it doesn't mean that 100% of people who view the webiste are bitching wanna-be nerds, just the target audience.
  2. Cause or effect? by kestasjk · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Does learning another language make you less susceptible to dementia, or does being the sort of person who learns another language mean that you already were less susceptible?

    It would be interesting to compare the dementia rates in bilingual people in unilingual(?) cultures and bilingual people in bilingual cultures, but it looks like this study was limited to a couple of hundred people at a single mental health clinic.

    --
    // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
    1. Re:Cause or effect? by CRCulver · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Does learning another language make you less susceptible to dementia, or does being the sort of person who learns another language mean that you already were less susceptible?

      The majority of the world is bilingual or multilingual. Especially in the countries refered to as Third World, people are forced to pick up at least one second language in childhood, and often continue learning languages throughout life. John Edward's Multilingualism (New York: Penguin, 1996) is an eye-opening introduction to the field. It seems really strange now to hear well-off Americans complain that learning languages is "too hard" and requires special talent, when one can plainly see that any poor and uneducated peasant does it succesfully and without complaint.

      So when you say "being the sort of person who learns another language", I hope you aren't suggesting that only language nerds with special brains do so. Multilingualism is a general human phenomenon, it's people in the West who are usual.

    2. Re:Cause or effect? by alshithead · · Score: 1

      I think that it has more to do with using more of your brain. Kids do better learning 2nd, 3rd, or other languages...whether they are spoken or otherwise. You can include maths and music. It's more about stretching your brain's abilities. If you stretch earlier, you promote more pathways and therefore help prevent problems in the future. There probably is still a genetic aspect for dementia of all types but, the more you expand, the less or later the impact.

      --
      I reserve the right to think for myself. Others' opinions are optional. Puppy on lap = typos...not illiteracy.
    3. Re:Cause or effect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Dude not everything can be answered with a smart ass "cause or effect". Think just a tiny bit for
      yourself at what you are asking. The sort of person who is able to learn another language is
      called homo sapien.
      This place is populated by more and more semi educated retards daily.

    4. Re:Cause or effect? by metlin · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Actually, born and having spent my formative years in India, I can attest to this.

      While growing up, I lived in a few states, which entailed not only learning to speak the local language, but also read and write the said language. The good news is that once you've gotten the hang of it, it's not particularly hard.

      Usually, folks learn the language of the state they are in, they learn Hindi (the national language) and of course English since it is the language of education and commerce, owing to the fact that we were a British colony.

      End result? I am quite conversant in reading and writing several languages (speak 5 and read/write 4 - of course, I can read serious literature in only three of these languages). And do note that when I mean different languages, I mean languages - not dialects (I have noticed that a lot of folks tend to mistake all Indian languages as being dialects - they are not, and depending on which part of the country the language originated, they even have different linguistic roots).

      I have also found that having learnt the skills for picking up languages as a child, it is a lot easier for me to learn a new language than it is for most people who've not had such an opportunity.

      A most equitable bargain, I'd say.

    5. Re:Cause or effect? by ravenshrike · · Score: 1

      Except they don't. The children do, but that's because if exposed frequently to both languages before the age of 5, they are relatively easy to pick up. However, there are plenty of adult peasants who find it hard. The difference is their livelihood can depend on it, so they buckle down and learn.

    6. Re:Cause or effect? by kestasjk · · Score: 1
      So when you say "being the sort of person who learns another language", I hope you aren't suggesting that only language nerds with special brains do so. Multilingualism is a general human phenomenon, it's people in the West who are usual.
      When I said "does being the sort of person who learns another language mean that you already were less susceptible?" I should have said "does being the sort of person who learns another language in a unilingual culture mean that you already were less susceptible?".

      You're right that there's nothing special about being bilingual in a bilingual culture; but, as you said, it is much rarer in unilingual cultures.

      Cheesy analogy time: It's like a study concluding that "owning a car makes you live longer", after measuring the life expectancy of people with and without cars in Zimbabwe. The fact that you own a car might be a symptom of something else, and that something else is affecting life expectancy.
      For the study to be taken seriously it would have to show that the only factor influencing life expectancy is car ownership.
      --
      // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
    7. Re:Cause or effect? by edibleplastic · · Score: 1

      It seems really strange now to hear well-off Americans complain that learning languages is "too hard" and requires special talent, when one can plainly see that any poor and uneducated peasant does it succesfully and without complaint.

      To be fair, most of the bilinguals you refer to learned their second language very early in age. There is an enormous amount of research that shows that it is much easier to acquire the syntax and phonology of a foreign language the earlier in life you begin learning it. The vast majority of Americans are not brought up in a bilingual environment and so begin learning their second language later in life, probably towards the end of the "critical period" for language, making it much more difficult to acquire. So it has nothing to do with economics and all to do with the age one begins learning another language.

    8. Re:Cause or effect? by RealGrouchy · · Score: 1
      Multilingualism is a general human phenomenon, it's people in the West who are usual.

      *unusual

      - RG>
      --
      Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
    9. Re:Cause or effect? by svunt · · Score: 1

      Effect. "Lifelong bilingualism" specifically precludes the intellectually curious & agile. Lifelong bilinguals are generally people raised in a bilingual home, so the children of immigrants, residents of polylingual societies, etc. People smart enough to want to learn another language when they're infants would have to be a teensy bit rare, I'd guess.

    10. Re:Cause or effect? by Rakshasa+Taisab · · Score: 1

      If you mean West as in north-west of the Atlantic ocean, sure.

      But in Europa, pretty much everyone speaks at least 2 languages, and learning a 3rd in high-school is mandatory in most countries. Sure, not everyone learns the 3rd one well... But monolingualism is pretty rare here.

      Hell, I'm on my 5th language and I've never been any good at learning them.

      --
      - These characters were randomly selected.
    11. Re:Cause or effect? by Riktov · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Oh, right. The editorial review board of Neuropsychologia , the medical journal publishing this study, is still incapable of clearly distinguishing between causality and correlation, after 40 years of publishing scientific research.

      I myself notice a link between Slashdot readers who read about a study claiming something that they don't want to believe, and those readers then attempting to dismiss them through trite posts about basic scientific practice. I can't say whether that link is causality or mere correlation, though.

    12. Re:Cause or effect? by Matthias+Wiesmann · · Score: 1

      That would explain why places like Switzerland or Singapore are so poor...

    13. Re:Cause or effect? by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Multilingualism is a general human phenomenon, it's people in the West who are usual.

      If by "in the West" you mean USA/Canada. Most people in Europe speak at least one language in addition to their native tounge, mostly english but combinations like german/polish, latvian/russian and a bunch of other variations exist too.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    14. Re:Cause or effect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tell me about it... I was bilingual by age 5, by age 12, I'd learned english and french as well, picked up another two fluently while in high school. People still look at me funny when I tell them I learned english at the age of 11 and speak 5 other languages. White folks are weird. Time to learn another language, but i'm lazy, I figure I'll learn 4 more to make an even 10 before i die.

    15. Re:Cause or effect? by o2sd · · Score: 3, Funny

      People still look at me funny when I tell them I learned english at the age of 11 and speak 5 other languages. White folks are weird.

      Reminds me of a Swiss guy I met in Beijing. He was already tri-lingual by the age of 16 (Swiss French, Italian, German), then learned English and Spanish after high school before going to Taiwan to study Mandarin Chinese. He was in Beijing for sight seeing before heading to Moscow to learn Russian.

      And yet hardly a month goes by without another idiotic article in the paper describing how difficult it is to learn a second language. White people ... sheesh.

      --
      - Nothing to see hear.
    16. Re:Cause or effect? by pafrusurewa · · Score: 1
      It would be interesting to compare the dementia rates in bilingual people in unilingual(?) cultures and bilingual people in bilingual cultures, but it looks like this study was limited to a couple of hundred people at a single mental health clinic.
      Well, sure, in some countries people speak multiple languages because they need them every day. In other countries it's more about education than culture. In many European countries you can get by if you only speak one language (many people do) yet most people who made it through school will speak at least one or two foreign languages.

      BTW, lame old joke related to your use of "unilingual":

      What do you call someone who speaks two languages? - Bilingual.
      What do you call someone who speaks three languages? - Trilingual.
      What do you call someone who speaks one language? - American.
    17. Re:Cause or effect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But that doesn't invalidate the argument.

      The original question was "is it being bilingual that has the effect, or is it being the sort of person that learns another language that makes the difference".
      The argument to that was that there is nothing special about learning another language. There's no such thing as the "type" of person.
      And even if there is, the "type" of person that learns another language in a unilingual society is rare enough to have little effect on the study. It's reasonable to assume that most of the multi lingual people in the study would have been unilingual had they been brought up somewhere like Australia.

        - as a side note, I find it funny that everyone talks about the USA as being the example of a unilingual society, on my couple of trips to the country I had a harder time getting by with English than I did in Germany or the Czech republic. Although I guess that kind of proves the point, just from a different direction. the USA is kind of bi-unilingual as a whole. You either speak Spanish, or you speak English, but probably not both.

    18. Re:Cause or effect? by zoftie · · Score: 1

      When there is the will there is a way.

    19. Re:Cause or effect? by rynthetyn · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's not difficult to learn other languages, it just requires effort. Problem is, since much of the rest of the world learns English in school, Americans don't feel the need to bother with other languages. We could fix that problem by starting foreign language education in early elementary school, actually, that's what we should do, but there's too much political baggage that goes along with language for that to happen any time soon.

      The thing to note though, is that depending on the languages, it's not hard to be multi-lingual. It's not that big a deal for someone to speak French, Italian, and Spanish, they're all basically the same language. I speak Spanish, have never studied either Italian or French, but I can understand spoken Italian and can read it, and I can read French and I don't consider myself to be particularly talented in the language learning department. Being able to speak completely unrelated languages is another thing altogether, and that does take work, though the more languages you know, the easier it becomes to learn more. And, back to the original article, the more connections you make in your brain, even when you start losing some, you're still ahead of the poor schlubs who never built those connections in the first place.

      --
      Eagles may soar, but weasles don't get sucked into jet engines...
    20. Re:Cause or effect? by zoftie · · Score: 1

      canandian eh' :)

    21. Re:Cause or effect? by bursch-X · · Score: 1

      You're so spot-on. I always have to find that only very few Americans, even abroad, do speak a second language, whereas in Europe having command of less than three languages is pretty sub-par.

      The extreme case in India -- sometimes referred to as the 4th world (depending on your caste I presume) -- most people speak 5 languages due to the fact that there are so many languages in the country and many are not even related to each other. I guess learning languages is mainly a factor of how many cultures you stumble across (and your will to get involved in these cultures).

      --
      There are two rules for success:
      1. Never tell everything you know.
    22. Re:Cause or effect? by Monkelectric · · Score: 3, Informative
      It seems really strange now to hear well-off Americans complain that learning languages is "too hard" and requires special talent

      Learn some neurology then. The brain looses its plasticity for languages after the age of about 14. It *IS* extremely difficult to acquire a language after that age -- and if you do it is actually stored in a physically different location in your brain than your primary language.

      This is the same reason that people who don't learn to read after a certain age almost *NEVER* learn to read.

      The human brain has windows during which it is most receptive to acquiring new abilities. After those windows expire it is very difficult and in some cases impossible to acquire those abilities.

      So blame the American educational system. Most language courses are offered at the freshman level of high school -- about the age of 15.

      --

      Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley

    23. Re:Cause or effect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Starting second-language learning in elementary school isn't enough, there still has to be some kind of real incentive to learn it. Look at Canada, where since the 70s (and before?) kids have been taught French starting in elementary school - and yet most can barely hold a conversation when they graduate from high school and a few years later they're completely hopeless. Adults or children, if a person doesn't need to know something and doesn't have an everyday use for it, only a few will get any good at it. Learning language doesn't require superior intelligence, but it requires a stronger motivation than school alone can generally provide.

    24. Re:Cause or effect? by Eivind · · Score: 1
      In the USA you mean.

      OK, so speaking 2 or more languages natively tends to require having parents from different cultures and/or living in an area with a heavy mixup. But just about everyone learns atleast 2 or more languages in their childhood where I come from.

      Infact, you start learning your second language at age 6 at the latest, and most start learning their third when they're like 12-13, there's been suggestions of making that mandatory as part of compulsory school, but this far it's voluntarily. Those with an interest in languages speak 4 languages before leaving high-school.

      True, not everyone is fluent in all their languages, but it's rare to meet someone who doesn't have good communication-skills in atleast 2 languages. (the 3rd is often weaker).

      I speak Norwegian, English and German fluently, and have basic understanding of French, Icelandic and Dutch (that is ignoring Swedish and Danish since they're very similiar to Norwegian so are understood with little effort by most Norwegians even without training) My wife speaks Polish and German natively, Russian, English and Norwegian fluently and have basic understanding of French and Japanese.

      And here's the thing: None of us are language-nerds or consider ourselves out of the ordinary. Infact I'm a computer-programmer that always took the *minimum* amount of language-classes, and my wife studied finance and administration.

      America, on the other hand is downrigth shocking. I know intelligent educated people over there with an above average interest in the world around them that nevertheless speaks english only.

    25. Re:Cause or effect? by tietokone-olmi · · Score: 1

      Have you also noticed that it's easier to pick up other major skills by finding the ways in which their learning is similar to learning a new language? Strange, but true. Explains quite a bit about the Americans, too.

    26. Re:Cause or effect? by Eivind · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      It's not difficult to learn other languages, it just requires effort. Problem is, since much of the rest of the world learns English in school, Americans don't feel the need to bother with other languages.

      I think that's precisely it. It requires motivation, and thats lacking in much of the USA.

      Being motivated to learn other languages requires thinking that the rest of the world *matters* that there's something to be had from better understanding it and communicating with it. If you consider yourself on top-of-the-world and everyone else as merely more or less civilized depending on how close to you they are culturally, then there's no point.

      Speaking a "small" language natively helps. As a Norwegian, for example, you don't have the luxury of being able to travel everywhere in the west and make do with your native language. So anyone who wants to travel knows that they *have* to learn atleast one world-language.

      As an American, it's too easy to think: "English works everywhere, so why bother?"

    27. Re:Cause or effect? by theonetruekeebler · · Score: 1
      There are two things going on in America.

      First, most of us can travel a thousand miles in any (land) direction and not have to switch languages. In other words, there's no point in bothering. Beyond that, there are so few opportunities to exercise a second language that even for those of us who bothered (French and German in my case), it atrophies from disuse unless one finds special settings.

      Second, World War I. Up until the 1910s, there were many multilingual communities in the United States, and still quite a few where English speakers were the exception, not the rule. This was particularly the case with German and Norwegian. When the U.S. entered the war, it did so with an anti-German fervor that was downright rabid. The Espionage Act and Sedition Act created an environment so hostile that the post office refused to deliver German-language mail and speaking German in public could land you in jail. Congress even refused to seat an elected member, in part because of his German heritage. In this environment, multilingualism was severely discouraged and America was well on its way into what has been nearly a century of monolinguistic, monocultural pressure.

      After WWI, mass communications such as radio and television, nearly all in one language, sealed the deal.

      --
      This is not my sandwich.
    28. Re:Cause or effect? by niktemadur · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It's not difficult to learn other languages, it just requires effort.

      You missed two crucial elements here, my good man: exposure and practice.

      I once travelled alone through Italy and France for a couple of months, and before I knew it, I was having conversations in Italian, not fluently of course, but enough to get by and then some (I got invited to a couple of parties, etc). If I had travelled with a friend, I would have spoken my native language (Spanish, similar but not identical to Italian by any means) with that person instead of making the effort to connect with the locals, so in a way, necessity became my crash course, and I was astounded by how fast I'd picked the language up.

      Similarly, I went to France right after that and it took me about a week to begin constructing my own proper sentences, even though my accent must have been grating to french ears, but the effort was appreciated and on a couple of occasions I was treated to drinks in bars, courtesy of parisians! It was a super cool exercise.

      However, sadly and predictably, about a month after I returned home I'd forgotten most of what I learned during my trip.

      Similarly, my now wife lived in Germany for a year, and a couple of years after she came back to her hometown, she'd forgotten most of what she spoke exclusively for nearly a year. She recently took a refresher course with immediate results, but now that the course is over, she doesn't have anybody to practice with, so she's forgetting it again! Getting rusty, so to speak.

      On a humorous note: I once met a guy from Chile who'd been living in the US for a couple of months. He hadn't picked up English very well yet, but he also hadn't practiced his native Spanish, so I tried to have a conversation with the guy and quickly realized he spoke no languages! Half an hour later his Spanish had fully returned, so I got to witness the language part of the mind (so to speak) in action at point-blank range.

      Most High School students in the US may take a language course, but while in Europe you drive a few hours and find yourself exposed to the stimuli of a foreign language, in the US there is a sort of language isolation, except for Spanish in the southwestern states, Florida and a few major cities, but many latinos in the US prefer to speak English anyway, and if they speak in Spanish it's like a sound in the background for most white folks, so there is neither much stimuli nor incentive for the average US citizen to be bilingual.

      OK, my point is this: take an average US citizen who thinks it difficult to learn languages, place him/her in a european-like environment, and that person will become adept at languages, sooner or later, to his/her astonishment.

      --
      Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
    29. Re:Cause or effect? by jlehtira · · Score: 1

      I think there's a strong reason to assume learning languages is the cause for less dementia. It isn't surprising that if you do practice, your brains develop. For what I know, the most certain way to catch dementia is to go all passive and sit around the telly when you grow old, while active old people grow very old without losing their wits.

    30. Re:Cause or effect? by CRCulver · · Score: 1

      (that is ignoring Swedish and Danish since they're very similiar to Norwegian so are understood with little effort by most Norwegians even without training)

      But isn't this an urban myth? When I've been at meetings with a mixed European crowd the Scandinavians, even when they are off on their own in some corner, speak English amongst themselves, claiming that they can't understand each other's languages much. It seems this is true even speaking of the written languages, I notice that Pia Tafdrup's poetry has to be translated into Swedish, the Danish original isn't accessible to Swedes.

    31. Re:Cause or effect? by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      It's not difficult to learn other languages, it just requires effort.

      I think you need to learn some vocabulary.

      difficult
      adj.
      1. Hard to do or accomplish; demanding considerable effort or skill; arduous: "To entertain is far more difficult than to enlighten" (Anthony Burgess).

    32. Re:Cause or effect? by zsau · · Score: 1

      but it looks like this study was limited to a couple of hundred people at a single mental health clinic.

      In psychology, where an awful lot of research is based on a dozen American psychology undergrads, doing it for extra credit,[1] a couple of hundred people, anywhere, is an awfully large sample set.

      [1]: I have never understood how these researchers have got ethics approval to require students to be subjects in research/grant them extra credit. Especially considering that apparently scientific ethics in Australia, where I've studied psychology, is usually about ten years behind the situation in America...

      --
      Look out!
    33. Re:Cause or effect? by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      Speak for yourself.

      - Brit who only learnt French at GCSE level, and got a B.

    34. Re:Cause or effect? by devonbowen · · Score: 1

      Absolutely. But when you say "West" I think you mean "America". I'd say the average number of languages spoken by my friends that live outside of America is somewhere around 3. And it's the Americans in that group that bring the average down since most of us are only effectively bilingual. However, for those friends that live in America it's exactly 1. (No, sorry, that year of Spanish in high school doesn't count.)

      Devon

    35. Re:Cause or effect? by oliderid · · Score: 1

      Well if you limit yourself to European languages:

      There are lot of words shared between these groups. for example I speak a bit of Dutch...And surprisingly it helps me to understand a basic text in German. Since I know Dutch and French (my native tongue), English is easier to learn because well...it is beautiful mix of Germanic & Latin words. You start to make links between these languages...You can almost feel the dead languages (Platte Deutsch-old saxon, Latin) that lie behind them.

      Languages aren't so complex to learn (except the first one you plan to learn). The biggest difficulty is pronunciation & the other is to practice it (languages can be easily forgotten. I learnt Latin at school, of course I have never practiced it. I forgot everything).

      It is always funny to remember that all these languages can be traced back to the Roman Empire and German invasions :-).

    36. Re:Cause or effect? by CmdrGravy · · Score: 1

      Well done ! I "learnt" French & German and got an E and a D respectively at GCSE and I think I was lucky with the D.

      I was under the impression that the speaking part of both exams was mostly going be judging the quality of your French or German accent so I had studied 'Allo 'Allo and various war films extensively but tragically during the exam it became clear that you needed to use some of the foreign words as well and speak so you could be understood.

      Amazingly, now over 10 years later I still can't speak a word of either language.

    37. Re:Cause or effect? by Sark666 · · Score: 1

      I find this subject very interesting. What other areas fall into this? Learning an instrument? Learning to type?

    38. Re:Cause or effect? by gedeco · · Score: 1

      Above poster gives a accurate description on historical view regarding languages.

      One thing to add:

      The current language frontier, between Dutch and French speaking people dates from the time of the Roman Empire.

      You can almost draw a line from Tongeren(Tongres) to Wervik (Wervique), passing by other old Roman cities, like Doornik (Tournai).

      All over this frontier, you'll find ancient Roman military cities who prevented the second german wave to enter the Empire.

    39. Re:Cause or effect? by drsquare · · Score: 1
      It seems really strange now to hear well-off Americans complain that learning languages is "too hard" and requires special talent, when one can plainly see that any poor and uneducated peasant does it succesfully and without complaint.
      In a way those peasants do have special circumstances, that is living in a place where several languages are used. Look in the post below for instance where in India three languages are used side by side.

      It would be impossible for me to learn another language as I live in England where there is only English. Even if I did learn another language, as I'd have no-one to speak it to I'd just lose it as quickly as I learnt it.
    40. Re:Cause or effect? by drsquare · · Score: 2, Insightful
      We could fix that problem by starting foreign language education in early elementary school, actually, that's what we should do, but there's too much political baggage that goes along with language for that to happen any time soon.
      It wouldn't make a difference. Say for instance you taught American schoolkids German from an early age. By the time they leave school they're pretty good at it. Then they leave school, and as they live in America they never use German at all, and several years later they've forgotten every bit they ever learnt.

      Learning a foreign language is only useful if you're actually going to use it day in day out. For an English speaker in an English country, this isn't an issue.
    41. Re:Cause or effect? by CRCulver · · Score: 1

      You can almost feel the dead languages (Platte Deutsch-old saxon, Latin) that lie behind them.

      Plattdeutsch is still very much alive, just used on a local scale since wider communication is done in Standard German. However, the European Union has given much money to further publishing in Plattsdeutsch.

    42. Re:Cause or effect? by Viol8 · · Score: 1

      "English is easier to learn because well...it is beautiful mix of Germanic & Latin words."

      Thats because english isn't a pure language (ok , none are but english even less so). Its actually a hybrid language made up of anglo-saxon , norman french and a bit of old norse. Thats why so many words in english are either identical or very similar to french. Most native english speakers find old english spoken before 1066 almost unintelligable whereas 11th century norman french is still fairly comprehensible to most modern french speakers (I've been told).

    43. Re:Cause or effect? by Eivind · · Score: 1
      No. It ain't a myth that the languages are similar. You won't instantly understand every single word if you've had little prior experience with the languages and no training. But you *will* understand the general gist of things and probably 75% of the words if you take care and listen carefully and the person is talking clearly.

      English may still be used, for the simple reason that most Scandinavians have had extensive training and lots of experience with that, so it can feel in some sense "safer" than a more "unknown" language, despite the unknown language being very similar to your mother-tongue.

      Poetry is just about the hardest text possible to really *get* in any language, it frequently uses uncommon words and/or depend on fine nuanses of meaning, english poetry, for example, still give me very little, despite my english being perfectly adequate for most other stuff. I read fiction, I read technical literature, I discuss orally or written without feeling limited by the language at all, but poetry is a different matter alltogether.

    44. Re:Cause or effect? by o'reor · · Score: 1

      Actually, kindergarten (2 y Early bilingualism brings kids an advantage when learning other languages later on.

      --
      In Soviet Russia, our new overlords are belong to all your base.
    45. Re:Cause or effect? by Milton+Waddams · · Score: 1

      Actually, the ability to pick up another language has lots to do with age and very little to do with education or wealth. The best time to learn lots of languages is when you're an infant. Your brain is maturing and learning how to use the articulatory muscles, learning vocabulary and learning how to process audio. If your brain learns language with more than one language, it can adapt to more languages easier later on in life. These 'well-off Americans' that you mention probably grew up with just English. To their brains, language is English so trying to learn a different language requires a bit of acrobatics from their brains. Compared to some Swiss kid whose brain thinks of language as French and English and German and Italian, their brains are much more limber and they'd find it much easier to pick up, say, Spanish later in life.

    46. Re:Cause or effect? by GeckoX · · Score: 1

      Just because you can find the word effort contained within the definition of the word difficult in the dictionary does not mean the two words are interchangeable. I think _you_ need to learn how to use a dictionary.

      The use of those two words in the above post are completely legitimate.

      --
      No Comment.
    47. Re:Cause or effect? by GeckoX · · Score: 2, Informative

      So very very true.

      I went through French immersion, spoke it completely fluently. Partook in exchanges to both Quebec and France, no problem whatsoever. Over 15 years ago now.

      Not a lot of french is spoken in the greater Toronto area, and thus I've lost the ability.

      Now, I am quite certain that if I was thrown into a french speaking environment, I would very likely pick it up again quite quickly. But it's certainly not an ability I can just pull out at my own whim anymore.

      --
      No Comment.
    48. Re:Cause or effect? by risk+one · · Score: 1
      It seems really strange now to hear well-off Americans complain that learning languages is "too hard" and requires special talent

      It's not learning languages that's hard, it's teaching languages. By the time I was 10, my English was good enough to make myself relatively understandable. That was before I was ever taught any in school. I just picked it up from tv. From age 12 to 18, I had mandatory French and German in school, and I still can't read or write either because I never made any effort. If I'd tried to read a book or watch a movie without subtitles every now and then, I'm sure I would have been able to pick it up, but I was a teenager and all the horribly tedious lessons did was condition me against French and German, rather than encourage me to explore the languages for myself.

      The point is that to learn a language, you need to be in contact with it. If you're trying to learn French in America, two hours per week will not do it. You'll have to read books and watch movies, and you have to do it more than just your homework. But then, what teenager is going to voluntarily watch 'Trois Couleurs' if they're being forced to memorize fifty French words each week? I spent about two hours per week in French class, for six years. If, instead, I had used those 480 hours to watch 240 French movies, I would now be able to have a conversation in French, and I would be able to read relatively simple French books. The only thing I have now, is some vague idea of how the grammar works, and a vocabulary of about 25 words.

    49. Re:Cause or effect? by araemo · · Score: 1

      Just one more reason to encourage your kids to take up a second language. It is tons easier to do when your brain is still in 'acquire language' mode.

      Yes, that means you and your partner might need to pick up one yourself and speak it around your toddler. I've also seen studies suggesting that once you've learned two languages(There might be some dependencies here, the languages might need to have significantly different syntax and grammar for this to be true), picking up more later in life is easier. These were more recent studies, so I have no idea if they've been debunked or reinforced or just ignored...

    50. Re:Cause or effect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So when you say "being the sort of person who learns another language", I hope you aren't suggesting that only language nerds with special brains do so.

      No, I think the point he was getting at is that there could be a selection bias here. For instance, I'd expect smart people to choose to learn another language more often than stupid people do. Is the dementia difference caused by the language or the difference in intelligence?

      Of course, I've oversimplified, I don't mean "smart" and "stupid" exactly, but rather "flexible-brained people who enjoy learning" and "inflexible-brained people who don't enjoy learning" if you see what I'm getting at.

    51. Re:Cause or effect? by archen · · Score: 1

      she doesn't have anybody to practice with, so she's forgetting it again!

      This is the same problem I had. I learned a bit of German for a while then got burnt out on it and it faded away. Then I learned Japanese to an passable level but found that although I watch Japanese movies/TV I'm tending to still grow more and more rusty. Right now I'm learning Polish because my wife (and her family) is Polish. She thinks I'm crazy because Polish isn't very useful compared to other languages, but my theory is that when I pick up enough Polish I'll be able to converse with her on a regular basis to keep it alive in my mind. I'm hoping I might be able to springboard that and learn a bit of Czech too.

    52. Re:Cause or effect? by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      Nonsense. The primary definition for 'difficult' is basically something that requires considerable effort. It's quite reasonable to say that it's a contradiction in terms to say that something can be one but not the other, unless you specify the meaning of 'difficult' as one of the lesser-used.

    53. Re:Cause or effect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I worked with a guy like your Chilean friend once. He was a Russian who had moved to Israel, so was learning Hebrew. He was also learning English for business purposes. Unfortunately, at the same time he was forgetting Russian (one of the guys on our team was Russian and mentioned how poorly this guy spoke it), and so was basically barely able to communicate in any of three languages. Made working with him rather difficult.

    54. Re:Cause or effect? by oliderid · · Score: 1

      If I may add. It can be traced back to the first wave of German invasion (4th century BC?).

      In the 1th century AC, Tongeren and other cities were inhabited by Belgae tribes and under the rule of the Roman empire (since Caesar). So the Roman empire included the actual language frontier.

      These northern Belgae tribes were already a mix of Celtic and Germanic culture. Eburon (the tribe who used to live in Limburg...Tongeren comes from Tungrorum which is a latin name) were celtic not German IMHO. Nervians (actual brabant) were Belgae tribes but with a Germanic/celtic culture. (At least that was my history teatcher told me).

      In the south, Tribes were purely celtic: Volques (Walha in ancient german...It means stranger. It gave a name to the frenchseapking people of belgium: Walloon (wallonie has been invented in the XIXth century based on this). they have been wiped out by Frankish and other German tribes (Goth, Vandals, etc.)Some Volques later moved down to the south. But latin remained (and of course survivors of the previous celtic tribes) and century after century it became a dialect.

      The linguistic border has also moved since then. For example there are lot of towns, villages and so on in the Frenchspeaking part (mainly brabant) which have "Romanised" German names (Wavre, La Hulpe, etc.)...And they were part of the Roman empire. It happenned also In the south (Arlon) where a german dialect is still spoken (or survived).

      So as we see ethnicity isn't really the only red line that you should follow. Culture is also important. Some people who used be celtic became German, Celtic became Latin, German became latin, latin became German and so on. This is a big melting pot and the explanation that the actual language frontier date from the Roman Empire isn't totally accurate.

    55. Re:Cause or effect? by Chrisje · · Score: 1

      Hm. I am one of those weird Europeans. My current linguistical curriculum looks as follows:

      Dutch/English/German/Swedish: fluent, do make the odd spelling boo-boo.
      Norwegian: Fluent reading/understanding, crap at pronouncing. Jolly good fun though.
      Danish: Can read it.
      Hebrew: Just learnt the alphabet, can swear in traffic quite well.

      If you then look at an American friend of mine, gifted, intelligent chap in all manner but languages. He spent 5 years in the UK and still doesn't like the lingo. He's lived in Sweden for 12 years, understands some of it, speaks crappily and writes none.

      This is a case in point that disproves that notion. There are Millions of people in all countries that speak horribly accented or maimed versions of the language they had to learn. A certain degree of eloquence and fluency must be one of the prerequisites needed for calling someone adept at languages. Really. Adept *does* still mean "highly skilled or well-trained", right?

      Coming back to that, I am a *weird* European, because many people in Europe speak *their* language and rather crappy English. So even Europeans don't get *adept* at languages in a European environment.

      Similarly you can bet your bottom dollar that not *everyone* in India is quadru-lingual or even bi-lingual with flair. Lord knows I have to speak to Indians sometimes that are in educated tech positions who couldn't communicate their way out of a paper bag in English. They really rape, mangle and slaughter that language and leave it bleeding on the ground. Merriam-Webster's definition of Bilingual is: "using or able to use two languages especially with equal fluency", and I think they are on the money there.

      Surely exposure, practice and effort count. God knows I could have learnt better Hebrew if I hadn't spent my time playing with my bollocks instead. But in the end, talent is required. And not everyone has it. And of those that have it, not all use it. The result: There probably are not that bloody many truly bilingual people, let alone tri- or quadru-lingual.

    56. Re:Cause or effect? by nblender · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I can support this as well. I was born in Austria and lived there til I was 3. Then moved here where I promptly had to learn english. My parents continued speaking to me in austrian but I would respond in english. Years later, I can still understand german/austrian fine when it is spoken to me but I have trouble making my mouth speak it. In the late 80's, I went there with my wife who didn't speak any german at all so I had to translate. After about 2 days of full immersion, it was like a switch was turned on in my head and I could speak german fluently...

      The strange thing that happened however, was that my brain switched to thinking in german as well so in a restaurant, while translating what the waiter was saying, to my wife, she looked at me like I was an alien. I had just spoken an english sentence but used german construction so it came out all wrong and practically incomprehensible.

      Having not been there in about 10 years, I'm back to being unable to speak german.

    57. Re:Cause or effect? by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      Unusual combinations: an Afghan woman I know speaks norwegian, farsi and some afghan language I'm not sure what's called, but not a word of english, french or german. László Polgár, the father of the Polgár sisters is famous for only speaking hungarian and esperanto.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    58. Re:Cause or effect? by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      I learned english in school in the US northeast, but I live the south now, and can converse easily and fluently with the natives. That's got to count for something.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    59. Re:Cause or effect? by GeckoX · · Score: 1

      It takes effort for a healthy adult to climb a flight of 100 stairs. However, this is not a difficult task to accomplish.

      Some mathematical equations are quite difficult but require very little effort to solve.

      Difficult != Effort. They are not synonymous contrary to what some people here appear to believe.

      --
      No Comment.
    60. Re:Cause or effect? by blugu64 · · Score: 1

      You know that's quite intresting, I grew up on the computer (like many here I suppose). However I cannot 'touch type'. I can however simple place my fingers on a keyboard, and almost instinctively know where to move my hands to type, muscle memory I think they call it (No I'm not looking at the keys and all that). I tried taking a college level typing class and just *couldn't* do it. I can get text into the computer as fast as they wanted, but I simply couldn't use 'home row' and all those other things that typists do that are alien to me.

      --
      "Personal ownership is a hallmark of conservative capitalism. And I don't believe I am entitled to anything that I did n
    61. Re:Cause or effect? by blugu64 · · Score: 1

      "Poetry is just about the hardest text possible to really *get* in any language, it frequently uses uncommon words and/or depend on fine nuanses of meaning, english poetry, for example, still give me very little, despite my english being perfectly adequate for most other stuff."

      Pfft. I am a native english speaker, and english poetry still gives me nothing. :)

      --
      "Personal ownership is a hallmark of conservative capitalism. And I don't believe I am entitled to anything that I did n
    62. Re:Cause or effect? by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1

      > that person will become adept at languages, sooner or later

      It depends (I think) on the person. I know a woman who was raised until age 6 in the Phillipines, moved to Costa Rica with one parent, then to the US with the other, and now she basically speaks no languages -- she can communicate, poorly, in English, Spanish, and Filipino, but can really only write English and even that's pretty hard to read. She is, frankly, not very bright. I don't know how her Filipino is, since I don't speak it, but she claims to not remember it at all; her English and Spanish are both heavily accented and full of basic grammar errors.

      On the opposite end of the spectrum, my grandfather grew up in a bilingual household: his mother spoke Frisian (now a dead language) and his father Danish. They spoke a whole different language as a family: Plautdeutsch, because that's what the locals spoke. At school they taught in Danish and German, so he picked that up, and during WWI, when he was fourteen and serving in the German Army, he learned French and Italian from being stationed there, and finally learned English in his late '20's when he moved here. He never managed to get 'V' and 'W' consistently straight (so he routinely referred to wee-8 engines, which I thought was uproarious) and had a little trouble with 'j' but generally spoke english beautifully, and wrote perfectly, considering it was his sixth or seventh language.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    63. Re:Cause or effect? by darkwhite · · Score: 1

      Wow. Just wow.

      As much as I dislike Elsevier for their access policy, and as much as I'm aware of their propensity for publishing math that takes hours per page to understand, I've never seen an unprofessional article from them. Your hubris in insulting this journal's board and reviewers and the authors is astounding.

      Do you think these people are amateurs, or dumb? Do you think they don't know how to de-bias medical surveys, both methodologically and statistically? Do you think they're prone to putting their names and their institutions' names (UToronto, Mt. Sinai) on bad research? Do you even know any of the statistical techniques used to remove confounding factors from surveys and tests?

      Have you even read the abstract, let alone the article? If not, how the hell can you level an accusation like this against professional scientists? If you'd bothered to read the article, you'd see that they devote a total of about 3 pages, including most of the discussion, to addressing confounding factors. They present some pretty strong arguments that there are none that are statistically significant, including covariance analyses on MMSE scores, gender, education, employment, immigration data, nationality, cultural differences, and a bunch of others. Even after doing all this, they still give this disclaimer:

      the present report should be treated as suggestive rather than as definitive

      and the rest of the hype is the usual journalism.

      These people have put hard work into making this good science, and you dismiss them and the editors as incompetents with a single sentence. What a fucktard. Who the fuck do you think you are?

      --

      [an error occurred while processing this directive]
    64. Re:Cause or effect? by darkwhite · · Score: 1

      Oh, damn! Should have read the parent for context.

      Got so annoyed by the posters above you suggesting that the authors don't know their science, that I managed to miss your sarcasm.

      Sorry about the misdirected wrath :)

      --

      [an error occurred while processing this directive]
    65. Re:Cause or effect? by christophe · · Score: 1

      I had just spoken an english sentence but used german construction so it came out all wrong and practically incomprehensible. Same problem here with some German constructions contaminating my English, and, to my own astonishment, my French (mother language).
      --
      Christophe (Don't hesitate to point out my spelling and grammar mistakes, I want to learn - Thanks).
    66. Re:Cause or effect? by LuisAnaya · · Score: 2, Interesting
      :).

      Yeap, I do not know, I was taking English classes from Kinder through College in Puerto Rico. I knew enough English to ask for an orange juice when I went to Disney World. I was seven years old, and in '74, whites were the majority in Florida.

      Today hispanics consits of 20% of the US population. Whites are still complaining about people speaking spanish on the streets.

      Get the hint... carry a spanish phrasebook, y evite la senilidad.

      --
      Vi havas e-poston.
    67. Re:Cause or effect? by christophe · · Score: 1

      Similarly, I went to France right after that and it took me about a week to begin constructing my own proper sentences, even though my accent must have been grating to french ears, but the effort was appreciated We French people like to be a bit flattered sometimes :-) Anyway, I took it as basic courtesy to learn the basic words of the local language when visiting another country. When in Rome...
      --
      Christophe (Don't hesitate to point out my spelling and grammar mistakes, I want to learn - Thanks).
    68. Re:Cause or effect? by gbalaji · · Score: 0

      Funny! I think 'white folks' are the most voluntary learners of languages! Learning a language when its not forced down your throat by the academia or the society is not so easy. Being a fellow Indian, I can converse in 6 languages. Of these, I learnt 3 in school and picked up 3 more from my neighbors. But after having spent 3 years in the US Southwest, I barely understand few words in Spanish.

    69. Re:Cause or effect? by K-Man · · Score: 1

      Bilingualism just means that, when you're old and people hear you babbling incoherently, they assume you're talking in a different language and take 2-3 years longer to recognize that you're nuts.

      --
      ---- "If we have to go on with these damned quantum jumps, then I'm sorry that I ever got involved" - Erwin Schrodinger
    70. Re:Cause or effect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True, but sometimes trying to speak the language can be more of an obstruction if you do it badly enough :-)

      Even for all the years I took French, I managed to butcher "Je voudrais acheté une boutaille de l'eau." badly enough that I remember the poor shopkeeper being confused as hell. (Note to self: it's more like 'boo-tie duh low' NOT 'bwat de lou').

      Still, I wish I was more able to practice it, because my vocabulary is shrinking with time. I can think in French sentences without translating them, but I don't know enough to express very complex thoughts :/

    71. Re:Cause or effect? by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      Time is finite. Learning a language at any age takes a lot of time. Colloquially, "takes much time" == "hard". You can't dispute that learning foreign languages is hard. In the judgment of many, the finite amount of time you have at school is better spent learning economically valuable skills rather than valueless foreign language skills.

      Even with studies like this, I don't think this is a reason to learn a language I will use maybe once in my life on a foreign vacation. It is most likely that the mechanism for improving mental health is not specific to language. I imagine we will eventually see a study that links strategy video games to good mental health. I would rather play games in my retirement than memorize French verb conjugation. And until retirement, I would rather learn math and science than memorizing the arbitrary genders of all the nouns. It likely has similar effects on health.

      In short, learning languages other than English is still a waste of time.

      P.S. I love your sig.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    72. Re:Cause or effect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The sheer arrogance dripping from that comment... sheesh.. it's positively SCARY!!

    73. Re:Cause or effect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Christ, could you have received a more upright British English education? Even your typed text sounds stiff!

      You are hereby banned from using the words jolly, rather, 'god/lord knows', and bollocks for a period of 1 week. You can keep 'bet your bottom dollar'.

    74. Re:Cause or effect? by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      Care to expand on that? Or are you a "troll and run" type if coward?

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    75. Re:Cause or effect? by rynthetyn · · Score: 1

      It's definitely true that speaking a "small" language helps. When my brother lived in India, pretty much all of his friends were at least trilingual. They spoke their tribal languages, Hindi, and English, and most of them spoke English better than Hindi. My brother is fluent in Hindi (his friends swore up and down that he speaks it better than they do, and it's their country), but living in Delhi about the only times he had to use Hindi was when he helped him in bargaining. His friends all preferred to use English because, as I said, they speak English better than Hindi and their first languages are only spoken in small areas. They have to learn at least three languages to get by, but since the average American doesn't travel beyond US borders, outside of South Florida and parts of Texas and California where speaking Spanish is useful, there's no incentive to bother with a language you're never going to use.

      --
      Eagles may soar, but weasles don't get sucked into jet engines...
    76. Re:Cause or effect? by rynthetyn · · Score: 1

      Good points. I was in Spain for a week and a half, and since the people I was with were all bilingual, about 95% of the time I was hearing nothing but Spanish and in just that week and a half my one year of college Spanish went from so-so to getting by pretty well. My Spanish is rusty again now, but I know if I hung out in an all Spanish environment for any length of time it would all come back. The funny thing on that trip to Spain was the one person in my group was a native Central American Spanish speaker who'd lived in the US for years. The two languages mustn't have been separated in his brain because he'd accidentally use English to answer a question asked in Spanish and not realize why the person he was responding to had a blank look on their face.

      --
      Eagles may soar, but weasles don't get sucked into jet engines...
    77. Re:Cause or effect? by Eivind · · Score: 1
      Yeah.

      But on the other hand, that doesn't explain it all. It explains, partially atleast, why the average Norwegian knows english better than the average American knows their second language (excluding the spanish-talking part of the USA).

      But it doesn't explain at *all* why it's more common to speak *3* languages fluently in Norway than it is to speak *2* in the USA. I mean, if knowing english serves as a demotivator -- stopping you from wanting to learn more (since it works "everywhere"), then what motivates Norwegian (german, swedish, finnish, whatever) kids for learning further languages *after* english ?

    78. Re:Cause or effect? by rynthetyn · · Score: 1

      I think that once you speak a second language and know it can be done, you're more inclined to at least attempt to learn a third.

      --
      Eagles may soar, but weasles don't get sucked into jet engines...
    79. Re:Cause or effect? by Eivind · · Score: 1
      Fun theory :-)

      So, Americans don't bother to learn language 2, because they think english alone "works".

      Europeans, on the other hand, learn english because they realice they "need to", and once they *have* mastered it, they conclude that languages are doable, and go on to learn a third language despite already knowing english.

      I still think there's more to it, Americans seem to be rather introspective in general (on average, there's always exceptions offcourse!) -- not just when it comes to languages. There seem to be a relatively low fraction of foreign culture, less reporting on what goes on abroad and so on. But I'm sure the effect you mention has part of the blame.

    80. Re:Cause or effect? by rynthetyn · · Score: 1

      Well, the whole having most of a continent to ourselves with only Canada and Mexico to keep us company tends to contribute to an isolationist attitude. People living in Europe don't have to travel anywhere near the distances to interact with their neighbors than Americans have to. If traffic's good and there aren't any traffic cops to stop me for speeding, it takes me 4 hours just to get out of my own state, and a good 8-10 hour drive for me to get to our state capital (as a matter of contrast, it took about that long to go by bus from Sofia, Bulgaria to Istanbul, Turkey). A European hops in his car and drives 8 or 10 hours, there's a good chance he's in another country. I hop in my car and drive 8 or 10 hours and I end up in Georgia or Alabama. Just the sheer landmass we're talking about and the cost of travel to get outside of the country tends to keep people in a bubble. And, while the cost of transatlantic travel isn't that bad (depending on how you swing it, it's cheaper that a trip to Disney World), the perception of cost is enough to keep people from even considering it, and without the prospect of possibly using a second or third language some day, people don't see the value in putting in the effort. To put it in economic terms, people in the US see the opportunity costs associated with learning a new language to be too high in relation to the benefits.

      --
      Eagles may soar, but weasles don't get sucked into jet engines...
    81. Re:Cause or effect? by Eivind · · Score: 1
      Agreed. For central Europe this is indeed the case. I lived near Berlin for a few years, and if I sat down in my car for a day I could visit any of the following countries:
      • Germany 0 hours.
      • Poland 0.5 hours.
      • Austria ~4-5 hours
      • Switzerland ~6-7 hours
      • Netherland ~6-7 hours
      • Denmark ~5 hours
      • Sweden ~7 hours
      • Checkoslovakia (however you guys spell that!) ~5 hours

      That ain't so in Norway where I grew up though. From the west coast where I grew up it's like ~7-8 hours to the next closest country, and then that's only Sweden which ain't really much different from Norway culture/languagelike. If you want anything other than Sweden, you're looking at a multi-day drive. From northern parts of Norway its worse, Sweden is close there too (but that's like Canada to parts of the USA, less different actually since Canada atleast has french parts), but other than that it's like literally 2000 miles or so to drive to reach central europe, and the roads aren't 3-lane highways but more like 2-lane roads with 80km/h speedlimit for the most part. Just for visiting Oslo you'd need a *week*. (so noone does that, planes are where its at)

      On the other hand, I had a penpal in central Belgium. She claimed that from where she lived, she could visit any of the neighbouring countries in a day --by bike. So I guess my answer is: It depends. For much of Europe you're certainly correct.

    82. Re:Cause or effect? by rynthetyn · · Score: 1

      Hey, 7-8 hours to get to another country is still not bad! If you live in Miami, it'll take that long to get out of the state. Of course, you could head south by boat and be in Cuba in a few hours, but most people who are taking boats between Florida and Cuba are trying to get away from Cuba, so that doesn't quite count...

      --
      Eagles may soar, but weasles don't get sucked into jet engines...
    83. Re:Cause or effect? by Eivind · · Score: 1
      True. But as stated, that "other country" is then Sweden, and honestly, Sweden and Norway are more similar than some US-states are (Hawaii and Alaska aren't *that* similar) so it doesn't really feel much like "abroad" to the average Norwegian.

      I absolutely agree that USA is huge. My entire point was that there's people in Europe too that have no real alternative to planes if they want to really go abroad. If you live in Northern norway and want to visit say France, Germany or the UK, you're going to travel by plane, because the alternative is to spend a *week* for the travel alone. And you're likely to pay *more* for Kirkenes-London than you'd pay for Chicago-London or NY-London. (you won't get the jet-lag though, only 1 hour difference)

    84. Re:Cause or effect? by rynthetyn · · Score: 1

      Good point, particularly about the differences between states. Especially considering that I went through far more culture shock going from Florida to rural Georgia for college than I did going to Spain, and in Georgia they at least speak the same language (allegedly)--I'm sure that Sweden and Norway are far more similar than Florida and Georgia, our closest neighbor. Stepped off a plane in Spain having flown from Georgia, felt like I had arrived back home from a foreign country, even though it was the opposite.

      Whatever the case, I like the slogan that Lonely Planet had for a while: "Do your country a favor. Leave."

      --
      Eagles may soar, but weasles don't get sucked into jet engines...
  3. 4 years? by TodMinuit · · Score: 3, Interesting

    And how long does it take for me to become (and stay) bilingual? Is there a net gain, or would my time be better spent elsewhere?

    --
    I wonder if I use bold in my signature, people will notice my posts.
    1. Re:4 years? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I learned english as a second language (in terms of bilinguality) in about a year. This was complete immersion, the only language available including between friends. The only exception was the family.

      I expect the time for adults to become bilingual is a lot longer, maybe from 4 to 10 years living in a environment where you only have the choice of using the language you want to learn. I doubt it's worth going through if your only objective is to delay the onset of dementia, but for many other reasons it's very much worth it.

    2. Re:4 years? by Max+Romantschuk · · Score: 3, Interesting
      And how long does it take for me to become (and stay) bilingual? Is there a net gain, or would my time be better spent elsewhere?


      Aside from the obvious benefits of simply broadening your perspective, learning a new language takes anywhere from 1 to 10 years. (I'm pretty much trilingual with Swedish, Finnish and English, know French pretty well, and some German.) Anybody can do it in one year if placed somewhere where you simply can't speak anything else. If you don't spend a lot of time, on the other hand, it'll take a lot longer. You'll also lose an extra language pertty quickly unless you use it regularly for a decent number of years.

      Then there's the question of what qualifies as bilingual. If you ask me it's the ability to express your thoughts equally and effortlessly in both languages. Otherwise you're just good at another language.

      It's interesting to note that if you're bilingual from age 0 and up it takes a little longer to learn to speak. It's also very important that one parent speaks one language to the kids, and vice versa. Otherwise they'll have a hard time determining what's what. (Our kids are Swedish/Finnish bilingual.)
      --
      .: Max Romantschuk :: http://max.romantschuk.fi/
    3. Re:4 years? by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      It took me three years to learn Resturant Spanish. After I got a job in the computer industry, I totally forgot about it. Not too many oportunities to say "tomato sauce on spaghetti" in Resturant Spanish.

    4. Re:4 years? by harmonica · · Score: 1

      This depends so much on your language skills that an estimate isn't really possible.

      But my advice: learn only if you have some foreseeable use. I learned French as a third language, and I liked it, but it's depressing how much I've forgotten because I have no practice reading or writing French.

    5. Re:4 years? by Jugalator · · Score: 1

      That likely depends on when you start trying to learn. The later, the longer and harder.

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    6. Re:4 years? by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

      And how long does it take for me to become (and stay) bilingual? Is there a net gain, or would my time be better spent elsewhere?

      Depends on so many things, mainly how close the learnt language is to the language you already master, how instensively do you learn it, how hard the language is (easier to learn english than french usually) and most of all, you, your skills and your brain.

      Some spanish speakers can become fluent in french in a few monthes for either reasons, and you can try to learn any language and still be far from fluent after 8 years.

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    7. Re:4 years? by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 1
      Anybody can do it in one year if placed somewhere where you simply can't speak anything else.
      There is a danger in doing this: you can lose your native language before acquiring the new one, effectively reducing you to speaking zero languages.

      No, really, you can. It happened to me and a lot of people I know. Very strange feeling to speak no languages at all. Eventually it comes back, though.
      --
      They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
  4. Research funding needs more scrutiny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After reading the article, I am deeply concerned about the lack of scrutiny on the way these "studies" are carried out. No controls, no methods to specifically rule out the influence of nationality, GEOGRAPHY (important, because environmental factors factor into neurological symptoms), race, gender.... ?? Who funds these studies anyways?

    1. Re:Research funding needs more scrutiny by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Think tanks. No one else has that much time or money to waste on studies.

    2. Re:Research funding needs more scrutiny by audacity242 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And the article clearly states this is preliminary, meaning, this is essentially a pilot study. The fully controlled studies come later, but cheap studies that show correlation are the way to go, unless you want to go on wild goose chases.

    3. Re:Research funding needs more scrutiny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a wealth of standardized control data available to these same researchers. They are not ignorant of its existence. In fact, at least one of the authors has spent almost 40 years contributing to that pool. I'll assume that this patient study is in fact "preliminary" as stated in the web article but am certain that the principal author has conducted a number of in lab studies (also drawing on the wealth of imaging and cognitive data available). These things are not done in isolation, the expected is very much known.

      How many factors do you wish to account for in a single study? I believe they web article indicated that they did partialed out the effects of a number of obvious factors but yes there are many others. Now, access to elderly patients for cognitive testing is very difficult which does pose a problem. If you wish to include imaging data (e.g, fMRI) then you're also looking at some $1000 per patient. I assume in this case they are being informed by existing stardardized data and earlier in lab studies consistent with the current conclusion.

  5. Great by Frogbert · · Score: 2, Funny

    I can understand English and whatever language New Zealanders speak, do I count as bilingual?


    :P

    1. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny
      whatever language New Zealanders speak

      It should, because it certainly isn't english.

      anklebiter: toddler, kids
      home and hosed: safe, completed successfully
      corker: very good
      get off the grass: exclamation of disbelief; equivalent to "stop pulling my leg" and "no way"
      Good on ya, mate!: congratulations
      skiting: bragging
      Wally: incompetent person, loser (my name's Wally, you insensitive clod!)
      and many more.

    2. Re:Great by toejam316 · · Score: 1

      I've never ever heard those words used together. EVER. I'm a kiwi too. On the other hand, I know a little bit of Maori, so it probably helps.

    3. Re:Great by strider44 · · Score: 1

      diponds... ef yow er relly god et et thin meybe.

    4. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't trust the list. As a New Zealander, I can say that some of that list is Australian only, and some of the weirder ones have never been uttered by anyone I know of in my entire life.

      A lot of the so-called slang dictionaries just make up their slang, or get it from a rarely used phrase from 50-100 years ago, that went out of fashion a month later.

      For instance: corker is an Australian term; skiting is almost never used (boasting/bragging are much more common expressions); the others are all very rare, and I've never ever heard anyone say "get off the grass" in that manner (and I'm 31).

    5. Re:Great by adamofgreyskull · · Score: 1

      It is indeed better to wear "jandals" than "gummies" if you're "hooning" about in a "fizz boat". But for the love of god don't suggest that sentence is pure gobbledegook to your kiwi girlfriend or she'll soon be a pissed-off "sheila".

  6. Specific Languages? by Rie+Beam · · Score: 1

    Were all of the languages the same, or was this a general trend? Like, if you spoke both German and, say, Japanese, would you have a slightly longer or shorter shelf life than, say, Spanish and Portuguese?

    1. Re:Specific Languages? by Rie+Beam · · Score: 1

      Okay, it might help to actually read the article.

      "Of that group, 91 were monolingual and 93 were bilingual. The bilinguals included speakers of 25 different languages, the most prevalent being Polish, Yiddish, German, Romanian and Hungarian."

      But the question still stands -- was this a general trend or were certain languages "healthier"?

    2. Re:Specific Languages? by Jeffrey+Baker · · Score: 1

      And does this hold only for verbal languages? What about music?

    3. Re:Specific Languages? by CRCulver · · Score: 1

      But the question still stands -- was this a general trend or were certain languages "healthier"?

      Modern linguistics holds that ultimately there are no significant differences between languages. Since all languages are just expressions of the same deep structure, it is impossible for one to be healthier than another.

    4. Re:Specific Languages? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps this is a politically correct "modern linguistics".

      There are vast differences between languages. Consider physical predispositions where some, for example, are having hard time to pronounce english wtf - "what a phack" - so some undergo surgery to correct it: http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=1150 872003

      and what about languages that have feminine, masculine, neuter nouns vs ones that don't, languages that use logograms vs 12 letters of Hawaiian alphabet...

      Some languages are harder to learn than others directly because they require more coqnitive power.

    5. Re:Specific Languages? by CRCulver · · Score: 1

      Perhaps this is a politically correct "modern linguistics".

      Ah, claiming it's a problem of political correctness, the standard rebuttal of the layman with no training who disagrees with those who actually know something about a field.

      Consider physical predispositions where some, for example, are having hard time to pronounce english wtf - "what a phack" - so some undergo surgery to correct it:

      Were Koreans reared by native speakers of English, they would have no problems with pronunciation. It is only because they are learning English later in life, when the patterns of their native language have already set in, that they have problems. Surely you've noticed that people of African decent in the Netherlands speak Dutch just the same as those who have been living their since time immemorial, or a fifth-generation Chinese immigrant in the U.S. sounds just the same as anyone else.

      and what about ...languages that use logograms vs 12 letters of Hawaiian alphabet...

      Linguistics properly speaking is not concerned with writing, but with speaking. The orthography a language uses is irrelevant here.

      Some languages are harder to learn than others directly because they require more coqnitive power.

      Nonsense, some languages are harder to learn only because after a certain age one's language-learning ability deteriotes and it is more difficult to assimilate anything radically new, like genders if one comes from a genderless language. A child would pick up either language in the same amount of time. No language requires more work for the brain than any other if they are learnt in infancy.

    6. Re:Specific Languages? by Planesdragon · · Score: 1

      Modern linguistics holds that ultimately there are no significant differences between languages. Since all languages are just expressions of the same deep structure, it is impossible for one to be healthier than another.

      PC science aside, it's not "impossible" for one language to form significantly different brain paths in its speakers than another. Just like there are clear genetic differences between Caucasians, Africans, Asians, and between Men and Women.

      The first thing I'd wonder if the study missed isn't language-healthiness, but if they controlled for the prevalence of monolingualism. It's a heck of a lot easier to be a prosperous, successful, and fully-realized person in America as a monolinguist than it is in France.

    7. Re:Specific Languages? by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1

      And does this hold only for verbal languages? What about music? If you can't say "which way to the bathroom" in it, it's not a language.
      Music is something else entirely.
      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    8. Re:Specific Languages? by Tuqui · · Score: 1

      But the differences between the native language and the second language could account. There is a big difference to learn Chinese from a Spanish native speaker than to learn Italy or Portuguese.

    9. Re:Specific Languages? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you missed the point. Learning Spanish and Portuguese (both Romance languages) does not require as much work as learning English and Japanese. Learning Portuguese after knowing Spanish doesn't require you to learn a completely different grammar system, only one that has been slightly modified.

      Deep down, many of us are asking (like the GP) whether the difficulty of the language or the number of languages has any effect. And I can attest that learning Spanish and German after knowing English was damn easy, but learning Japanese was more difficult than both of them put together.

  7. sure, maybe bilingualism can stave off dementia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    it's too bad political doublespeak seems to ensure it.

  8. Any language? by ktakki · · Score: 1

    Does knowing a programming language (or two) help? This wasn't addressed in the article, of course, but I'm curious. Also, I wonder if the ability to read musical notation would have the same (or some) effect.

    k.

    --
    "In spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart." - Anne Frank
    1. Re:Any language? by ClamIAm · · Score: 2, Insightful

      My opinion is that programming languages and musical notation (I also read these) are basically different ways of writing mathematical-type expressions. So you're basically learning different ways to write down logic and relationships between abstract things. Natural language is in some ways similar, but there's the added human elements like emotion and nuance.

      As for benefits, I certainly believe that knowing programming languages or any kind of abstract notation helps a person understand other abstract notations, as well as "systems" in general. The more generalized your understanding of logical/mathematical relationships between things, the easier it is to piece together the workings of different systems. This can be a benefit when learning natural languages; I've noticed that I can pick up the "rules" of a language pretty easily (I've studied Spanish). Who knows if it has health benefits, although it seems most studies show people who work their brains tend to not go senile.

      OK, ramble over.

    2. Re:Any language? by Knutsi · · Score: 3, Informative

      This will be guesswork on my behalf (not yet a doctor), but if I was to make an uneducated guess as to what causes this, i would suggest it is the constant increased level of activity in the brain of a multilingual person. It makes sence, that you have to engage larger patterns of knowledge when navigating between languages. If you learn a thing in one language, you also learn it in a second. If you know 10.000 words in two languages, I'm quite sure this accounts for quite a bit of added activity in the learning process, and is contsantly being stimulated by life around you. It should suggest that the more languages you know, the better the effect.

      People claim that memorising a few things every day, such as learning a poem, keeps your mind kicking beyond the average age. I'm not sure this is a the actual case, but it is interesting.

      (What the article fails to address is wether these people where speaking the language activly, or if they just knew it. I would take it there is a bit of a difference)

      The patterns of a programming language is probably not being stimulated very much in your head as you move through the world, and I think it's scope is quite narrow. I'd doubt simply knowing one will have an effect, but maybe if you programme allot, the challenge of constructing systems and flows should be an interesting challenge for the mind, hopefully keeping it young (:

  9. I think I'm safe by darkonc · · Score: 1
    Lesse: C, Basic, Fortran, Algol, perl, ......

    Et un peu de Francais.

    --
    Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
    1. Re:I think I'm safe by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      Da chto vi govorite? (Sorry, Slashdot doesn't support Unicode).

    2. Re:I think I'm safe by bob65 · · Score: 1

      If un peu de Francais counts, then shouldn't all Canadians be safer from dementia (compared to e.g. Americans), considering that French is mandatory through grade school and high school? :P And I guess Quebecers should be even safer, considering that they're actually fluent in both English and French.

    3. Re:I think I'm safe by Asztal_ · · Score: 1
      (Sorry, Slashdot doesn't support Unicode).
      It's okay, just encode in UTF-16 and base64 encode it. As for the minority who aren't fluent in base64-encoded utf-16, well, we don't want any of their types in here.
    4. Re:I think I'm safe by l0b0 · · Score: 1

      The missing ingredient for a long life: Alt-135

    5. Re:I think I'm safe by monkeySauce · · Score: 1

      Not all are. In more remote areas of Québec, you will encounter people who speak no English at all.

    6. Re:I think I'm safe by JimXugle · · Score: 1

      I'm golden.
      Ich bins auf gold.
      Soy de oro.
      1m g01dn.
      Ya Zolotist.

      --
      -jX

      Don't you just love politics? It's like a comedy of errors.
    7. Re:I think I'm safe by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      /v8ATgBvACAAcAByAG8AYgBsAGUAbQAsACAAaABlAHIAZQAgAH cAZQAgAGcAbwAhACAEFAQwACAERwRCBD4AIAQyBEsAIAQzBD4E MgQ+BEAEOARCBDUAIQ==

    8. Re:I think I'm safe by darkonc · · Score: 1
      I wouldn't call parts of Quebec City and Montreal "remote". Heck. My uncle got in trouble with a girl on the train to Toronto because she didn't understand the difference between "is this seat taken" and "is this seat free". Serious trouble -- he ended up marrying her. :-)

      Back to serious: My aunt's family are from the Quebec City area, and some (especially older ones) of them know no english. Especially after Bill 101, it's especially easy to live in Quebec with pretty much zero need for English -- In fact, if you take too much interest in English, you could get into some trouble (either social or legal).

      --
      Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
    9. Re:I think I'm safe by blugu64 · · Score: 1

      "In fact, if you take too much interest in English, you could get into some trouble (either social or legal)."

      Please expound upon this further. I've been meaning to/attempting to learn French, and have been considering a trip to Montreal. Is this an unwise legally or socially for reasons I am unaware? I'm from the US so not sure if that helps or hurts.

      --
      "Personal ownership is a hallmark of conservative capitalism. And I don't believe I am entitled to anything that I did n
  10. More useful connections in the brain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More useful connections in the brain, longer for age-related deterioration to takes its effect. Now if only the scientists can figure out how to prevent the deterioration. I bet having purpose is a big factor. Special purpose.

  11. Some people think bilingualism is bad by pembo13 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Some people think bilingualism is something for 3rd world countries. Of course I've only heard this sentiment expressed in the USA.

    --
    "Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
    1. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm seeing more and more Spanish-translated stuff popping up in the US, and not just near the southern border either...

    2. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by Pancake+Bandit · · Score: 1

      Those kinds of people just get frustrated that immmigrants don't magically know English upon entering the United States. I wish they'd imagine what it would be like if they went to live in another country with a different language. People might assume that you're stupid, because you can't speak their language. You might naturally gravitate towards other Americans, because they could understand you and help you. Oh, and English is a really hard language to learn. It's full of silly rules that make no sense. Even people who learn it at a young age and speak it their whole lives have trouble with it.

    3. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by Gothmolly · · Score: 3, Insightful

      While your comment is an obvious troll, I'll bite. Americans assume that you don't need to be bilingual simply because if you speak English, you DONT need to be bilingual. You can travel in the entire UK Commonwealth, the US, most of western Europe and Central America, and get by with English. It's the language of the Internet, it's the language of business. A German friend works for a Japanese country (in Germany) - what do they all speak? English. It's not the US' fault that it speaks one of the world's most popular languages.

      --
      I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
    4. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by dorpus · · Score: 1

      You're right, we don't believe in being constrained by two "official" languages. We believe in having hundreds of different languages, therefore no official language.

    5. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by CRCulver · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Those kinds of people just get frustrated that immmigrants don't magically know English upon entering the United States. I wish they'd imagine what it would be like if they went to live in another country with a different language.

      I think the frustration is not that people don't immediately learn English--even the most vocal opponents of Mexican immigration I've encountered understand that English is difficult--but rather that some immigrants don't even seem to try to learn. For when large areas of major cities now have Spanish-language billboards, the locals only know the culture they see on Univision and miss out on traditional American references, and there's not even a need for one living there to learn English, then there's understandably a fear of balkanization. Personally speaking, however, I dig Latino immigrants, and when I used to live in the U.S. I spent a lot of time in such neighbourhoods.

      It's full of silly rules that make no sense. Even people who learn it at a young age and speak it their whole lives have trouble with it.

      Native speakers automatically speak perfectly correct English, since correct English is determined by how native speakers speak. You are thinking that people speak incorrectly just because they don't mold their speech to artificial proscriptivist norms, but this is antiquated reasoning from the era when all languages had to be just like Latin (no split infinitives, prepositions at end of clause, etc.). Linguistics has been a purely descriptivist field for nearly a century now, but it's taking a long time for this to filter down to the public, who still get riled up if you show that there's nothing wrong with, say, African American Vernacular English.

    6. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by nelsonal · · Score: 1

      It's technically a really easy language to learn (almost everyone who knows even a small amount of English is understandable), but it is tremendously difficult to master (as the grammar Nazi's show us very frequently).

      --
      Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
    7. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by Turn-X+Alphonse · · Score: 1, Funny

      It's not just the US. Here in the UK We're getting shitty cartoons where half the stuff is in Mexican as well. I've never even seen a Mexican and yet for some reason it's a useful language for British people to know..

      --
      I like muppets.
    8. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by TerranFury · · Score: 1

      I'm so jealous of my friends from other countries. Language education in the U.S. is so screwed up: We don't start kids until it's far too late to learn to speak without an accent. My international friends have more than one native language; native languages come 'free!' I just have some minimal and essentially useless high school and intro college French.

      Of course, my jealously extends to more than language education. It sounds like they've had so much more adventure in their lives. And they have an obvious target: If you want to go to the best colleges, you go to the U.S. (for now). What obvious overseas targets do I have? I'm here already!

      I'd rather have been born in a country that's moving up, where I'd have more hope, than in a country that sits back on crumbling past glories.

      *feebly waves a flag*

    9. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by metlin · · Score: 1

      To a great extent, this is a problem of social perception.

      For instance, if someone were to speak the Queen's English with a crisp Standard RP, I would be more likely to listen to them for two reasons - one, I would understand them better and two, I would assume that someone who takes the pains to speak a particular language in the proper vernacular is, for want of a better word, sophisticated (or at the very least educated).

      On the other hand, while there is an African American Vernacular, you do not see it being used in education, business or commerce. You only see it within the community, in certain neighbourhoods and by folks who use the language to underscore a cultural identity.

      Even African Americans I know who are educated tend to stay away from the AAV and would rather speak (and have their children speak) good old English, whatever that may entail. In fact, I know a lot of well-educated African Americans who go out of their way to ensure that their children do not speak anything resembling the AAV.

      Now, this might be social, for whatever reason - but it cannot be ignored.

      Combined with the fact that a lot of the world learns English from proscriptivist norms, it is not surprising. And secondly, I might be wrong, but it seems to me that it is only in the US that descriptivist vernaculars take over proscriptivist vernaculars (for English, at least).

      For instance, English in some of the commonwealth countries tends to be very proscriptivist in nature. Of course, I do not know what an educational system for learning a language effected by society may mean to lingustics, but it may be social and societal factors contribute to the fact that many people do not consider vernaculars to be part of the language per se.

      And can't say that I disagree, either. :)

    10. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, actually it is :P

    11. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by Gryle · · Score: 1

      I'm not expecting magical fluency upon entry to the US, but I don't think it's unreasonable to ask an immigrant to make an attempt to learn English. If you're going to live somewhere, it's just good manners to try and learn the native language, even if you never become proficient.

      As a side note, a true story: I live in an area of Texas where a small but significant amount of the population speaks Spanish as a primary language. One day a customer who spoke only Spanish came into my workplace. While not fluent, I do speak some Spanish, so I attempted to translate for her. She spoke rapidly despite my repeated requests for her to slow down and got upset when I didn't translate fast enough. She insulted me for not being fluent in Spanish and then told me that everyone working there should be required by law to learn Spanish.

      --
      Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
    12. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by CRCulver · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Combined with the fact that a lot of the world learns English from proscriptivist norms, it is not surprising. And secondly, I might be wrong, but it seems to me that it is only in the US that descriptivist vernaculars take over proscriptivist vernaculars (for English, at least).

      Prescriptivism is dying in England, as well. RP is pretty much dead, and what passes for RP now among the elderly has marked differences from the standard set down a century ago. It's replacement as the standard English accent, Estuary English, is learnt more through osmosis just by living in the area than by rigorous schooling and hearing that this is the "right way to speak". Nevermind that in some former British colonies, such as Nigeria and India, the masses learning English nowadays are taking it in crazy directions that the British upper classes who brought the language there could have never imagined.

    13. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by janzen · · Score: 1
      As it happens, I was reading the Wikipedia article on the split infinitive just the other day. (Yes, I know, should have looked up "life" while I was at it...)

      According to the article, wanting English to be "just like Latin" is not the reason for many people's distaste for the split infinitive. Apparently, "[i]n Greek and Latin, it is impossible to split infinitives because these languages never use their infinitives together with a preposition/particle". Therefore, even if we accept the Latin way of doing things as the one true way, it gives us no information as to how an English preposition and infinitive should or should not be arranged.

      And linguistics may be as descriptivist a field as you say - but if you really think that "[n]ative speakers automatically speak perfectly correct English", I invite you to come and spend a few days in Singapore. It'll make you beg for a strictly prescriptivist Académie Anglaise... :-)

    14. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by pembo13 · · Score: 1

      How is my post a troll? I heard this on CNN.

      --
      "Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
    15. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by ms1234 · · Score: 1

      Well, I speak swedish and finnish (and english and a bit of german) so I guess I when I'm old (if I live that long) I wont be too far out there somewhere in my happy little place...

    16. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by OverlordQ · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Those kinds of people just get frustrated that [sic]immmigrants don't magically know English upon entering the United States. I wish they'd imagine what it would be like if they went to live in another country with a different language.

      And do tell me how accommodating the Mexicans would be if I went down there and started demanding everything be written in both Spanish and English . . . not gunna happen right?

      --
      Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
    17. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by zoftie · · Score: 1

      I am an immigrant and I don't give crap if people don't know eglish. I think that should be mandatory for people to know english or whatever language they want to speak, if they want to stay in the country. If you want to come to a country and not participate in its general culture, then you ought to go back. Most of the time people who don't wholeheartedly learn local customs and language(s), because dienchanted with state of affairs, cause general unrest, crime etc. Reason many , but idea is one. Staying here? Learn english. Or french. (that is in canada). In russia people are pretty severe if someone immigrates and doesn't learn local language. They general stay in lowest places of the society and never attain any legal status.

      As for the languages, It is sort of odd. I heard that programming computers, does muck up you brain in general ways, and there is a half-life of the programmer that amounts to around 10 years of straight coding. (might be not true though when I do write alot of code at once, I can't align words quite right.)
      2c.

    18. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by quigonn · · Score: 1

      as the grammar Nazi's show us very frequently

      Was this intentional?

      Anyway, for those native speakers who still don't get it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostrophe#English_la nguage_usage

      --
      A monkey is doing the real work for me.
    19. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by ebatsky · · Score: 1

      actually i believe english is one of the easiest languages to learn. i was told that when i was learning english after moving to canada when i was around 12 (russian is my first language). finnish and some asian languages like japanese are suppose to be the hardest to learn. also, being able to understand a language is much easier than being able to speak it. and speaking without an accent is pretty much impossible for most people without special training if they learned the language after they were 12

    20. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by koreth · · Score: 1
      To be fair, Mexico doesn't have a history of accepting waves of immigrants from all over the world. The US has actively encouraged immigration for most of its history. Isn't it conceivable that that might result in a different set of norms and expectations about immigrants, and a different view about the extent to which the culture should accomodate them?

      Or, to put it another way: So you're suggesting the US should look to Mexico as a model of how to conduct its affairs?

    21. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by xtracto · · Score: 1

      Hi, I am a Mexican living in the UK. Although I have not seen those shitty cartoons you are talking about (it would be interesting to see what kind of crap is Mexico exporting...) I was amazed at the demand of Mexican food (chile, tacos, quesadillas, tamales, etc) that exists in here. As every Mexican-wannabe restaurant I have been is just a Tex-Mex chicken-fajita bar.

      As a Mexican I think it is really cool that people from over here are valuing our culture. And hey, Spanish is the third most spoken language in the world (after chinesse and another one I dont remember...) and if you go to the Europe mainline (France, Spain, Germany, etc) people will like you more if you speak in Spanish than if you speak in English (they tend to despise American english mostly... I have personal experience on that =o)

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    22. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by glwtta · · Score: 1

      understand that English is difficult

      I've heard this a few times and I just don't understand where this myth comes from. English is far and away one of the easiest (widely spoken) languages to learn (assuming you are coming from some other IE language, of course).

      It's very streamlined and has a comparatively small set of "primitives" that combine in a largely regular manner. It's the Java of human languages :) This is reflected in the very permissive morphology: almost any passable sequence of phonemes can be a usable word in English, you never have to worry about fitting it into a declension/conjugation (which is why English easily adopts so many words from other languages, and easily integrates new words for novel concepts; words that many foreign speakers use verbatim, rather than the awkward local forms; well, there's a cultural element to that too, of course).

      Now I've heard that it's hard to get to the point where you are indistinguishable from a native speaker (well it's hard in any language, harder I suppose), largely owing to the highly idiomatic conversational style. Don't know how true that one is - most people only pick up on my foreignness by the accent; but then again, I don't claim to be "near-native" in any other language I've learned, so I can't compare.

      But apart from that, learning fluent, correct, perfectly functional English is easier than most Western languages.

      Oh and on the topic at hand: if you come to a country to live - learn the damn language. All philosophical and socio-political arguments aside, it's just plain rude not to. I don't even really have anything against the little ethnic communities that invariably spring up in large cities (though I don't get the appeal myself - if I wanted to feel like I'm living in Russia, I would've stayed in Russia), nothing wrong with that, just make sure you can function outside of your little "home away from home".

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
    23. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by linuxrocks123 · · Score: 1

      > You are thinking that people speak incorrectly just because they don't mold their speech to artificial proscriptivist norms, but this is antiquated reasoning from the era when all languages had to be just like Latin (no split infinitives, prepositions at end of clause, etc.).

      The standard defines what is correct. If a web page doesn't conform to the W3C, it is in error, and if someone's English writing doesn't conform to Standard English's grammar, it is likewise incorrect.

      You're just trying to redefine words here, and I'm not going along with it.

      --
      vi ~/.emacs # I'm probably going to Hell for this.
    24. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by CRCulver · · Score: 1

      The standard defines what is correct. If a web page doesn't conform to the W3C, it is in error, and if someone's English writing doesn't conform to Standard English's grammar, it is likewise incorrect.

      But there are many standards for English, and even when one doesn't conform to one, another, or any of them, one can often still be intelligible to other native speakers. As I said, prescriptivism has been pretty dead for a century now, and you're just embarassing yourself to claim otherwise without any training.

      You're just trying to redefine words here, and I'm not going along with it.

      Words mean whatever people want them to mean. Read De Saussure and his concept of the "arbitrariness of the sign". This is the foundation for modern linguistics, semiotics, and various schools of philosophy. If that's too hard for you, even Lewis Carroll demonstrated the arbitrariness of the sign in a dialogue between Humpty Dumpty and Alice.
    25. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by vidarh · · Score: 1

      Nice argument, except that there is no such thing as "Standard English". English is defined entirely by usage, contrary to for instance French (Which is defined by the Académie française)

    26. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by glwtta · · Score: 1

      Native speakers automatically speak perfectly correct English, since correct English is determined by how native speakers speak. You are thinking that people speak incorrectly just because they don't mold their speech to artificial proscriptivist norms

      That is a terrible description of how descriptive language rules work. By your logic, the word "proscriptivist" actually means "prescriptive" (I'm assuming you are a native speaker), simply because you used it in that word's place; whereas I would have to guess that it'd mean "someone who wants to prohibit you from using the language", if it existed.

      Grammatical rules and conventions are defined by how the native speakers use the language, they change and evolve over time. That doesn't mean that whatever comes out of the mouth of a particular native speaker is magically correct. And I say that people speak incorrectly when they don't mold their speech to the entirely natural and descriptive norms currently prevailing. Sure there are plenty of gray areas created by rules and conventions that are in transition from one accepted form to another, but that's what makes language fun (for example, the actual meaning of "beg the question" is probably lost forever; whereas no amount of instant messages will ever make the contraction "you're" into a possessive pronoun). Point is, most identifiable linguistic rules have specific logic behind them, and even though popular use has the power to change them, disregarding their current forms makes your language weaker. (btw, the whole "split infinitive" thing is a ridiculous assertion that hasn't been taken seriously for some time now. I think it actually grew out of a general avoidance of split infinitives in literature in the 17-18th centuries - in that sense it's actually descriptive. The whole Latin connection as an attempt to justify the rule is a later fabrication, and like I said, is utterly ridiculous. )

      I don't really know what "African American Vernacular English" is, but I'm guessing that since you've given it a distinct name, it's not part of what we commonly refer to as "English"?

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
    27. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *grammar Nazis That point isn't very difficult to master, apostrophes are never used to create plurals.

    28. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by huge+colin · · Score: 1

      That's because the de facto standard language of the US is often the language that those people in third world countries are forced to learn to be productive.

    29. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are thinking that people speak incorrectly just because they don't mold their speech to artificial proscriptivist [sic] norms

      Rubbish. Pick up a magazine or newspaper and then tell me there's no such thing as Standard English.

      but this is antiquated reasoning from the era when all languages had to be just like Latin (no split infinitives, prepositions at end of clause, etc.)

      If you're finished savaging that straw man (since no style guide on the planet considers either of things you mentioned to be wrong), you might want to check out some of the real concerns, which are:

      -- Logical (read: consistent and expressive) use of the subjunctive mood
      -- Logical capitalization in headings
      -- Logical personal pronoun cases (in other words, not things like "please tell Jack and I...", etc.)
      -- Logical, self-consistent sentences (i.e., not "The person who said those things are...", etc.)

      And so on. The point is to promote logical, consistent, precise usage, not to impose arbitrary rules, as you pretend.

      Linguistics has been a purely descriptivist field for nearly a century now

      Yes, but you don't seem to understand what that means. Descriptivism is the idea that grammars and dictionaries adapt to changing usage; it doesn't mean that there is no such thing as standard usage. Again: the concept of "incorrect" remains; it's just that "incorrect" means at odds with the educated usage of today, not that of the 19th century.

      So to conclude, everything you wrote was ignorant garbage. Naturally, you got +5.

    30. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by CRCulver · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, but you don't seem to understand what that means. Descriptivism is the idea that grammars and dictionaries adapt to changing usage; it doesn't mean that there is no such thing as standard usage. Again: the concept of "incorrect" remains; it's just that "incorrect" means at odds with the educated usage of today, not that of the 19th century.

      Having trained as a linguist for some years, I've never heard the term "incorrect" used. In fact, I know that using it quickly bring reproachment from my elders in the field. If a speaker does not match the standard, one says that his speech is simply non-standard, not "incorrect".

    31. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by carpe_noctem · · Score: 1

      Nevermind that in some former British colonies, such as Nigeria and India, the masses learning English nowadays are taking it in crazy directions that the British upper classes who brought the language there could have never imagined.

      That reminds me of a joke a friend of mine heard when he was working in India:

      An Englishman an an Indian are sitting next to each other in a bar, and after a few drinks become a bit emotional about the British Empire.
      "Hey mate, I'm really quite sorry that we fucked up your country for 200 years or so," the Englishman says.
      "Ah yes, no apology necessary," replied the Indian, "because now, we will fuck your language forever!"

      (Truthfully the above joke is funnier when read aloud with an Apu-like accent :) ).

      --
      "Quoting famous computer scientists out of context is the root of all evil (or at least most of it) in programming." - K
    32. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having trained as a linguist for some years, I've never heard the term "incorrect" used. In fact, I know that using it quickly bring reproachment from my elders in the field. If a speaker does not match the standard, one says that his speech is simply non-standard, not "incorrect".
       
      As you're obviously struggling to put the two together, "non-standard" == "incorrect in standard usage". In any case, linguistics does not concern itself whatsoever with the question of how language should ideally or most effectively be used. That issue has been called a number of things throughout history, but the favoured term today is style. From the perspective of style, cleaving to standard usage ("norms") is necessary. If you disagree, tell me: How many of your venerable academic elders deviate from Standard English (or the standard form of whatever language they use) when writing papers?

      I should add that I am struck afresh by how specious your initial remark ("Native speakers automatically speak perfectly correct English, since correct English is determined by how native speakers speak.") was: the truth is that native speakers as a whole speak "perfectly correct English" because correct English is how native speakers as a whole speak; but an individual native speaker is not in fact "automatically speak[ing] perfectly correct English" just by virtue of his language background. He could, for example, replace in his speech the word "and" with the squawking sound of a cockatoo, all the while remaining a native speaker of English, but few would agree with you that he is speaking "perfectly correct English". Likewise, deviations by English native speakers from standard English usage are incorrect in standard usage (or "non-standard") and hence inadvisable from a style point of view.

    33. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      "For when large areas of major cities now have Spanish-language billboards, the locals only know the culture they see on Univision and miss out on traditional American references, and there's not even a need for one living there to learn English, then there's understandably a fear of balkanization."

      These aren't new arguments. US cities have had non-English newspapers and the like in ciruclation for centuries (German, Polish, Russian, etc.). And Know-Nothings and their ilk were around to decry the lack of "Americanization" in these people.

      Guess what: the Republic survived, and I'd wager that English is more prevalent in the United States today than it has ever been, despite hispanophobic FUD.

      And "the culture they see on Univision?" Where exactly do people think Univision and Telemundo come from?

    34. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by Magada · · Score: 1
      Hey, hey. Watch it. While "correctness" is out of fashion, expressive power is not, and neither is concision. What would take minutes to express in AAVE might take seconds in another language or dialect. Try translating "existential malaise" into AAVE. You'll probably end up writing the lyrics of a rap song or a very unusual novel.

      Also, from what I see, there is great reduction in the use of tenses other than the simple present/past and the "gonna" future, which makes for vague speech and pragmatic difficulties - difficulties which had not existed in, say 1930's English. There are languages who manage to take a turn for the worse - High Latin with its unbelievably asinine grammar was one, present-day English is another, to my mind.

      Amazingly enough, Newspeak seems on the verge of becoming
      • the
      English language - mostly as a result of strenuous efforts by the US and English governments to NOT teach poor/minority/imigrant kids how to speak properly. You really should beware of those in the ruling class who support it and even go as far as to use it - Dubya comes to mind, but he's by no means alone...
      --
      Something bad is coming when people are suddenly anxious to tell the truth.
    35. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "crumbling past glories."

      WOW. I bet you are a leftist, correct?

    36. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by tehcyder · · Score: 1
      It's not just the US. Here in the UK We're getting shitty cartoons where half the stuff is in Mexican as well. I've never even seen a Mexican and yet for some reason it's a useful language for British people to know
      I'm afraid I'm missing the joke here...
      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    37. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by blugu64 · · Score: 1

      "And "the culture they see on Univision?" Where exactly do people think Univision and Telemundo come from?"

      Texas? SoCal?

      --
      "Personal ownership is a hallmark of conservative capitalism. And I don't believe I am entitled to anything that I did n
    38. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by blugu64 · · Score: 1

      Being from Texas I feel your pain. In situations like you described I just continue using English. Granted spanish isn't spoken in my office other then the call center, but I know where you are coming from.

      --
      "Personal ownership is a hallmark of conservative capitalism. And I don't believe I am entitled to anything that I did n
    39. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      English is far and away one of the easiest (widely spoken) languages to learn (assuming you are coming from some other IE language, of course).

      Wrong. Unless unless by "widely spoken" you mean billions, in which case you really aren't saying much of anything, n'cest pas? ...learning fluent, correct, perfectly functional English is easier than most Western languages.

      Maybe right, I don't know.

      Be careful with your qualifiers, I'm forever messing mine up.

      That said, I, as a native speaker, find English to be a difficult language, even though I am better than the average native speaker at speaking and writing it (at least based on the average slashdotter :-)

      You want a wonderful, easy to learn, sensible language? One where there are a lot of very cute native speakers (well, at least the females, but I'm biased)? Learn Korean. Sensible, very few icky rules/idioms, no 'tones' like Chinese, alphabetic (and pretty much phonetic). A nice place to visit (Taegu and Kwangju are best, Pusan and Taejon are also nice).

    40. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by linuxrocks123 · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but ad-hominem attacks won't make your argument correct. I don't particularly care about the latest fads in academic linguistics anyway, since I'm looking at a communication protocol and telling you what the rules are, but take a look at this to see how you're wrong there as well:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prescriptive

      It's obviously stupid to say that "the TCP/IP RFC's are prescriptivist nonsense!" Why can't you see that the same as true with Standard English, another communication protocol? You're avoiding the issue by claiming that there are different standards since they are separated only by geography. You can use Standard American English in the U.S. and RP in Britain in order to be correct in both places. The differences in the versions of the standards almost never result in ambiguity, though, so following one version of the standard is good enough to allow for natural language processing by any competent reader (native or otherwise). If you don't follow the standard, you make it harder for readers to understand you, especially those who /aren't/ native speakers. This is similar to bugs in inferior TCP/IP implementations needing workarounds in superior ones. By not folloowing the standard you force others to mentally correct your errors in order to understand you, even if they are able to understand you most of the time. Personally, I find that communication from people who have a large number of errors in their Standard English implementation is best dealt with by dropping their packets. Most educated non-native speakers are able to learn the correct rules for the language and apply them. Speakers who are unable to do this, especially if native, are often pretty stupid folk who don't have much interesting to say.

      If your issue is that comprehending this protocol is difficult for you, there are several sources available in print and online you can use to educate yourself. Here's a pretty good one:

      http://www.grammarbook.com/

      You've been following the standard well in your posts here, so you must understand what it is. If you understand the standard and use it to communicate effectively ... what's your problem with it again?

      --
      vi ~/.emacs # I'm probably going to Hell for this.
    41. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by linuxrocks123 · · Score: 1

      protocol and telling you what the rules are, but take a look at this to see how you're wrong there as well:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prescriptive [wikipedia.org]

      It's obviously stupid to say that "the TCP/IP RFC's are prescriptivist nonsense!" Why can't you see that the same as true with Standard English, another communication protocol? You're avoiding the issue by claiming that there are different standards since they are separated only by geography. You can use Standard American English in the U.S. and RP in Britain in order to be correct in both places. The differences in the versions of the standards almost never result in ambiguity, though, so following one version of the standard is good enough to allow for natural language processing by any competent reader (native or otherwise). If you don't follow the standard, you make it harder for readers to understand you, especially those who /aren't/ native speakers. This is similar to bugs in inferior TCP/IP implementations needing workarounds in superior ones. By not following the standard you force others to mentally correct your errors in order to understand you, even if they are able to understand you most of the time. Personally, I find that communication from people who have a large number of errors in their Standard English implementations is best dealt with by just dropping the packets. Most educated non-native speakers are able to learn the correct rules for the language and apply them. Speakers who are unable to do this, especially if native, are often pretty stupid folk who don't have much interesting to say.

      If your issue is that comprehending this protocol is difficult for you, there are several sources available in print and online you can use to educate yourself. Here's a pretty good one:

      http://www.grammarbook.com/ [grammarbook.com]

      You've been following the standard well in your posts here, so you must understand what it is. If you understand the standard and use it to communicate effectively ... what's your problem with it again?

      --
      vi ~/.emacs # I'm probably going to Hell for this.
    42. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by tknd · · Score: 1
      Oh, and English is a really hard language to learn. It's full of silly rules that make no sense. Even people who learn it at a young age and speak it their whole lives have trouble with it.

      Isn't that every language? I'm not bilingual but I've spent (and still am spending) a good amount of time learning other languages (French, Japanese). Every language has funny rules that don't make sense but after spending all that time studying these other languages I've found funny rules in each of them that are unexplainable and are only solved by memorization.

      For instance French is funny compared to English because every noun has a gender but no such thing exists in English. The gender gives the phrases no additional information but is so much a part of the language that you can't get by without memorizing the genders for all of the words.

      Japanese is funny because they have different ways of counting things depending on the object's properties and I still have a hard time understanding the usefulness of Kanji.

      However, each language has their benefits and consistencies compared to one another. French has more consistent spellings compared to English (thanks Webster). For example anytime in French when you see 'eau' it is always pronounced the same way. English goes the wrong direction and overloads certain spellings with different sounds so when you see a word you've never seen before, you always have to 'guess' at how it is pronounced. Japanese has a pretty superior particle system (almost everything has a particle minus some funny rules...again) that makes certain aspects of it easy to learn.

      There are some things that English does pretty well though. I think it does a decent job of accepting words from other languages and attempting to preserve the sound of the original word as long as the speaker is willing. In Japanese they take many words from other languages but because their system is based on the Kana system everything gets morphed quite a bit. For example "beer" is "bi-ru" because their kana system has no single 'r' sound. English also has fewer verb conjugations compared to something like French (I/you/they/we eat, he/she eats VS (I) Je mange, (you-casual) tu manges, (he/she) il/elle mange, (we) nous mangeons, (you-formal) vous mangez, (they-guys+girls/they-girls-only) ils/elles mangent).

    43. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by epee1221 · · Score: 1
      It's technically a really easy language to learn (almost everyone who knows even a small amount of English is understandable)
      This is the first time I've heard anyone suggest that one can "know" a language without actually knowing how to speak it correctly.
      --
      "The use-mention distinction" is not "enforced here."
    44. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is +5 Interesting? Dear God.

    45. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by nelsonal · · Score: 1

      Perhaps know isn't the right term. If I say, "Go Liberty Statue, how?" that isn't even remotely close to, "I would like to go see the Statue of Liberty. Would you be so kind as to provide directions?" 99% of english speakers will understand what both mean. If you butchered the grammer as badly as in my example in many languages you would be far less understandable.

      --
      Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
    46. Re:Some people think bilingualism is bad by OverlordQ · · Score: 1

      No, i'm saying learn fucking English or jump your ass back across the border.

      --
      Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
  12. The easy way to bilingualism? by tepples · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Does Toki Pona count? It's amazing what one can do with only 120 words.

  13. Eh, um, er... by twocoasttb · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    So at what age is dementia onsite likely when one doesn't have fluency in even one language like, say, George W. Bush?

    1. Re:Eh, um, er... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      So at what age is dementia onsite likely when one doesn't have fluency in even one language like, say, George W. Bush?

      It's funny that you should mention that, I just happened across a video the other day on youtube that took a look at this very issue...
       
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRhhtkRp8aM
    2. Re:Eh, um, er... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clearly George W. Bush is the one and only fluent speaker of the language 'George W. Bush' - although I see you're trying valiantly to master it. For that reason alone, I think dementia ensuite is imminent for you.

  14. Re:SEND THE ILLIGAL MEXICANS HOME by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The real reason why bilinguals live longer is because they don't have to work as hard to make a living. At my work (city hall) bilinguals get $600 extra per month just for knowing another language. I'm in the same paygrade as a bilingual animal waste disposal person (it's an actual job). Talk about a shitty job

  15. hmm by compro01 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Must be why the Canadian government hasn't gone crazy yet.

    --
    upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
  16. ymmv by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm bilingual and have been demented since I was born.

  17. English+Maori=2 languages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you fluent in Maori? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C4%81ori_language)

  18. Same goes for Bi-Sexuals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Except if you get AIDS

  19. I'd just like to say... by greenguy · · Score: 1

    Ya lo sabía! Es una ventaja más de ser bilingüe entre las muchas que ya hay.

    --
    What if I do the same thing, and I do get different results?
    1. Re:I'd just like to say... by Propaganda13 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Let me be the first to say "Tengo un gato en mis pantalones."

      Either that or "Tengo un sandwich de jamón en mi sombrero." After that, the conversation usually goes downhill from there.

    2. Re:I'd just like to say... by omarin · · Score: 1

      While your reply is silly, at least you did it in correct Spanish, which is more than the majority of the non-Latino US population can do :D (I grew up as a Mexican-American in the USA, and I am astounded how many people in the US (whether white or latino or etc.) are afraid to try a second language! If our current US "President" can speak some Spanish (which he can, surprisingly enough!), then saner/smarter people across the US should be able to pick up a second language too! ;-)

    3. Re:I'd just like to say... by pafrusurewa · · Score: 1
      I grew up as a Mexican-American in the USA, and I am astounded how many people in the US (whether white or latino or etc.) are afraid to try a second language!
      It's amazing, isn't it? In my opinion speaking multiple languages makes so much valuable information available to you that I can't understand why people would debate whether it's actually useful.

      I once had an American tell me that it's not true that Americans don't speak foreign languages; he said he did speak a foreign language, he just chose Latin -- how useful. So did I, but in addition to the other two foreign languages that most people learn (to speak fluently BTW) in school here.
    4. Re:I'd just like to say... by sharkey · · Score: 1

      If our current US "President" can speak some Spanish (which he can, surprisingly enough!)

      OK, how do you say 'nucular' and 'misunderestimated' in Spanish?


      Seriously, that's a pretty good point.

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    5. Re:I'd just like to say... by danpsmith · · Score: 1
      Let me be the first to say "Tengo un gato en mis pantalones." Either that or "Tengo un sandwich de jamón en mi sombrero." After that, the conversation usually goes downhill from there.

      This reminds me of a practice I used to have in Spanish class where I'd fill in Spanish gibberish when I forgot to do my homework while the teacher was walking around checking everyone's stupid little workbooks. I was caught once at this as she, for once, actually read a portion of what I wrote in my book. There was a question in the workbook, something like "what time is it?" and my response, which she read aloud with a question mark was "Me gusta cocinar in el coche?"

      Still my favorite Spanish phrase.

      --
      Judges and senates have been bought for gold; Esteem and love were never to be sold.
    6. Re:I'd just like to say... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe the indefinite article "un" would not commonly be used in those cases (you should omit it), nor would the posessive adjectives, i.e. use "los pantalones" rather than "mis pantalones", since posession is already implied with articles of clothing and parts of the body.

    7. Re:I'd just like to say... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jesus.The.Fuck.Christ! How anal can a person be?
      How about this:

      Chingas a tu puta madre.

      no, no,

      Chinga tu puta madre.

      actually, since your madre is already implied to be puta, we can ommit that.

      Chinga tu madre.

      wait...

      Chingas a tu madre.

      no, wait... ...nevermind ;)

  20. Related languages by Mogster · · Score: 1

    I wonder what the differences would be for bilingualism in closely related languages, such as the Latin derived romance languages (French, Spanish, Italian, etc) as opposed to languages further apart eg Japanese vs English.

    Would a person fluent in both Japanese and English be less susceptible that someone fluent in in two of the romance languages?

    --
    ACK NAK RST
    1. Re:Related languages by eebra82 · · Score: 1

      Given the fact that scientists have drawn a parallel here, why not? Obviously, being bilingual is the key factor here and it is likely going to look better if you speak more languages fluently. In other words, the more similar the languages are, the "less" bilingual you get. English and Japanese have nothing in common and therefore require far more learning, understanding and whatnot.

      I speak five languages - four of them fluently - so I guess I'm in the safe zone. :)

    2. Re:Related languages by CptNerd · · Score: 1

      I've only ever had languages in high school and college, but I started with Latin, went to German, then took the first two Russian courses offered at my university, and really only got good enough to simple tourist things. After about 20 years of no language study, I started learning Japanese here at the local university, thankfully taught by native Japanese speakers. Strange phenomenon, I would find myself accidently saying what I wanted to say, but in German or Russian instead of Japanese. Apparently I learned enough to think (crudely) in the other languages, enough to trigger some long-dormant paths when I tried to use the new language. The biggest problem I've had in all the languages was vocabulary. Just learning enough words to say what I want to say is difficult for me, for some reason.

      Since there's a history of Alzheimers' in my family, I'm also interested in doing what I can to keep my brain healthy, if it's possible to build up that "cognitive reserve" so I'm not so much of a burden in later years.

      --
      By the taping of my glasses, something geeky this way passes
    3. Re:Related languages by bladx · · Score: 2, Interesting
      "English and Japanese have nothing in common and therefore require far more learning, understanding and whatnot."
      Actually... Japanese has many loan words... from Chinese, English and some other languages as well. That makes picking it up easier. The real difference (in my opinion at least,) that makes learning Japanese (from an English as a first language person's standpoint,) is learning to think in Japanese. It's a lot different and I find myself thinking more in Japanese than in English now.
    4. Re:Related languages by Tuqui · · Score: 1

      It had happened to me too. I was trying to master a third language and time to time I had the second language (english) words going out while speaking. Something like "Esto cuesta quinientos veinte TWO pesos".

  21. Simple conservation of confusion by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 4, Funny

    Be confused with multilingual voices in your head for much of your life... or just a concentrated dose for the last four years.

    --
    This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
  22. statistics by digitalderbs · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I was curious about the claim (and standard deviations) and pulled up the paper. The mean for monolinguals is 71.4 +/- 9.6 and the mean for bilinguals is 75.5 +/- 8.5. Now those std deviations are 1*sigma (68.3%) leaving a lot of overlap between the two distributions. However, they claim that these two distributions are statistically different by an F-test (if I'm not mistaken, which assumes that both distributions are normal). I'm not a clinical statician and I'm used to working with numbers closer to Avogadro's; how statistically significant are these results? Can you make binary statements like this with such a small pool and such close distributions?

    1. Re:statistics by dorpus · · Score: 5, Informative

      Normally, we would test a difference in means between two populations by a t-test. If the sample size is large enough, then even a difference that is only a fraction of a standard deviation can be statistically significant. F-tests are used in ANOVA tables, and yes, they do assume normal distributions, as well as homoskedasticity (same variance). Assuming they performed a linear regression, then one can perform a Type I F-test (added-in-order test) or Type II F-test (added-last test). One can also talk about an overall F-test, testing whether any of the effects in the model are nonzero. However, as I indicated in another post, the study only had 184 patients from a single treatment center. There is selection bias, since the study only sampled patients who were already suffering from memory loss. How many other bilingual immigrants with memory loss are lurking in the general population, who aren't going to memory loss clinics due to lack of knowledge? Also, what method did they use to adjust for "cultural differences, immigration, formal education, employment and even gender" with only 184 patients? The study only proves that bilingual patients who arrived at a particular treatment center were, on average, 4 years older than monolingual patients. It does NOT provide a causal link between bilingualism and cognitive reserve.

    2. Re:statistics by bruguiea · · Score: 1

      This is something that puzzled me for a long time. For simplicity, let's consider only one value and you want to know if it's greater than zero. You have a flurry of independent measurements, and you estimate the mean and standard deviation of *one* measurement to be 1 and 10 respectively. But the mean of all the measurement of, say, 10000 people, you keep a mean at 1 but the standard deviation goes to 10 / sqrt(10000) = 0.1. We have significance! Now, they report the standard deviation of *one* person, because you are not interested in a measurement of variation that depends on your sample size. But when it comes to significance, you do take into account the fact that you have many samples, and actually, the more you have, the easier it is to be significant. Was I clear?

      --
      http://www.bruguier.com
    3. Re:statistics by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1
      Can you make binary statements like this with such a small pool and such close distributions?

      No, of course not, except in weak papers written in obscure journals by "eminent" researchers. The fact that they use a "convenience" selection of patients that happen to wander into to their memory clinic just screams selection bias. Their total number of patients, 184, isn't terribly large which means that the standard deviation issue you bring up is more likely to be significant. I'm too lazy to to figure out how well the study is powered (ie, whether or not there are enough patients to reliably see a roughly 5% difference) but I kind of doubt it.

      Furthermore, since I'm being all pissant - they lump Alzheimers' and "other" dementia's together - bad form. Worse, their data points for determining age of "dementia" is a Mini-mental status exam. BZZT. That's a beside screening test, not a research instrument.

      So all of you monolingual Americans can rest easy knowing that you'll go crazy at approximately the same rate as everyone else.

      Unless of course, you're a Visual Basic programmer - in which case you're doomed.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    4. Re:statistics by bcaffo · · Score: 1

      From your description, I believe that 9.6 and 8.5 are not standard errors (numbers used to evaluate the uncertainty associated with the sample mean) but are standard deviations (numbers used to evaluate the spread of a population). Therefore to make the kind of comparison you're trying to do you would have to divide 9.6 and 8.5 by the square roots of the respective sample sizes. The confusion comes about because, for some reason, it has become a convention to report "mean +/- sd" in the medical literature where the "+/-" which doesn't make a lot of sense. Reporting "mean +/- std. error" would at least be a 68% confidence interval. I think that it would be better if people simply reported (mean, sd, n), that way people would have all of the relevant info.

    5. Re:statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if you *measure* one value then you know whether or not it's greater than zero.

      If you are interested in whether the mean of the distribution that the number came from is greater than zero, then you do need a sample, and if you have 10000 samples, then the standard error (not standard deviation) of the mean is indeed 10/sqrt(10000). Obviously the more samples you take the more sure you can be that the mean really is where you think it is and the more statistical significance you will have. The standard devaition of the individual observations doesn't change though, and many of these may be below 0 even though the mean is highly significantly above zero.

  23. Galvanized minds? by w33t · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I find this interesting. Since these are apparently, "life long" bilinguals, they must have learned the second language at an early age.

    I would seem that having two languages one's whole life would somehow affect a brain. However, I think research shows that life-long bilinguals actually use the same region of their brain when speaking either language.
    As shown by this article - google cache - the real site barely worked. just google "bilingual brocas"

    Perhaps bilingualism gives the brain some kind of extra strength - or flexibility. Maybe more than just the broca's area gets an extra workout, and that effort pays off in the long marathon of dementia.

    1. Re:Galvanized minds? by DynaSoar · · Score: 1

      w33t sez:
      > I would seem that having two languages one's whole life would somehow affect a brain.
      > However, I think research shows that life-long bilinguals actually use the same region
      > of their brain when speaking either language. As shown by this article - google cache
      > - the real site barely worked. just google "bilingual brocas"

      > Perhaps bilingualism gives the brain some kind of extra strength - or flexibility.
      > Maybe more than just the broca's area gets an extra workout, and that effort pays
      > off in the long marathon of dementia.

      Broca's area is the brain motor used in the production of speech. It is not at all surprising that there is only one. To have two active motor areas for the same part of the body would tend to cause conflicts. Just to have two adjacent motor areas active at the same time can cause problems. Check it out: balance a stick of some kind on your finger. Time yourself over several trials. Then have someone give you some difficult to spell words, and spell them while balancing the stick. Time yourself some more. Have them give you some more words while you balance it, and try to spell those backwards, while timing yourself. As the speech production becomes more complex, it becomes harder to balance the stick because the two motor areas being used are directly adjacent to each other. A part of the cortex that does a certain thing will try to recruit nearby regions for hard work.

      Actually, I use this test to show the difference in male and female brains. Females are far less specialized, or alternatively, far more integrated, than male brains. While they tend to not be able to balance the stick very well to begin with (guys tend do this sort of goofy stuff for no apparent reason more so than females), they don't get worse as the task gets harder. They don't have the conflicts caused by the overlap of recruited areas because the tasks are already spread out over more of the brain.

      My boss at NIDCD/NIH was studying mono- and bi-linguals that had had strokes or other brain damage. Those blinguals that have damage to the other speech center, Wernicke's area, would often "lose" one language, but not the other. They could still produce the lost language if you gave them a recorded example to follow, showing that the motor area was working, but lost the ability to understand one of them, in both the hearing it and the understanding of what their own brain was producing. The evidence was that there is more than one Wernicke's "area" in bilinguals. I put it in quoted because Wernicke's is in the association cortex, the part of the brain that pulls together other parts to produce complex cognitive processing. The association cortex is much less generalized and hard-wired than other parts so that it can call on different areas for different tasks.

      I know of one man who moved to the US from France when he was 5, and spoke nothing but English after arriving. He had a stroke at 70-something and lost his ability to use English. However, he not only retained his ability to speak French fluently, it had matured along with him despite not being used. He used it as an adult would, not as the 5 year old he was when he stopped using it. He could also talk in French about his technical career (he'd invented one process used in the production of steel) despite having only started on that career 20 years after he'd stopped using French.

      --
      "I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
    2. Re:Galvanized minds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The idea, as far as I understand it, is that if you have practice throughout life "switching" between languages, then this practice will make you more efficient at switching between tasks generally. Since switching, and the ability to screen out irrelevant information, is a function of your attention system, the idea is that this type of practice will help protect mental function.

      I think one should be skeptical about this, however interesting and compelling it might be. For example, why bilingualism? Why not other types of mental activity which require switching?

  24. How do you say by mdsolar · · Score: 1

    "where did I put mu glasses" in French?

    1. Re:How do you say by The+Hobo · · Score: 1

      Où est-ce que j'ai laissé mes lunettes?

      I'm one of those bilingual Canadians. Where I come from, bilingual typically means French and English since they are the two official and most popular languages. Those who are bilingual are often that way from birth.. the way I see it is if you speak French in Ontario you speak English as well. You catch English like a cold, it's simply much easier. The concept of putting off dementia if you're bilingual is an interesting one, since I have some memories in French and some in English.

      --
      There is another kind of evil which we must fear most, and that is the indifference of good men. -- Boondock Saints
    2. Re:How do you say by mdsolar · · Score: 1

      Thanks, now Où est-ce que j'ai laissé ma tete?

  25. Stands to reason by Gryle · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "At my work (city hall) bilinguals get $600 extra per month just for knowing another language."
    I fail to see your point. Don't additional skills usually warrant an increase in paygrade?

    --
    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
    1. Re:Stands to reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How common is the language? Spanish, or some asian language? If it's a rarer one the extra pay may be in case the need ever arises for a translater. Someone already getting paid for knowing the language is more likely to be willing to translate than not.

    2. Re:Stands to reason by TerranFury · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >I fail to see your point. Don't additional skills usually warrant an increase in paygrade?

      Depends.

      If your second language is Spanish and you work in Miami -- definitely.
      If your second language is Swahili and you work in Vermont -- well, probably not.

      Kinda like how, if I learned the skill of snake charming, and I worked in an I.T. department, I wouldn't expect any extras in my paycheck. ;-)

    3. Re:Stands to reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      ANY language in addition to English. A couple of vietnamese engineer coworkers signed up (all it requires is a proficiency test performed by a translator), but I'd say about 2/3rds of the people I know who are doing it are signed up as Spanish. I'm considering just swallowing my pride and signing up, because it looks like the policy is here to stay. According to wiki 7.37% of the city population is Hispanic or Latino (compare to 35.5% statewide), so it's pretty ridiculous...but a free $7200/year is worth my pride.

    4. Re:Stands to reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      If a secretary can fit a pineapple in her vagina, should she receive extra money every month?

      I agree she should be well compensated for her specialized set of skills

    5. Re:Stands to reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
      Kinda like how, if I learned the skill of snake charming, and I worked in an I.T. department, I wouldn't expect any extras in my paycheck. ;-)

      But if you worked as a flight attendant, it might just come in handy!
    6. Re:Stands to reason by stud9920 · · Score: 1

      Depends where. In Belgium, being fluent in French, Dutch and English is an extra way to get a job, but don't expect to be paid more.

    7. Re:Stands to reason by OldManAndTheC++ · · Score: 5, Funny

      Kinda like how, if I learned the skill of snake charming, and I worked in an I.T. department, I wouldn't expect any extras in my paycheck

      Just add "Expert with Python" to your resume.

      --
      Soylent Green is peoplicious!
    8. Re:Stands to reason by nacturation · · Score: 4, Funny

      ANY language in addition to English. Ellway, ouyay oday eakspay Igpay Atinlay, on'tday ouyay?
      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    9. Re:Stands to reason by cadeon · · Score: 1
      Kinda like how, if I learned the skill of snake charming, and I worked in an I.T. department, I wouldn't expect any extras in my paycheck. ;-) But if you worked as a flight attendant, it might just come in handy!
      Depends on the snake charming school the flight attendant graduated from. If it was the one in India, that's one set of skills that could prove very useful in a very limited range of situations. If it was the Snake Charming School of Nevada, those skills could prove useful on *every flight*
    10. Re:Stands to reason by Potor · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I disagree. I once worked at IBM, and they hired me, they said, because I knew Latin. I would submit that Latin is to IBM as Swahili is to Vermont (mutatis mutandis).

      Knowing another language also means an ability to think outside of the box (excuse the cliché, but I am tired), because knowing another language is simply the culmination of a bunch of other skills you have (intellectual/cultural curiosity, tenacity, an open mind, and strong analytic / synthetic skills, not to mention probably vastly improved English skills).

      In fact, this last point is probably the strongest argument. I have acquired a three other languages since I turned 19, and although I am perfect in none of them, my English skills are extremely strong because of the extended process of comparative grammar I have undertaken.

      But since I am not a life-long bilingual, I expect now to lose my mind at 71. I guess all you slashdotters who've been coding since the cradle are safe though.

    11. Re:Stands to reason by MrAnnoyanceToYou · · Score: 2, Funny

      Nah. It's been proven that learning things like SQL flat out increase mental instability.

    12. Re:Stands to reason by ag0ny · · Score: 1

      Hey, please tell me where you work. Looks like a very nice place (specially if they pay $600 for EACH extra language that you can speak).

      My mother tongues are Spanish and Catalan, and I also speak English and Japanese fluently. It would be cool to get $1800 extra/month just by showing up. ;)

    13. Re:Stands to reason by Tanuki64 · · Score: 1
      Hmm. Bad example. Okay, if a park ranger excels at Assembly programming, should he/she be paid more?

      No either he is park ranger because he loves it. Then he get exactly the amount of money he wants and deserves.

      Otherwise he does no deserve more, because he is an idiot. Working as a park ranger when he could make more as assembly programmer.
    14. Re:Stands to reason by drsquare · · Score: 1
      "At my work (city hall) bilinguals get $600 extra per month just for knowing another language."
      You have to work out whether the extra cash is worth the time investment in learning and maintaining a language. If it takes you five years to learn a language at twenty hours a week, and you have to study it for twenty hours a week afterwards just to not lose it, then that works out at less than $7 an hour. In many places that's way below minimum wage.

      It would be more profitable to spend the same time stacking shelves.
    15. Re:Stands to reason by jackbird · · Score: 1
      A number of my in-laws work in the New York City psychiatric hospital system. By law, any patient in that system is entitled to translation services to enable them to communicate with doctors and staff in their native language. Several years ago, a schizophrenic entered the system insisting that his native language was Klingon. They retained a Klingon-speaking translator to communicate with him.

      A Swahili speaker in the Vermont government might save them some money down the road.

    16. Re:Stands to reason by real+gumby · · Score: 1
      ...I once worked at IBM, and they hired me, they said, because I knew Latin. I would submit that Latin is to IBM as Swahili is to Vermont...

      Oh I don't know; Latin has a famous role in computing as well...

      (although in my case my memories from those years of classical languages are long since gone....but the modern spoken languages I have to use every day are easily at hand. I guess the same could be said for my memories PL/1 though...long since evaporated).

    17. Re:Stands to reason by gakguk · · Score: 1

      Connecting through culture, celebrating diversity.

    18. Re:Stands to reason by Kattspya · · Score: 1

      That is if you learn the grammar. I know almost nothing of the formal grammar in both of the languages I know. My only way of learning languages is immersion, that's how I learned English and it's a big reason why I couldn't manage to pick up much German.

      I would say that I read more English than Swedish though. Ever since I got as fast in English that's about the only language I read books in because most of the authors I like happen to write in English.

    19. Re:Stands to reason by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Snake Charming School of Nevada? Is that anything like owning a Taser and knowing how to use it on unruly, drunk business-class passengers?

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    20. Re:Stands to reason by goarilla · · Score: 1

      yeah i kinda hate it

      because i'm belgian and i really suck at french
      it goes so far that i often translate dutch 'spreekwoorden' to french
      nice way how to not get a job is showing off your french skills with phrases like this:
      toujours je m'assieds avec mes mains dans mes cheveux
      seriously it's becoming embarrassing
      and be able to speak, read, write french, dutch, english here is not really an advantage
      it's a requirement!

    21. Re:Stands to reason by tehcyder · · Score: 1
      If a secretary can fit a pineapple in her vagina, should she receive extra money every month?
      I agree she should be well compensated for her specialized set of skills
      Certainly enough to fund the running of a webiste, for example. Link anyone?
      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    22. Re:Stands to reason by Lijemo · · Score: 2, Informative

      If your second language is Swahili and you work in Vermont -- well, probably not.

      Actually, Burlington VT is a refugee resettlement center. There are small numbers of people speaking so many languages there that the second-most common language (after English) is "other." This makes life interesting for the public library with regard to forign-lagugage collection development and ESL classes-- and I suspect it makes things interesting for municipal servieces as well.

      Truth is, in a municipal setting, you never know when Swahili (or any other language) will be very useful to know.

    23. Re:Stands to reason by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 1
      Kinda like how, if I learned the skill of snake charming, and I worked in an I.T. department, I wouldn't expect any extras in my paycheck.

      You, sir, obviously have not be in I.T. long enough.
      --
      They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
  26. Speaking as a biostatistician by dorpus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The study only had 184 patients from a single treatment center. There is selection bias, since the study only sampled patients who were already suffering from memory loss. How many other bilingual immigrants with memory loss are lurking in the general population, who aren't going to memory loss clinics due to lack of knowledge? Also, what method did they use to adjust for "cultural differences, immigration, formal education, employment and even gender" with only 184 patients?

    The study only proves that bilingual patients who arrived at a particular treatment center were, on average, 4 years older than monolingual patients. It does NOT provide a causal link between bilingualism and cognitive reserve.

    1. Re:Speaking as a biostatistician by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shhh. This is Slashdot. Informed opinions are verboten.

    2. Re:Speaking as a biostatistician by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps you should search the publications of the primary author. If I'm not mistaken she has published a number of similar papers with varying assessments and cognitive measures tending toward the same conclusion.

      When you say that 184 patients is a small number you're thinking in terms of clinical trials for drugs where 1/1000 or 1/10000 deaths is too much. Yes, there is a selection bias but the 184 is plenty to determine a real difference between two groups.

    3. Re:Speaking as a biostatistician by purplelocust · · Score: 1

      There are some obvious other bias possibilities in the study. The languages listed ("the most prevalent being Polish, Yiddish, German, Romanian and Hungarian") and the ages of the patients now (60-80 now, say) suggest to me that these are people who immigrated to Canada from eastern Europe in about 1930-1950. These are people who chose to immigrate, which means they had some initiative and at least a bit more resources than the average eastern European who did not immigrate. So that biases that population in one direction. In the US, particularly in NYC, the 1930 to post WWII Eastern European immigrant community was very strong, with many scientists, engineers, entepreneurs, and artists coming from that background. That being said, it is not so easy to construct a study to measure the effects of bilingualism on dementia- how about having a control group just speak one language, and "prescribing" that another group speak a second language regularly in their home for 40 years or so. The reasons that a second language is spoken regular are widely varied, presumably, but probably those reasons have a greater correlation with delayed onset of dementia than with the act of speaking a second language.

    4. Re:Speaking as a biostatistician by giafly · · Score: 1

      On this subject, Dorpus knows what he's talking about. Whenever you adjust a study for biases, this effectively reduces the sample size, and 184 is anyway a pathetically small number on which to base any dramatic conclusion.

      Also there's a fundamental problem with small medical studies that you get "reporting bias". The 99 studies where there's no dramatic result are ignored by Slashdot and the media. The 1 where something odd is reported gets all the press interest. So take the results with a huge pinch of salt and wait for it to be replicated - or more likely not.

      --
      Reduce, reuse, cycle
  27. What about more languages? by Palal · · Score: 1

    What if I know more languages? Does it increase even more?

    --
    -Palal
    1. Re:What about more languages? by I7D · · Score: 1
      "What if I know more languages? Does it increase even more?"

      No; Strangely it reverses.

      --
      Neil is that you? Yeah yeah, it's me... Neil...
    2. Re:What about more languages? by Chaffar · · Score: 1
      What if I know more languages? Does it increase even more?
      Exponentially so, but your penis shrinks. Be careful what you wish for.
  28. Proof! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In other words, onset of dementia can be avoid if the voices in your head are not able to understand each other....

    I guess its safe to learn LISP after all....

  29. And what would be the effects ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of learning both QWERTY and Dvorak? I just got started learning Dvorak, and I already know QWERTY.

    Of course, I'm also already trilingual plus i'm starting to learn chinese and japanese.

  30. Dead languages... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    I'm thinking (yes, be very afraid) about learning Latin for the hell of it. What's the best way to learn this dead langauge without going crazy?

    1. Re:Dead languages... by CptNerd · · Score: 1
      --
      By the taping of my glasses, something geeky this way passes
    2. Re:Dead languages... by Ruphuz · · Score: 1

      The sole intention of learning Latin strongly suggests that it might be too late for you ;)

      --
      My other post is a First.
  31. Wunderschöne pink elephant? by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Most nem fogom megmagyarázni hogy mi a francot jelent amit írtam, legyen elég annyi hogy 4 évvel tovább élek mint ti, haha.

    I kind of like the idea of living 4 years longer. Does the effect stack with more than 2 languages? If that's the case then it ist Zeit für ein neu schprache gelearnen.

    Sometimes the idea that my english/american is most likely better (barring accent, but could be trained) than half of the people speaking it as a native language scares me.

    --
    It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
    Be yourself no matter what they say
    1. Re:Wunderschöne pink elephant? by TheoMurpse · · Score: 1
      Sometimes the idea that my english/american is most likely better (barring accent, but could be trained) than half of the people speaking it as a native language scares me.
      Well, that depends on what you define as "better." Do you mean "can read high literature," "can coin new slang which sounds like an English-speaker would have," or do you mean "can apply unwritten linguistic patterns to new-to-you sequences?" For example, you may be able to read Ulysses by Joyce and enjoy it (while many Americans cannot), but can you tell me the difference between "absofuckinglutely" and "abfuckingsolutely," which sounds more correct, and then tell me where you would insert "fucking" into "librarian" to preserve the feel of a native speaker? That is how one ought to define "better." I'm sure you really meant to say that your command of English may be superior in literary understanding to other Americans.

      I apologize for so much emphasis on "fucking," but I find that the native usage of one of English's very few infixes is fascinating.

      And for anyone curious, the first language A Beautiful Mind is using in his post is Hungarian.
    2. Re:Wunderschöne pink elephant? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most nem fogom megmagyarázni hogy mi a francot jelent amit írtam Nem is kell.
    3. Re:Wunderschöne pink elephant? by dunkelfalke · · Score: 2, Funny

      es ist Zeit, eine neue Sprache zu lernen.

      now call me grammar nazi.

      --
      Conservatism: The fear that somewhere, somehow, someone you think is your inferior is being treated as your equal.
    4. Re:Wunderschöne pink elephant? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >and then tell me where you would insert "fucking" into "librarian"

      Doesn't work. You need to add an e, or it won't roll of the tongue.
      So you get liberfuckingarian. Then you also need to get rid of the g, which makes liberfuckinarian.
      You could for added invective, change the last i to an y like so, liberfuckinaryan. Which can be translated as book hating nazi. There you go.

    5. Re:Wunderschöne pink elephant? by Ruphuz · · Score: 1

      but can you tell me the difference between "absofuckinglutely" and "abfuckingsolutely," which sounds more correct,

      I find your example excelfuckingent, or fanfuckingtastic at the very least.

      where you would insert "fucking" into "librarian" to preserve the feel of a native speaker?

      "fucking librarian"? :D

      Of course, no offence meant to librarians.

      --
      My other post is a First.
    6. Re:Wunderschöne pink elephant? by bobdinkel · · Score: 1

      My two cents as a native speaker of American English:

      abso-fucking-lutely

      li-fucking-brarian

      I also have a fascination with English infixes. Are there others besides "fucking" and possibly "freaking"?

      --
      A publicly traded company exists solely to make profits for shareholders.
    7. Re:Wunderschöne pink elephant? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Finally, someone who knows what the fuck they're talking about.

    8. Re:Wunderschöne pink elephant? by TheoMurpse · · Score: 1
      Are there others besides "fucking" and possibly "freaking"?
      According to a linguistics professor I had in college, "fucking" is the only one. However, I'm sure she meant "fucking" and its relatives, such as "freaking," "friggin," and "bloody."

      However, you know how people say "a whole nother ballgame." I have a theory that this is really "awholenother," with "whole" being an infix which is not placed at syllabic boundaries (an|oth|er), since there is no such word as "nother." This would be the only case of "whole" being an infix that I know of. But IANAL (I am not a linguist).
    9. Re:Wunderschöne pink elephant? by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

      Sometimes the idea that my english/american is most likely better (barring accent, but could be trained) than half of the people speaking it as a native language scares me.

      Same here, I often have to reword what I say with simpler and more common words for native english speakers. The annoying part is that many of them refuse to acknowledge that both my level of english and my awareness and knowledge of the american civilization near or exceed those of the average american citizen, most likely due to a kind of complex of inferiority in them imputable to their relatively poor awareness of the "outside world" and their linguistical ignorance.

      On the other hand I completely suck at figuring out ebonics.

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    10. Re:Wunderschöne pink elephant? by kraut · · Score: 1

      Es ist Zeit.

      --
      no taxation without representation!
    11. Re:Wunderschöne pink elephant? by bobdinkel · · Score: 1

      As I read your post I was thinking "that's exactly what a linguistics professor of mine said". Then I saw your email address. Is the linguistics profressor you're referring to named Mark Southern? If so, we may have been in the same class

      --
      A publicly traded company exists solely to make profits for shareholders.
    12. Re:Wunderschöne pink elephant? by TheoMurpse · · Score: 1
      Is the linguistics profressor you're referring to named Mark Southern?
      No, mine was Ginger Pizer.
  32. More material to decay? by deadlock911 · · Score: 1

    If this is true (previous statements point out this far from proves it) then maybe it is because there are more neural connections there to decay (therefore taking longer). Does anyone know of any studies linking things like university education or overall knowledge base with dementia onset?

  33. Finally some good news! by Jethro · · Score: 1

    Oh please tell me that it's exponential! I can always learn more languages...

    Then again, I'm bilingual and people are always saying I'm demented.

    --


    In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is kinky.
  34. Poster needs to learn another language by Dersaidin · · Score: 1

    Whoever posted this needs to take up another language immediately. Maybe then their mind will hold together well enough to stop them posting something so old.

  35. I don't think this is specific to languages by Secret+Rabbit · · Score: 1

    IMO, I think that this has to do with constant learning.

    With regards to language, one constantly has to keep updating the colloquialisms. But, when two (or more) languages are concerned, one much also keep in mind what is the equivalent word/phrase in the other language(s). Then there's the whole translating between languages. That would require somewhat fast thought as to not lose subtleties.

    I imagine the same is true for anyone that constantly learns and/or has to do consistently high level critical thinking. Keeping the brain active has its benefits. I mean, how many academic researchers go nutty statistically speaking (at least the ones that didn't start that way ;)).

    I remember hearing about a master chess player in his old age complaining that he couldn't see as far into the game anymore. Then after he died they found out that this technically had advanced Alzheimer's. They conjectured that having played the game his whole life, the brain had so many "connections" that the Alzheimer's just cut off a lot of them, but not the majority/all of them.

    Basically, the phrase, "If you don't use it, you lose it" has more than just a couple applications.

    1. Re:I don't think this is specific to languages by Virtual_Raider · · Score: 1
      I agree with you in that practice keeps the brain "fit", but I just wanted to point out that once you truly become bilingual then the translation process stops and you switch to full-on thinking-in-x-language mode. I am bilingual in this sense as I am fluent both in English and Spanish, but when I speak French I have to go back to translating as I'm not yet fully proficient with the language yet. I expect this is the reason why the study says that the same area of the brain lights up for either language, there is no constructing sentences in one language and then moving them to the other (as I'd be forced to do to translate from French to English or Spanish).

      This also is the same principle behind the games like Brain Age. Not long ago there was at least one article here on /. about how some scientist discovered that adults do produce more neurons contrary to what was previously believed, but they die within days if no new synapses are formed, so learning new stuff actually does help rejuvenate and maintain your brain. I owe you the link, i'm at work so I should at least pretend to do some :P

      --
      +Raider of the lost BBS
    2. Re:I don't think this is specific to languages by bladx · · Score: 1
      IMO, I think that this has to do with constant learning.
      Agreed.
  36. A little off-topic... but funny, nevertheless. by NerveGas · · Score: 1

    We had a person apply for a programming position, and on his resume, he listed polyglotism as one of his areas of interest. One of the other interviewers said "That's terrific! All of us here speak another language - let's see - Portugese, Spanish, Spanish, and Japanese. Which languages do you speak?"

    The poor guy sunk about six inches into his chair as he confessed "Well... none, really."

    --
    Oh, you're not stuck, you're just unable to let go of the onion rings.
  37. well, unless... by oohshiny · · Score: 1

    the two languages happen to be C and Java--then, dementia sets in instantly (I should know!). Fortunately, it's partially reversible.

  38. Bullshit by Alphager · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I am the Son of a Diplomat. This means that every 4 to 5 years, we went to a different country as a family. We _ALL_ managed to learn the foreign language in ~12 months (this means that we could function normally in school, understood the local television and had no problems reading newspapers). After 24 months, one can master the language to the point where literature-studies are not harder in any language. Of course, it helps to really live _IN_ the country among locals, not in some kind of gated community where everybody speaks your language. And we never got satelite-TV, so all TV-chanels were in the local language. End effect is that my whole family is multi-lingual. Even my parents, who where significantly older than 5 when they learned these other languages.

    1. Re:Bullshit by Dun+Malg · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I am the Son of a Diplomat. This means that every 4 to 5 years, we went to a different country as a family. We _ALL_ managed to learn the foreign language in ~12 months (this means that we could function normally in school, understood the local television and had no problems reading newspapers). After 24 months, one can master the language to the point where literature-studies are not harder in any language.Of course, it helps to really live _IN_ the country among locals, not in some kind of gated community where everybody speaks your language. And we never got satelite-TV, so all TV-chanels were in the local language.End effect is that my whole family is multi-lingual. Even my parents, who where significantly older than 5 when they learned these other languages. Do you really think learning the language in 12-24 months is fast? I learned Russian well enough to read and discuss Crime and Punishment after 8 months at the Defense Language Institute when I was in the Army, and all we had was classroom instruction and textbooks. Achieving basic fluency after 12 months of immersion is only average for an adult, and downright pedestrian compared to how fast a child under 5 can pick it up.
      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    2. Re:Bullshit by JanneM · · Score: 1

      Do you really think learning the language in 12-24 months is fast? I learned Russian well enough to read and discuss Crime and Punishment after 8 months at the Defense Language Institute when I was in the Army, and all we had was classroom instruction and textbooks. Achieving basic fluency after 12 months of immersion is only average for an adult, and downright pedestrian compared to how fast a child under 5 can pick it up.

      His very point was 24 months isn't all that fast or unusual, as opposed to those people who seem to believe (or just take as a convenient excuse) that mastering a new language is more or less impossible after the end of adolescence.

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    3. Re:Bullshit by CRCulver · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Do you really think learning the language in 12-24 months is fast? I learned Russian well enough to read and discuss Crime and Punishment after 8 months at the Defense Language Institute when I was in the Army, and all we had was classroom instruction and textbooks.

      Speaking as another former DLI student (Mandarin Chinese), one cannot really compare the situation there to that of the OP. Of course one is going to learn a language fast if severe punishment follows if one slacks off, and if one is spending eight hours a day with some of the finest language instructors in North America. If one is the average civilian without access to world-class language training, learning a foreign language in 12 months is fast.

    4. Re:Bullshit by MrAnnoyanceToYou · · Score: 1

      Um.... He didn't say he was competent in the language at the end of that time. In fact, I'd bet that by the time he had learned to pick up languages quickly he was capable of basic communication within a few weeks at most.......

      The point was that most Americans are irrationally fearful of picking up additional languages, and should not be. Nothing more. I agree, and I bet you do too.....

      As an exception to the rule, I think I should mention that if you go to another country to teach English, you will not learn anywhere near as quickly. It is much easier to slide along if everyone knows you're in the country to teach people to speak your language.

      I met a man whose German was worse than mine despite having married a German woman.... It was weird.

    5. Re:Bullshit by Sique · · Score: 1

      If you don't have special language courses and just pick it up by daily usage, 12 months is a realistic time frame. And the first steps are very fast indeed. When I was in Brazil for three weeks I picked up enough Portugese to understand the basics of a news paper article, could follow some of the TV shows and in the end was able to tell a joke in Portugese. On the other hand I was visiting relatives who don't speak anything but Portugese.

      And no, I am not the language talent in our family. My brother speaks seven languages (including some of the more obscure like Middle Age Latin and Irish).

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    6. Re:Bullshit by Alphager · · Score: 1

      Of course I was talking about the whole family - including my mother, who stayed at home and did not work at that time. We kids learned _much_ faster.

    7. Re:Bullshit by regexes · · Score: 1

      Yes, I would agree with you... I have met many an American married to a German who speak extremely poor german. One case in particular... he's been here as long as I have (14 years) and still can't order from a menu.

    8. Re:Bullshit by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      Being young is a huge advantage when learning languages, but it's not without problems. Kid I know who grew up in Italy has almost forgotten the language, on account of moving to Norway at the age of six or so. I hear that those that learn to read and write the foreign language do much better. Still, seems you have to use it. I also know a norwegian who moved to the US at sixteen or so, and his norwegian is quite weak by now. He's in his eighties, and perhaps suffering from mild dementia...

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    9. Re:Bullshit by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1
      I am the Son

      So is English not your primary language? In English, when the word "son" is capitalized, it refers to a particular Christian mythological figure. I thought you were going to tell me you're Jesus!
      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    10. Re:Bullshit by Alphager · · Score: 1

      Obviously English is not my primary language. Sorry, for the error! In German, the word "Sohn" (son) is always capitalized.

    11. Re:Bullshit by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      Well, crap. I was going to ask you how you fit all those animals on to one boat. Oh well.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
  39. Not just bilingualism - mental activity in general by Raul654 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In the book 'Everything Bad is Good For You', they mentioned several studies that have come to the same general conclusion - staying mentally active tends to reduce both the incidence and seriousness of mental disease. One nunnery they studied, whose order believes than an idle mind is the devil's playground, the incidence of mental disease was a fraction of the total population, and the overall lifespans were tremendously greater (the two librarians were 97 and 99 years old)

    --


    To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
    --E.C. Stanton
  40. I do a wee bit better than that. by patio11 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As long as we're talking about human languages on Slashdot for a change, let me give you my pitch: STUDY A LANGUAGE. I'm a native speaker of English who also speaks passable Japanese and can program. There aren't exactly tens of thousands of people with that skillset. There are more than a few positions that require it (including my current job), and every time I hear of a new one the hiring official practically begs me to introduce him to anyone I know who would fit the bill. I'm not exactly hot stuff as a programmer -- in fact, I bet you could find dozens of people who are my equal or better at any graduating class in India. None of them can do my job. This gives me job security and a variety of employment options in a quite lucrative little niche which has a nice, deep moat around it that keeps out competitors.

    If you're planning on a career in IT, get yourself an answer to the question "What can you do that I can't do with two and a half Indians for the same price?" "I speak a foreign language" is an easy and sufficient answer to that question.

    I'd rank languages in terms of priority by a quick mental guesstimate of our trade with the appropriate countries divided by the number of Americans who speak the language. Chinese, Japanese, and Korean are going to be high on the list. Arabic is an up-and-comer, particularly if you desire to work for the federal government. Spanish is not a great choice because we have plenty of American bilinguals. I wouldn't personally recommend the European languages because the market sizes are smaller but, hey, there is money to be made in facilitating communication and commerce with Italy or Poland and SOMEBODY is making it.

    1. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by silkenphoenixx · · Score: 3, Interesting

      As long as we're talking about human languages on Slashdot for a change, let me give you my pitch: STUDY A LANGUAGE.
      I think you've touched on an important point there, it's the extra mental activity that increases the brain's longevity, and studying (or even learning on a conversational level) an extra language really streches the brain's proverbial muscles, speaking as a bi-lingual myself. It requitres an increase of one's mental capacities, one eventually learns to think in another language rather than deciding what you want to say in English and translating it before speaking. It's the exercise that helps.

      Note the article said that being bi-lingual fends off dementia, not death, as was implied in a post somewhere above this one. Thus not working as hard because of a pay increase due to an extra language has nothing to do with it, and that's totally ignoring the fact that we generally associate working harder with increased longevity (although increased job stress would counter this out).
    2. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by sporkme · · Score: 1

      What about Japanese people that speak English?

    3. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by mackyrae · · Score: 1

      Hey, me too. Used to speak Spanish along with Japanese, but haven't in so many years it wore off. Japanese kept popping into my head when I started studying Russian too though.

      --
      look! it's a bird, it's a plane, it's....a girl? yes, a girl browsing Slashdot on Linux
    4. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do you call somebody that speaks many languages? Polygloth What do you call somebody that speaks two languages? Billingual What do you call somebody that speaks only one language? American You have disqualified yourself. Beware of the neofacists, they will shoot you along with anything that looks slightly different from their retarded mass-mind.

    5. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      My native language is Russian :)

      I'm now studying German and knowledge of English really helps. And actually studying different languages is quite fun, especially when you start noticing similarities between languages in absolutely unexpected places.

    6. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No thanks. If I end up using phrases like "I do a wee bit better," well then, I'd rather just be uneducated. Thx anyway.

    7. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      What do you call somebody that speaks only one language? American

      Speaking one language? Well that's just darned convenient. Knowing one language? Well to graduate from most decent American universities requires several years of a foreign language (in addition to the 2 years required for high school graduation in my area), so that doesn't really apply to Americans. Just because we don't use languages other than English does not mean we're lacking in any way. There is no need. I grew up around a mixture of Polish, Bohemian, and English...in Southern California. In high school I learned Spanish, and the resulting Spanglish fluency has permitted me to survive on the local fast food services throughout college. I now remember a handful of words in Polish and Bohemian, but am damn near fluent in Spanish. If you have no use for additional languages, they are worthless. Hell, in California a person can easily get by as a monoglot in either of two languages (English or Spanish).

    8. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah yes, because ALL of the population of productive age in the USA has college education. The VAST majority of the people is willfully and complacently ignorant, and their idea of knowing a foreign language is saying "burrito" and "deja-vu".

    9. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by niktemadur · · Score: 1

      And actually studying different languages is quite fun.

      Well, from what I've heard, in Western Europe it is de rigueur to speak at least three languages. It's not even admirable in countries like Switzerland and Germany, it's a standard requirement.

      --
      Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
    10. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by christophe · · Score: 4, Informative

      in Western Europe it is de rigueur to speak at least three languages. Well, Western Europe is a big place with many different nations. You can expect people from small countries, like Swiss or Belgians, to be fluent in one or two foreign languages, and people from Sweden or Danemark to speak very good English and often German. But the average French barely speaks enough English for international business (with many exceptions), and English people don't even have to learn another language. Situation seems better in Germany, at least for English. IMHO, that has more to do with the educational system and motivation than anything else. Exposure to foreign content (most films in original version with subtitles on TV for example, as in Danemark) is another key.

      (Spoken as a French which speaks three languages).

      --
      Christophe (Don't hesitate to point out my spelling and grammar mistakes, I want to learn - Thanks).
    11. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by linuxci · · Score: 2, Funny

      And actually studying different languages is quite fun.
       
      Well, from what I've heard, in Western Europe it is de rigueur to speak at least three languages. It's not even admirable in countries like Switzerland and Germany, it's a standard requirement. In the UK those three languages are usually en-gb, en-us and en-au
    12. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by ag0ny · · Score: 1

      What's interesting is that the more languages you know, the easier it gets to learn new ones. I know Spanish, Catalan, English and Japanese, and now I'm studying mandarin Chinese. While learning to speak it is a real pain in the ass, the fact is that learning Chinese is improving my Japanese noticeably.

    13. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by wannabgeek · · Score: 1

      If you're planning on a career in IT, get yourself an answer to the question "What can you do that I can't do with two and a half Indians for the same price?" "I speak a foreign language" is an easy and sufficient answer to that question.

      Are you kidding? Almost all Indians in IT speak at least one language other than english. (I Know all the jokes about how Indians in tech support do not speak english, but you get the point) And given the demography of India, it is more likely that the 2.5 Indians will have knowledge of 2 languages between them (again, 2 languages apart from english).

      --
      I'm much more funny, interesting and insightful than the moderators think
    14. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by niktemadur · · Score: 1

      Exposure to foreign content (most films in original version with subtitles on TV for example, as in Danemark) is another key.

      Interesting point! I once heard it said that a general measure of the cultural level of a society is the ratio of dubbed-subtitled foreign films.
      Which brings me to a curious contradiction, as the french are acknowledged as purist film buffs who still reject dubbed films, yet as we all know, cling to their language with great zeal.
      Does the subtitle purism exist in just in a city like Paris, or is it a nationwide mindset?

      --
      Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
    15. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by zsau · · Score: 1

      Interesting point! I once heard it said that a general measure of the cultural level of a society is the ratio of dubbed-subtitled foreign films.

      Really? Because aside from ads that have been dubbed to count as local content, and childrens shows, I don't think there's any dubbed content on Australian (free to air) tv. But there is a bit of subbed content, primarily on SBS. You cannot say that we have a generally high cultural level with a straight face.

      --
      Look out!
    16. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by christophe · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think this has economic roots. Dubbing has about the same cost in every language, but the cost for the final customer is very different according to the size of population/market.

      France (like Germany) is a big market (60/80 millions people) to make dubbing economically feasible. Danemark for example (5 millions people) only dubs movies for children ; subtitles are enough for the rest. It is not a wonder to have very good English-speaking Danes when most of their TV speaks English. (It goes as far as endangering the Danish book industry: succesfull English or American books are read in English before the translated Danish version is available.)

      In some Eastern Europe countries exit a cheap version of dubbing, with one or two actors reading translated text without synching the lips. They're used to it... Many Swiss people are probably accustomed to switching between their 3 or 4 official languages.

      I can assure you that ALL foreign movies are dubbed in France, in the cinemas or on TV. Subtitles are not mainstream (this is laziness). But it's true that a rather big "cultural" alternative market exists for many people like me who prefer the original voices (with subtitles) and see it as a way to improve their English or German. It you want original content, you can have it (French-German TV broadcast TV channel, many free foreign TV channels through ADSL, cinemas in big cities).
      On the other side, our educational system needs to seriously improve the way foreign languages are teached (even if the default is that most children between 10 and 14 must begin to learn 2 languages (mainly English+Spanish, sometimes German or Italian).

      As for clinging to our language with zeal, it is resistance of a once-powerful country in face of the power of English - and the American influence in many ways and areas, which goes with it. In my mind, the real problem has more to do with the lack of bi/trilinguism than with protecting French (which won't disappear). And we won't make ourselves understood by speaking so badly foreign languages.
      I'm astonished that so many countries accept so easily to throw all their own identity and use English (and only English) in so many areas: Scandinavian pop music, European Union internal communication, business relationships... I understand the practical reasons, but still...

      --
      Christophe (Don't hesitate to point out my spelling and grammar mistakes, I want to learn - Thanks).
    17. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by Ethelred+Unraed · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ahem. That may be the case in Switzerland, but in my experience (having lived 13 years in Germany) the Germans are also by and large pretty monoglot themselves -- not as bad perhaps as the French, English and especially Americans, but it's not like you find that many people in Germany who speak more than a bit of a second language (usually English). Certainly a far lower proportion than in Norway, the Netherlands, Switzerland and so on.

      It is partly because there just isn't that much interest in Germany in learning other languages -- movies, TV shows, etc. are all dubbed (usually poorly to middling), English-language original editions of books don't sell remotely as well as German translations (quite often rather inferior), and so on. Before multilingual DVDs came out, it was very hard to find English-language video cassettes, unless you lived in a major city like Hamburg or Berlin. It used to be that most major cities had perhaps one or two cinemas that did show movies in English, but even that's being scaled back -- the city where I live now shows more movies in Turkish and Russian than in English (because of all the immigrants).

      In Switzerland, the Netherlands and so on, by contrast, movies generally are shown in the original language (albeit often with subtitles) and the culture is more encouraging towards learning another language. In four-official-language Switzerland it's a day-to-day necessity; in official-language-pretty-much-only-spoken-here Netherlands it's a commercial necessity, just to do business with the rest of the world.

      I remember visiting Amsterdam once some years ago. My (German) wife and I were accosted by a panhandler, who addressed us in Dutch. I didn't catch what he said (I only speak a bit of Dutch) and asked my wife sotto voce if she caught what he said. He apparently thought I spoke French to her, so he switched to a stream of pretty fluent-sounding French. I turned back to him, and said "What?", and he switched to (quite good) English, and said "Can I have a bit of money? I want to buy some food." I asked him how many languages he spoke. Dutch, French, German and English, he said. Why doesn't he get a job as a translator, I asked. He shrugged and said everyone in Amsterdam speaks four languages. I figured he had a point, gave him a few guilders (I don't normally give panhandlers money, but what the hell, I gave him an A for effort), and went on.

      Cheers,

      Ethelred

      --
      Everyone wants to be Ethelred. Even I want to be Ethelred.
    18. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by renoX · · Score: 1

      >Does the subtitle purism exist in just in a city like Paris, or is it a nationwide mindset?

      Mostly in Paris, and not coincidentally, it's also in Paris that you have the greatest probability to speak to French people which speak English too.
      I think that those who prefer subtitled movies usually speak the original language too: it's good to sustain your knowledge of the foreign language.

    19. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by Joebert · · Score: 1

      They sex chickens.

      I learned that on Discovery Channels, Dirty Jobs show.

      --
      Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
    20. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
      I am often surprised when I go abroad (from the US) and see how pervasive English-language cultural elements are. Sometimes it seems like US TV shows like Friends, CSI, or 24 tend to outnumber native language TV shows (and this surprised me most in France!). For countries like Denmark or Sweden this makes sense because countries with less than 10 million people are not going to have the size to be able to create many cultural elements of the size and quality that almost half a billion English speakers with a common culture can. But France and Germany are larger countries that should have the critical population base.

      I can understand how the French would want to cling to their language, because English is a bastard child. James D. Nicoll noted:

      "The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary."

      Personally, I would prefer Spanish to become the lingua franca since it is probably the cleanest of the Romance languages (and doesn't have all the silent endings that make me want to claw my eyes out when studying English or French). But we are stuck with English for at least the next 30 years or so I'm guessing. Perhaps the de facto lingua franca status will allow people to get the motivation to clean up the abysmal spelling of English.
    21. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by drsquare · · Score: 1
      Interesting point! I once heard it said that a general measure of the cultural level of a society is the ratio of dubbed-subtitled foreign films.
      Either that or it just means their own film industry is abysmal.
    22. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by anothy · · Score: 1
      not disputing anything in your post, just pointing something out:
      Well, Western Europe is a big place with many different nations.
      depending on how one defines "nation", so is America. compare the number of indigenous languages found in Europe to the number found in North America; guess who's got more (hint: it's not Europe). most of the numbers for the indigenous NorAm languages are pretty low, but there's a few that are still significant populations in various regions (my company got asked to translate our app into Navajo, for example; just the second translation we were asked to do, and the first was for an international market). if you're in the american southwest, particularly, knowing spanish and navajo probably makes you twice as valuable, on average, as someone who just speaks english. people over-estimate the homogeneity of the Americas. it's true for Central and South America, too; i've got a few friends from Guatemala who've met plenty of people who only speak Mayan; their only Spanish is "no hablo castellano".
      --

      i speak for myself and those who like what i say.
    23. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by jackbird · · Score: 1
      Personally, I would prefer Spanish to become the lingua franca since it is probably the cleanest of the Romance languages (and doesn't have all the silent endings that make me want to claw my eyes out when studying English or French). But we are stuck with English for at least the next 30 years or so I'm guessing.

      If English and French make you want to claw your eyes out, you'll need to spend the entirety of those thirty years learning the Chinese you'll need afterwards.

    24. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by verus+vorago · · Score: 1

      I think you are under-estimating.

      Each of the three Indians I work with speaks at least 4 languages: English (at least as well as the vast majority of Australians/Americans/Brits I've met), Hindi, at least one other Indian language and one of German or French.

      Despite the fact that our most important customer is in Spain, my Spanish has been used in a work situation only once: to order from a Colombian waiter when our team went to an Indian restaurant.

    25. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by thegnu · · Score: 1

      You cannot say that we have a generally high cultural level with a straight face.

      Maybe you should come to the US and compare. :-)

      I think the "high cultural level" thing is more like a culture's awareness of other cultures, no necessarily being haute couture. In Mexico, I discover that even among the lower classes, there's a cultural awareness that people don't have in the US (in general). Living in another country really stabilizes and centralizes your opinion on your own country. If you hate it, you'll like it more, and if you like it, you'll hate it more. If you think all the people are crazy, you'll probably want to go back and visit those crazy bastards after a few years, because it turns out you're crazy, too. :-)

      --
      Please stop stalking me, bro.
    26. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by thegnu · · Score: 1

      Either that or it just means their own film industry is abysmal.

      Sister Act 2
      2 Fast, 2 Furious
      Bring in On (2?)
      You got served
      Eragon
      The Santa Clause 3
      Will Smith movies (except, of course, Wild Wild West. That was fantastic)
      Josh Hartnett movies
      Ben Affleck movies (Daredevil! He's blind!!! BUT HE CAN SEE!!!)
      Ashton F. Kutcher (the f stands for Fucking)
      Scary Movie 3
      Not Another Teen Movie
      American Pie 4
      Mission Impossible 3 was the worst movie I've seen in forever

      And I've seen lots of good foreign movies. I'd rather the industry slow down a little, and stop trying to sell me monkey shit in a bag and call it a movie.

      --
      Please stop stalking me, bro.
    27. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by soliptic · · Score: 1
      Christophe (Don't hesitate to point out my spelling and grammar mistakes, I want to learn - Thanks).

      Well, I'll take you at your word, for three reasons:

      • I enjoyed your post
      • It's a very quiet afternoon here at work
      • It seems appropriate given the article we're commenting on

      ;-)

      NB: before I even begin - your English is already great, the fact I understand all of it is proof of that. My "corrections" in many places are not so much correcting something which is "wrong", but just making things slightly smoother or more elegant. My French is rubbish. It used to be quite good when I was about 17, 18 (the culimination of studies, and holidaying in France most years), but since then I haven't been to France or studied it, and now I can barely remember it at all.

      France (like Germany) is a big market (60/80 millions people) to make dubbing economically feasible.

      ...is a big market (60/80 million people) which makes dubbing economically feasible.

      Danemark for example (5 millions people)

      Denmark :)

      And once again - 5 "million", singular.

      It is not a wonder to have very good English-speaking Danes when most of their TV speaks English.

      It is not a surprise to have fluent English-speaking Danes when most of the speech on their TV is in English.

      In some Eastern Europe countries exit a cheap version of dubbing, with one or two actors reading translated text without synching the lips.

      I think exit was a typo for "exists"? I would probably rephrase it "Some Eastern European countries use a cheap version..."

      On the other side, our educational system needs to seriously improve the way foreign languages are teached

      Teached --> Taught.

      And we won't make ourselves understood by speaking so badly foreign languages.

      "...by speaking foreign languages so badly"

      I'm astonished that so many countries accept so easily to throw all their own identity

      I'm not sure how to rephrase this elegantly whilst sticking closely to your words. If I wanted to keep the concept (verb) of "accept", I would probably say "I'm astonished that so many countries (so easily) accept the loss of their own identity..." On the other hand, if I wanted to keep the concept/verb of "throw", I would say "I'm astonished that so many countries (so easily) throw away all of their own identity". Offhand, I can't think of a smooth way of keeping both concepts in the sentence.

    28. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by tehcyder · · Score: 1
      If you're planning on a career in IT, get yourself an answer to the question "What can you do that I can't do with two and a half Indians for the same price?" "I speak a foreign language" is an easy and sufficient answer to that question.
      That's right, because there aren't any Indians who speak a language other than their own.
      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    29. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by opkool · · Score: 1
      Personally, I would prefer Spanish to become the lingua franca since it is probably the cleanest of the Romance languages


      Err... Spanish is one of the least Latin languages, as it has many influences from Arabic. See Wikipedia for yourself:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Influences_on_the_Spa nish_language

      Somewhere in Wikipedia I read about Occitan being the "possible lingua-franca" for all Romance languages. Sorry, I forgot the link
    30. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by jpkunst · · Score: 1
      He shrugged and said everyone in Amsterdam speaks four languages

      The Dutch like to brag about their supposed multilingualism, but they tend to overrate their abilities. People in Amsterdam (talking about native Dutch here) generally speak two languages: Dutch and stilted, accented 'tourist' and/or 'conference' English. With a small vocabulary.

      JP

    31. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by Petrushka · · Score: 1

      In the spirit of your sig, I shall point out the following very minor quirks in the language of your post (partly to put off marking tests):

      (60/80 millions people)

      Terms like "million" ("thousand", "hundred", etc.) are only pluralised when there is an indefinite number of millions; they're not pluralised when used in a cardinal number.

      Danemark

      It's actually "Denmark", even though the people are referred to as "Danes".

      In some Eastern Europe countries exi[s]t a cheap version of dubbing

      "A cheap version of dubbing" is the subject of this sentence, so the verb should be third person singular, "exists" rather than "exist".

      our educational system needs to seriously improve

      Probably just a slip of the mind, but it's clear that you mean "seriously" to be modifying the verb "needs". Hence "seriously needs to improve" would be better.

      As for clinging to our language with zeal, it is resistance of a once-powerful country

      "Resistance" needs a definite article "the" here. Though a native speaker, I do not pretend to have a complete understanding of the reasons behind all the rules concerning articles in English, so don't ask me why, it'd probably take me hours to work it out. :-)

      and the American influence in many ways and areas, which goes with it.

      Commas are not usually required before relative clauses in UK English. US English, however, does have a strict rule: comma before "which", no comma before "that", and the two alternatives have different meanings (which you can look up). But if you're wanting to use US English, "that" with no comma would be more appropriate here.

      we won't make ourselves understood by speaking so badly foreign languages.

      The adverbial phrase "so badly" should go at the end. I'm not sure what the relevant rule is, off the top of my head.

      so many countries accept so easily to throw all their own identity

      The infinitive can't be used as a substantive in English; use the gerund "throwing" instead.

      I'm sorry I can't cite the relevant rules in all of these situations; I teach languages, but not English, and so my knowledge of English grammatical rules is not always conscious knowledge. However, I'd better compliment you on the fact that your English is better than many of my students who are native speakers. :-) And it's definitely better than my French, which I haven't had occasion to practise for a decade now.

    32. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by zsau · · Score: 1

      I think the "high cultural level" thing is more like a culture's awareness of other cultures, no necessarily being haute couture.

      Ah, well that could well be the case. It's very difficult to not be aware of other cultures when you have none of your own :) (Or at least, anything local is considered to be provincial and not worth paying attention to; if it is to be admired it must be imported. See for instance, the difference between attitudes of Australian football and soccer.)

      --
      Look out!
    33. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by christophe · · Score: 1
      Many thanks for your comment!

      Terms like "million" ("thousand", "hundred", etc.) are only pluralised when there is an indefinite number of millions; they're not pluralised when used in a cardinal number. It may be very logical... for an English mind :-)

      Though a native speaker, I do not pretend to have a complete understanding of the reasons behind all the rules concerning articles in English, so don't ask me why, it'd probably take me hours to work it out. :-) That's the same in any language. Only teachers and foreigners try to understand the rules - and must accept that they sometimes do not exist (especially in French or English).

      Commas are not usually required before relative clauses in UK English. US English, however, does have a strict rule: comma before "which", no comma before "that", and the two alternatives have different meanings (which you can look up). But if you're wanting to use US English, "that" with no comma would be more appropriate here. Commas are difficulties in many languages. As a French, I put them where I'd put a silence in the sentence. My German part of the brain tells me to put them before every relative clause (compulsory in German). As a European, I prefer the British English, that is the prefered version in French schools. As a French, I tend to choose the version that [and not 'which', right?] annoys the British the most. Then I remember I'm supposed to disklike Americans too, and choose not to care about grammar, as Globish is a bastardized child of American imperialism and globalization, and English like Americans need to suffer the same way as us who need to learn another language to communicate with the outside :o)
      Seriously, let's say that a comment on Slashdot should be in US English, and one on a British blog in UK English - if a foreigner even knows these subtile differences (I didn't; thanks for pointing them).
      --
      Christophe (Don't hesitate to point out my spelling and grammar mistakes, I want to learn - Thanks).
    34. Re:I do a wee bit better than that. by Petrushka · · Score: 1

      Well, I do sympathise with your principle of making sure to annoy whomever you're talking to; but since I am neither British nor American, but a New Zealander, I'm unable to share your tactic :-( We're not great fans of either the UK or the US these days, but for an NZer it would be almost criminal to use US English!

  41. Don't get too excited. by TheNarrator · · Score: 1

    Correlation does not equal causation. All people's brains are not perfectly equal. Perhaps suffering from dementia later means the brain has more processing capacity to spare, thus making learning two languages easier earlier in life.

  42. The girlfriend by SpaghettiPattern · · Score: 1

    The girlfriend. She loves bilingualism.

    --

    I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
  43. Kuplah! by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Funny

    Kuplah!

  44. Bilingualism delays dementia! by liak12345 · · Score: 1

    Test subjects say "Me gusta!"

  45. Yet Another Reason To Learn Klingon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  46. Don't tell this to the Fenno-Swedes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    They are always grasping at any straws they possibly can reach to push their agenda regarding everyone else having to be Swedish-speaking so that they don't feel like they are in the minority. They LOVE the idea already that bilingualism makes a person holier than anything -- as long, of course, as one of the languages happens to be Swedish. Their unyielding faith and low-quality arguments make them seem like a local branch office of Creationism.

    Based on the supposed sense of tolerance and civilization their language brings to everyone it touches (particularly, Finnish-speakers), our government already mandates Swedish in the most ludicrous ways, even in things where the language is completely irrelevant (like completing a Master's in CS), just to make you have to live it and love it. If you don't, well, too bad, you aren't supposed to exist here if you don't agree to pass the language-political litmus test. Their greatest idea is "language-bathing" Finnish-speaking kids by denying them an education in their own native language. They would even have Finnish taught to them in Swedish. This, of course, destroys the base of a Finnish-speaking educated class and returns us to the darkest medieval days of Swedish rule. All this in the name of tolerance towards the minority.

    I can already see them pushing mandatory Swedish on public health grounds... after all, we're getting older as a nation and dementia is a major concern. Who on Earth would want to get DEMENTIA? If you are only Finnish-speaking [that is, you don't speak Swedish and no matter how many other languages you do speak], you're probably already demented though...

  47. Moving up means never moving back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I married an Asian from a "developing" country who bootstrapped herself from merchant's daughter to earning a Ph.D. from a good US university. Having "moved up" as you say, she now is deeply frustrated at the lack of movement in her country as a whole. It seems it is very easy to become westernized in thought, and lose that hope for your countrymen when you realize how much of your culture seems to reinforce the developing (but not developed) status of the economy. I have many (scientist) friends in the US who have similarly come to the US from Western Europe for studies and found they never wanted to go back to their "backwater" country. We're still young gen-X'ers, so I have a hard time seeing the US as sitting back on a crumbling past. We're still busy making our past, some stupid politicians notwithstanding.

    And to stay on topic, I have found myself frustratingly monolingual after almost three years living with her in her country while she makes a go of "giving back" some of her western knowledge. But, I can only blame myself for keeping a job where I work with other US citizens via telephone, internet, and frequent business trips to North America. In effect, I am stuck in a cocoon of English here at home, since she speaks it fluently and there is nothing to force me to sink or swim. I can see that one needs to allocate a real fraction of their life to learning a new language, meaning time not spent learning something else.

    On the other hand, I found that after studying German for about 6 years as a child, to the point where I could read some decent literature as long as I kept a dictoniary handy, I was able to learn a pretty decent amount of Spanish from just one introductory course in high school. Unfortunately, that has all faded away as I had no practical use for either.

  48. You don't f**king say! by davmoo · · Score: 1

    I'm fluent in both English and profanity, does that count?

    --
    I want a new quote. One that won't spill. One that don't cost too much. Or come in a pill.
    1. Re:You don't f**king say! by metlin · · Score: 1


      Yeah, as my girlfriend says, good at English and Hick English (TM). =)

  49. Re:Not just bilingualism - mental activity in gene by SydShamino · · Score: 1

    This is why I do crossword puzzles. I have problems remembering words when I'm speaking; the word I want just isn't there to use. I think crossword puzzles, which I've gotten better at over the years I've been doing them, help me keep my vocabulary active and keep those synapses firing. Assuming I'm predisposed to Alhzeimer's (and I might be; one great-grandparent had it), this should help keep those particular synapses from turning to mush.

    --
    It doesn't hurt to be nice.
  50. I've added 4 years to my life by Centurix · · Score: 1

    Just by watching Dora the explorer. Thanks Nick Jr.

    --
    Task Mangler
  51. I'm set because... by syousef · · Score: 1

    I know C++ and Java and many more! Wait that's multilingual. What do you mean computer languages don't count?! What were we talking about again?

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  52. Correlation does not imply causality. by Minstrel+Boy · · Score: 1

    Just keep repeating it to yourself, in however many languages you speak.

    KeS

  53. Well then by Jewfro_Macabbi · · Score: 1

    Privet, Kak vas zovut? Menya zovut? Eta ne vazhno

    1. Re:Well then by Edmund+Blackadder · · Score: 1

      Menia zavut Edmund.

      I guess there may be some benefit of being forced to learn Russian and all its infuriating padezhi after all.

    2. Re:Well then by yoprst · · Score: 1

      That's some ancient Russian. It's preved now, krosavcheg!

  54. Gotta Love Academia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    In this present study, researchers set out to answer that question by examining the diagnostic records of 184 patients who came to Baycrest's Sam and Ida Ross Memory Clinic between 2002 and 2005 with cognitive complaints. Of that group, 91 were monolingual and 93 were bilingual. The bilinguals included speakers of 25 different languages, the most prevalent being Polish, Yiddish, German, Romanian and Hungarian.
    Making a conclusion about 6 billion people based on 184 people. I'm sure there are a number of arbitrary attributes you could get similar outcomes. eg Time watching TV, time playing board games, time spent with family, etc.
    This is why I shake my head at social sciences. While it might be interesting to investigate; there should be some hypothesis that they can prove, either by a more significant statistical or less confounded studies before they publish.
  55. "Correct" vs "Useful" by evanbd · · Score: 1

    OK, fine, various weird dialects are correct then. But "correct" English (as defined by, say, your average skilled editor) is a very useful language to know. It helps a lot with communication and clarity, for preventing ambiguity and misunderstandings, and for creating the desired tone of voice (as perceived by the audience) in a piece of writing. So whether you want to call that "correct" English or "standard" English or "anal-retentive proscriptivist copy-editor" English, I don't really care -- but it's damn useful to have it and to have a relatively uniform definition of what it is and uniform education in it.

    Language isn't just about conversing with those you interact with on a daily basis. If you want to communicate with people outside your immediate cultural group, it's awfully useful to have some standardization. I think this is what most people are driving at when they complain about bad English skills among native speakers. Since standardization implies some proscriptivism, someone has to do the proscribing. Perhaps the linguists should stop complaining about the proscriptivism, do some proscribing, and give the 7th grade English teachers some better rules to teach -- I'm sure any linguist will agree that your average grammar class does a fairly bad job of teaching grammar, even when compared to the language it's trying to teach the grammar of (as opposed to whatever dialect or form the people in the class normally use).

    So I am forced to respectfully disagree with you and say that there is something wrong with African American Vernacular English -- not in any abstract, objective sense, and not when communicating with others who are fluent in it, but in using it to attempt to communicate with those who aren't fluent in it, or in using it in situations where it isn't socially expected. And plenty of people do exactly that. I know several people who are effectively bilingual in it and "standard" English, and quite fluidly shift between the two as appropriate to the situation. That seems entirely appropriate. But expecting other people to speak your language in a social situation where the norm is for you to speak theirs is, at best, rude -- be it ignorant American tourists abroad or illegal Mexican immigrants in the US.

  56. what about translate.google.com ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does using automatic translation programs count ?

  57. Well my uncle's cock is bigger then yours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously dude, put it back in your pants.

  58. I bet... by kruhft · · Score: 0, Redundant

    ...correlation won't mean causation in this case. Or any case, in the case of an article like this showing up on /.

    Just a hunch, but hey, what would I know?

    Is there an echo in here?

  59. Finally, proof! by halovaa · · Score: 1

    Je suis Napoleon!

  60. Not worth it by grimJester · · Score: 1

    Ok, you gain four years of lifespan, but learning a language takes about five years of your life, full time. I, for example, speak three languages and graduated from high school at 28.

    1. Re:Not worth it by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

      learning a language takes about five years of your life, full time

      If it really takes you 5 years *full time* to learn a language I advise you to take an IQ test ;-)

      --
      You just got troll'd!
  61. Daniel_Tammet by fredouil · · Score: 2

    one week to learn icelandic, the most difficult language in the work. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Tammet impressive, insnt it

    1. Re:Daniel_Tammet by CRCulver · · Score: 1

      Icelandic is not the most difficult language in the world, since the absolute concept of "most difficult language in the world" doesn't exist. Some languages are easier than others depending on ones own native language and prior experience. And for what it's worth, there are many scholars of Nordic history and Nordic languages who picked up Icelandic after just a common of weeks working through a grammar. In fact, in the academy two weeks is fairly common for when a scholar has to learn a language to make use of some data. Many of Mr Tammet's achievements are impressive, but this is a case of hype.

  62. Re:Not just bilingualism - mental activity in gene by CptNerd · · Score: 1

    I guess the Reader's Digest was right all those years: It Pays To Increase Your Word Power!

    (I used to read those and quiz myself with those columns all the time when I was in junior high and high school. I still throw some people when I use a word that not many people other than William F. Buckley use...)

    --
    By the taping of my glasses, something geeky this way passes
  63. big nitpick by aepervius · · Score: 1

    quote : Native speakers automatically speak perfectly correct English, since correct English is determined by how native speakers speak.

    Correct language (english/french/german) is determined not by academic, but by how the average native speaker speaks that language. Note the accent on average: it is important. This means that some below and above average will not speak the "native language". I cannot give example in english but in my native language (translated in english) the correct way to speak is "which is what I mean" whereas a minority says "that is that I mean". Obviously since the majority use the correct form, then the minority native speaker using the second form are in error, on the contrary to the opinion you support.

    Language *HAS TO* mold itself for the majority of people in some sort of average understood by said majority. It is after all an instrument of communication, and if everybody speaks its own idiom, then it lost completly its purpose as communication tool. Now what I won't argue against, is that "that average" language evolve with time, sometimes yes toward simplification against "artificial proscriptivist norms".

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  64. Stupid, ignorant, or fraud by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Title of the article: "Bilingualism Has Protective Effect In Delaying Onset Of Dementia By Four Years, Canadian Study Shows"

    That's either stupid, ignorant, or deliberate deception. The study did not prove causality. It showed that two phenomena seemed to be related.

    Here's a quote that says what was actually shown: "Our study found that speaking two languages throughout one's life appears to be associated with [my emphasis] a delay in the onset of symptoms of dementia by four years compared to those who speak one language,"...

    It's common that editors try to get attention by claiming that scientific investigation is important than it really is. I don't know what happened in this instance, but it's difficult for me to believe that the editors of a medical journal would be so ignorant about science that they would not know they were mis-reporting it.

    1. Re:Stupid, ignorant, or fraud by Derek+Pomery · · Score: 1

      While I'm normally a big fan of pointing out correlation != causation, especially in psych studies, there are a few issues here.
      One, you haven't actually read the study, so you have no idea what variables they controlled for, the length of the study, what data they collected, etc.

      Two, there is an extensive set of similar studies showing that mental activity of any kind has a protective effect. So they are on stronger ground as a result.

      --
      -- perl -e'print pack"H*","6e656d6f406d38792e6f7267"' /. ate my old sig. Bastards.
  65. Very small sample by frank_abacus · · Score: 1

    I'm surprised not to see any comments regarding the ridiculousness of drawing any conclusions based on a sample so small. I'm sure that another sample of less than two hundred could be used to prove the exact opposite.

    --
    Sorry, nothing profound to put here! (http://www.abacus4.com/
  66. But you may only get to keep your native language by joeflies · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I know this is only annecdotal, but my good friend works at Asian nursing home. They hire billigual people to help the elderly, because after the onset of dementia, many of the patients only remember their native tongue. Their children who were raised in the US without being trained in their parent's language often find themselves unable to communicate with their elderly parents.

  67. Mandrin by Frans+Faase · · Score: 1

    Toki Pona is indeed a very interesting language. On the other side, Mandrin, the language spoken by over a billion people, also as a relatively small set of basic words, where "new" words are created by putting together the basic words. An interesting fact is that some basic words have no longer any meaning in themselves and only occur in combinations with other basic words. I have been living with a Mandrin native speaking lady for over ten years and have become aware of the effects this has had on her way of expressing herself in English.

  68. It's Too Bad... by TheoMurpse · · Score: 1

    ...that the article is inaccurate, because I'd really like to say (to join in with other Slashdotters in showing off bilingual skills): Nihongo wo manande yokatta. (Ninchishou tte yokunai kara)

    Or...um...No me gusta demencia ;)

    1. Re:It's Too Bad... by goarilla · · Score: 1

      is that japanese and italian?

    2. Re:It's Too Bad... by TheoMurpse · · Score: 1

      Japanese and Spanish. All I can say in Italian is "Il parlo italiano" and "Eets-a me, Mario"

    3. Re:It's Too Bad... by goarilla · · Score: 1
      i think you're underestimating yourself i mean everybody can say
      vafancullo stronzo or ...
      com esta bella donna :D
      these are known italian phrases, the reason i asked was because i've only
      seen the word
      gusta
      in italian
      i wonder tho if the word gusta has anything to do with desire/urge/'ready to do a specified act'.
      because the word goesting was voted the most popular flemish word last year
      ... flemish is a dutch dialect spoken in north-belgium btw
    4. Re:It's Too Bad... by TheoMurpse · · Score: 1

      I'm aware of Flemish; I think tennis star Kim Clijsters is from an area where it is spoken, and I used to hear the language's name batted around whenever she would play Justine Henin-Hardenne (from Walloon-speaking Belgium).

      In any case, yes, the Spanish I wrote was, "No me gusta demencia," which is Spanish for "I do not like dementia," or, more literally, "Dementia does not please me." The verb is "gustar," and it (or something similar) appears in Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, and probably the rest of the Romance languages.

    5. Re:It's Too Bad... by goarilla · · Score: 1

      thanks for the translation since it is yet another indication that most
      european languages have linguistic similarities since ... 'goesting' is a state
      of mind where you want to pursue something that pleases you

      it also makes me very happy since i do think, given enough time most europeans can
      translate other foreign european texts, not completely offcorse but enough
      to understand it.

      Thank god all our languages are phonetic

  69. Ah, si? by Krishnoid · · Score: 1

    Muerde mi brilliante metalico trasero!

  70. Effect on european population and retirement age by Knutsi · · Score: 1

    I wonder if the added years of mental clarity significantly affects the estimates for long people will work. After all, we are working in less physically stressfull ways, and multilingualism is definetly on the rise in Europe (due to immigration, and more population movement - I am Norwegian, my working language is English, my girlfriend is Portuguese, and I will soon study in Hungary).

  71. What is a valuable skill? by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 3, Funny

    Kinda like how, if I learned the skill of snake charming, and I worked in an I.T. department, I wouldn't expect any extras in my paycheck. ;-) You seem to value skills only if they result in a pay rise, this is a major mistake. You see... while snake charming might not get you an increase in pay it will significantly increase your chances of survival when it comes to dealing with management. This is true in any industry, not just IT and has been true for many millennia, which actually makes snake charming a most valuable skill.
    --
    Only to idiots, are orders laws.
    -- Henning von Tresckow
  72. Once again... by Sargeant+Slaughter · · Score: 1

    Corelation == Causation

    Seems like /. has had a higher amount of stories like this than normal the last 6 months or so.

    I think people who speak two languages would on average have more mental activity overall than those who only speak one language. If you work out your brain, it will be stronger and you can resist dementia and degradation from old age. If you work out your body, it will be resist health problems and old age.

    --
    I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand. -Confucius
    1. Re:Once again... by MLease · · Score: 1

      Corelation == Causation

      Didn't you mean, "Correlation != Causation"? Oh, well; at least you didn't say "Correlation = Causation", since that would have probably caused a memory leak or something. ;)

      -Mike

      --
      I'm sorry; I don't know what I was thinking!
  73. Well... by Xenographic · · Score: 1

    According to some anime I watched the other day, they're "Highly Quarified" :]

    Just joking :] They usually seem to do quite well in English, for the most part, perhaps because it's a mandatory part of their education. I can hardly blame them when they have to learn to pronounce that many hundreds of sounds not found in Japanese, especially when my Japanese is so terrible and I have to learn the thousands of kanji they use to make up for having so few unique sounds...

  74. "White folks are weird"? by alienmole · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Plenty of European "white folks" speak at least two languages - often their home country's language and English, but also other regional languages. If you're going to go down the path of stereotyping everyone different from you (following a lot of white folk, btw), at least get it right: you're probably really mainly thinking of Americans and/or British white folk.

  75. I am not surprised by Tanuki64 · · Score: 1

    I am not an expert, but it just fits into the several pieces of information I have. For a long time it was thought that nerve cells like in the brain does not regenerate. New connections between brain cells might be created, but dead brain cells cannot be replaced, so the absolute number of cells can only decrease. This seems to be wrong. It could be shown that learning a language actually increases the number of cells in certain brain areas. Dementia might at least partly the result of more cells dying than new cells formed. And this might partly be the result of life style. Knowing a second language simply might mean that one starts with more cells to begin with.

    Similar effects should be possible by constant learning new and different stuff. I do suspect that learning one computer language might also qualify, but probably not learning a second or third. The second and third computer language might not require new cells, but only new connections when the secondary languages are 'explained' in terms of the first learned computer language. If someone is a technician, literature might help. If someone is proficient in humanities, dealing with math might be a good way to remain active.

    http://biology.about.com/library/weekly/aa102199.h tm http://healthlink.mcw.edu/article/926345803.html

  76. You've got to be kidding. by n1hilist · · Score: 1

    I've heard talking in tongues and clearly they seem to be suffering from dementia!

  77. exercise delays decline? by Kopretinka · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If you exercise, it's understandable that you'll be fitter longer. Bilingualism is to the brain like living in a hilly terrain to the legs. I'm dazzled that the scientists would be dazzled by a finding like this.

    --
    Yesterday was the time to do it right. Are we having a REVOLUTION yet?
  78. Bender by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Besa mi brillante trasero metálico!"

  79. Try it for kicks... by psulonen · · Score: 1

    It's not "extremely difficult to acquire a language after [14]." It was much easier for me to learn Russian at the age of 28 than, say, French at the age of twelve: I had more practice in learning languages, you see. I'm not saying that neurology has nothing to do with it, though: I have more of an accent in languages I've picked up as an adult than with languages I learned as a small child, and haven't managed to master the subtleties of grammar the same way. In practice these are pretty minor considerations; for most practical purposes my Russian is just fine.

  80. Another reason to learn a second language by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 1

    One of the reasons I'm learning Spanish is to have more words for variable names in my programs.

  81. Definition of bilingual by Milton+Waddams · · Score: 1
    According to dictionary.com, the definition of bilingual is:

    able to speak two languages with the facility of a native speaker


    That means that you have two native languages. My native language is English. I learned Irish in school and German in school and University but I'm not bilingual (or multilingual). In my Uni class, there was a girl who was bilingual because she learned Irish and English as native languages, i.e. as she was learning language as a child, she learned both Irish and English.

    So, acquiring another language after learning language as an infant does not make you bilingual. As a side note, bilinguals are supposed to find it much easier to pick up extra languages than people who have only been exposed to one language whilst growing up.
    1. Re:Definition of bilingual by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      What do they call it when you learned it at a later age, then?

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    2. Re:Definition of bilingual by maidopolis · · Score: 1

      acquiring another language after learning language as an infant does not make you bilingual. Nonsense. Your definition only requires native-like facility, not native-like learning conditions. In other words, the (many!) adults who learn second, third, etc languages well enough to have native-like ease in speaking the language (often this is perceived as "thinking" in the language, not needing to translate from another language into the target language, etc) are truly bilingual.

      Native speakers are simply the benchmark for determining how well a language has been learnt. There are plenty of bilingual people who learnt languages as adults and are by any scholarly definition bilingual.
    3. Re:Definition of bilingual by Milton+Waddams · · Score: 1
    4. Re:Definition of bilingual by Dephex+Twin · · Score: 1

      While I do not wish to downplay the crucial importance of dictionary.com definitions in areas of linguistic debate, I must mention that this would qualify as but one definition of bilingualism. Likely another dictionary would suggest another definition. You will find that this term is one whose definition is constantly up for debate. Not only does it have academic implications, but sociological and political implications as well. You might as well use the dictionary to determine whether life begins at conception or birth.

      --

      If you want to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe. -- Carl Sagan
    5. Re:Definition of bilingual by Milton+Waddams · · Score: 1

      I was really making my point because of what one of my lecturers told me in University (I studied linguistics as part of my course). I just used dictionary.com as a reference to back up my view point. I usually don't try to use dictionaries as references for the reasons you stated above.

      Heh, reminds me of this argument I had with someone about communism. He stated that communism was purely a way of running the economy of a country and had nothing to do with democracy. He gave a dictionary definition as his only reference. I, having read The Communist Manifesto and numerous other writings on the subject went on to argue that the whole point of communism was for everyone to have an equal say. The economic part was to enforce this idea. I gave lots of references about the theories of Karl Marx and other communists and he just kept on giving me the same dictionary definition...

    6. Re:Definition of bilingual by Dephex+Twin · · Score: 1

      Certainly the dictionary definition you list is not wrong, that is to say, nobody would argue that complete, native bilingualism is *not* bilingualism. Perhaps your linguistic coursework (or at least the portion dealing with bilingualism) was more of an overview, because the word "bilingualism" is a very loaded term that has a hundred years of debate and politics behind it. Maybe they didn't get into all of that (if you are looking at theoretical linguistics then all of that stuff is not so relevant). I would say the definition you got from dictionary.com was simply the most conservative. I would prefer to see a definition that said something like "one who can speak two languages, particularly when both are at native level".

      --

      If you want to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe. -- Carl Sagan
  82. Language-related behaviour by sinktank · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I am a lifelong bilingual (English/French), and I have quite distinct personality traits depending on the language I'm using. In English, I am reserved and polite whereas in French, I am more outgoing, brash and tend to swear more.

    If I go out for an evening with Francophone friends, we drink wine, live to eat (expensive "fine" food), and talk about each other. If I go out with Anglophones, we drink beer, eat to live (cheap familiar food like pizza), and talk about current affairs. There are more jokes in English, but more sex and ribaldry in French.

    It's a nice balance. I suspect if I only spent time with French folk, I'll eventually die of liver failure, whereas if I only spent time with Anglophones, I'll die of heart disease. I can't be bothered to check which is statistically likely to kill me first, but surely I'm hedging my risk between the two?

  83. Tricks by Joebert · · Score: 1

    I think it just takes people around them 4 years to figure out they're talking to themselves in one language and responding in the other rather than translating as it seems.

    --
    Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
  84. not to mention non-white Americans... by goulo · · Score: 1

    Not to mention that an awful lot of NON-white non-immigrant Americans also only know English.

  85. here are some Latin links + book recommendations by goulo · · Score: 1

    From a recent discussion on how to learn Latin by self-study: http://community.livejournal.com/latin/326666.html

  86. thanks by ghyd · · Score: 1

    Thanks Slashdot I owe you 4 years.

  87. Re:SEND THE ILLIGAL MEXICANS HOME by Joebert · · Score: 2, Funny

    Wow, wait untill I tell Stacy she can get $600 a month just for being Bi.

    --
    Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
  88. Onset of demetia by elmo1618 · · Score: 1

    If I'm thinking and speaking in French how will I be able to tell?

  89. i can speak loads of languages by eneville · · Score: 1

    c, perl, c++, java, c#, python, sh, ruby... does c/perl make make one go mad earlier or later?

  90. Latin at IBM by kennykb · · Score: 1

    Latin is useful in IT!

    I have a sign on my office door: "Ita erat quando hic adveni."

  91. Eating Healthy? by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 1

    ``This difference remained even after considering the possible effect of cultural differences, immigration, formal education, employment and even gender as influencers in the results.''

    What about eating healthy?

    --
    Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
  92. Peut-etre we could learn Europanto? by Peter+Cooper · · Score: 1

    Europanto is a language that mixes together the best of the major European languages into a mix that even a non-speaker can understand.

    Ici eine sample:

    Eine terrible menace incumbe over el Kingdom des Angleterra. Poor Regina Elisabeth habe spent todo seine dinero in charmingantes hats und pumpkinose carrosses und maintenow habe keine penny left por acquire de Champagne dat necessite zum celebrate Prince Charles anniversario op el 14 Novembro. (Diego Marani)

    1. Re:Peut-etre we could learn Europanto? by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

      Looks to me like another Euro-wish that English wasn't the lingua franca.

      Seriously, why would anyone learn this? There is no literature written in it, it has no cultural heritage nobody speaks it and there is no commercial traffic in it.

    2. Re:Peut-etre we could learn Europanto? by tehcyder · · Score: 1
      Eine terrible menace incumbe over el Kingdom des Angleterra. Poor Regina Elisabeth habe spent todo seine dinero in charmingantes hats und pumpkinose carrosses und maintenow habe keine penny left por acquire de Champagne dat necessite zum celebrate Prince Charles anniversario op el 14 Novembro. (Diego Marani)
      My attempted translation:

      A terrible menace falls over the UK. Poor Queen Elizabeth has spent all her money on charming hats and pumpkinish crosses/carresses (???) and now has only a few pennies left to buy the Champagne thatis necessary to celebrate Prince Charles's birthday on the 14th November. (Daily Moron)

      Hmmm, seems OK apart from the pumpkin thing.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    3. Re:Peut-etre we could learn Europanto? by Peter+Cooper · · Score: 1

      Without reading the Wikipedia article (although I think it is explained there), it was 'constructed' as a tongue-in-cheek joke against European integration about ten years ago, as far as I recall.

  93. Fantastic! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I forgot about pig latin. That means in addition to elvish and klingon, I know pig elvish and pig klingon. That puts me up to 6 human languages and 12 computer languages.

    I'm going to live 4*(6+12)=72 years longer than average!

    1. Re:Fantastic! by Bastard+of+Subhumani · · Score: 1
      I'm going to live 4*(6+12)=72 years longer than average!
      No, it'll just feel like it.
      --
      Only three things are certain; death, taxes, and apocryphal quotations - Ben Franklin.
  94. I'm trilingual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, would my potential dementia come 6 or 8 years later?

  95. Re:SEND THE ILLIGAL MEXICANS HOME by IdleTime · · Score: 1

    Bilingual? I haven't been bilingual since I was 10. I speak 7 languages and i wonder how long I will live...

    --
    If you mod me down, I *will* introduce you to my sister!
  96. quick joke by jakupovic · · Score: 1

    What do you call a person that speaks three languages (tri-lingual)
    What do you call a person that speaks two languages (bi-lingual)
    What do you call a person that speaks one language
    *drum roll*
    American

    --
    You always point your finger at the bad guy, but what if the bad guy points his finger at you?
  97. The voices... by subl33t · · Score: 1

    If the voices talk to me in Spanish, does that mean dementia is 4 years further off for me?

  98. You are an idiot by thegnu · · Score: 1

    The real reason why bilinguals live longer is because they don't have to work as hard to make a living.

    Oh, shut the hell up. The vast majority of the population of the world has a tendency to know some English (as a second language). There are many many many of them who have taken the time and been talented enough to learn it fluently. And plenty of those are commonly referred to as wetbacks, are the victims of police brutality, and are abused by the US system.

    I live in St Petersburg, FL, and there are tons of Hispanic people in Tampa (just across the bay), with the population growing in St Pete. I know so many bilingual people who can't get a job because they speak English with an accent. I know a 45-year old doctor (a cardiologist specializing in congenital defects) from Venezuela who is attending nursing school because he can't attend the 9 years of training necessary for him to practice in the US, and he can't get a job anywhere that doesn't treat him like a migrant worker, because he fucks up his tenses, and enunciates incorrectly. Oh, and he's been working at USF making fucking 16k a year (a fucking cardiologist!) for 8 months being promised benefits for 4. Oh, and his wife is a cancer survivor and needs to be scanned and he can't afford it. OH YEAH, his fucking daughter has some disease I can't pronounce, and has to go to special school.

    Yay for being bilingual.

    --
    Please stop stalking me, bro.
  99. Translate something for me. by thegnu · · Score: 1

    How do you say "All your base are belong to us," in Japanese?

    --
    Please stop stalking me, bro.
    1. Re:Translate something for me. by patio11 · · Score: 1

      The original was: ...Kimitachi no kichi ha subete CATS ga itadaita. ("CATS has taken all of your military bases.") Hat tip: Wiki, of course. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_Wing_(translatio ns)

      If you wanted me to adlib Japanese which sounds like that spoken by a foreigner who got a C- in their one semester of study, it would be something like: Subete anata no beisu ha watashitachi no mono desu.

  100. Which Germany are you talking about? by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    In the one I visit regularly everybody and his Hund speak a passable English.

    May it be that after so many years living there you are becoming like them and are full of Schadenfreude?

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
    1. Re:Which Germany are you talking about? by Ethelred+Unraed · · Score: 1

      If you're in a major city in Germany, or especially near where a NATO base is or was, then the proportion of English speakers is relatively high. Oustide those areas, though, the numbers drop considerably. I live in a city of about half a million, and in spite of its having been in the old British sector (indeed in the 1800s it was technically part of the British Empire), having an airport and major train station, and the local university having a substantial English and American Studies department, it's surprising how few people speak English beyond the very basics. Even English teachers I've spoken to have been surprisingly bad at it.

      I speak fluent German myself, so it's not like it's a problem for me, but I notice it whenever my (English-only) parents are here to visit. Aside from at the hotel where they like to stay (the staff all speak pretty good English), most of the time I end up translating for them.

      Cheers,

      Ethelred

      --
      Everyone wants to be Ethelred. Even I want to be Ethelred.
    2. Re:Which Germany are you talking about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. When I was in Koeln, every time I asked someone if they spoke English the answer was "A little" (and that "little" ranged from truly a little to being fluent). German-speaking Switzerland was the same. Almost no one in Lyon tried to speak English, and northern Italy/Italian speaking Switzerland was somewhere between those extremes.

      Nice people, everywhere, but Germany seemed to have quite a high percentage of English speaking people (questions elsewhere got a smile and shake of the head).

    3. Re:Which Germany are you talking about? by Petrushka · · Score: 1

      No, he's right. English is certainly the most widely-spoken foreign language there, and it's rarely difficult to find someone who speaks a bit of English, but it's nowhere near as universal as in Scandinavia or the low countries. If someone walks up to you in Germany and asks you for a light, or for directions, 90% of the time it's better to respond in poor German than in fluent English.

    4. Re:Which Germany are you talking about? by Ethelred+Unraed · · Score: 1

      I agree. When I was in Koeln, every time I asked someone if they spoke English the answer was "A little" (and that "little" ranged from truly a little to being fluent). German-speaking Switzerland was the same. Almost no one in Lyon tried to speak English, and northern Italy/Italian speaking Switzerland was somewhere between those extremes.

      Except that I never said that all parts of Germany are poor in English speakers. I wrote that the really big top-tier German cities (Cologne is one of them) tend to have relatively high numbers of English speakers, and your experience fits with that. It's when you leave the big cities and tourist areas that you start to run into trouble. I live in a more moderately sized city, and there really aren't that many English speakers around, certainly not many that can hold a conversation for more than a few minutes -- and that in a city that used to have a big British garrison, no less.

      When I go to visit my in-laws out in a smallish town (population 30,000), the number of English speakers is very, very low -- vastly outnumbered by Russian and Turkish speakers, and even they are a small minority. Even hotel staff there don't speak English (as my parents found out when they've stayed there).

      As Petrushka says below, the proportion of Germans who speak English is much, much lower than in Scandinavia, Switzerland, the Netherlands and so on -- and only marginally better than in France. Actually, in my experience, more French speak English than Germans do, but the French are just unwilling to use English unless you at least try to speak French first (then they tend to be pretty cool about it).

      Cheers,

      Ethelred

      --
      Everyone wants to be Ethelred. Even I want to be Ethelred.
  101. counterexample by bobl · · Score: 1

    I have my doubts about this. It certainly didn't help the truly demented emcee (Joel Grey) in Cabaret. On the other hand, that was a case of trilingualism.

  102. My first reaction by wonkavader · · Score: 1

    My first reaction to these things is almost always "Bad Study or Bad Article or Wishful Thinking." The sample size is small and focused. That in itself means that there's nothing to see here, yet. Wait for well-run studies.

    But let's take it on face value and look for some explanations.

    1. People who speak two languages are tolerated in dementia more than those who aren't, so their mean date of getting handed to mental health folk is higher (They seem to have controlled for this, but what they're really proving with the MMSE tests is not when demntia onsets, but rather how well the people function -- and thus, they may be showing that bilingual people cover their dementia better. But maybe the tests are well designed to factor this out.)
    2. People who don't learn a second language don't learn it for a reason. Perhaps they hate outsiders. Perhaps it's anger, hatred and suspicion which is the real measure here.
    3. People who speak two languages have contact with a larger germ pool. Perhaps its germ isolation which speeds dementia.
    4. People who speak more than one language have more contact with a second group of people and thus have a more varied diet. Perhaps it's variety of food which slows dementia.
    5. People who read more than one language see more reporting on medical studies than people who read only one language. Perhaps it's disgust with bad science in medicine or bad reporting in a sensationalist press which causes demintia. Now where did I leave my car keys... oh, maybe the lady who owns this house hates me and hid them. Again. Who is she, anyhow, and how did I get here? What does this submit button do?

    1. Re:My first reaction by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

      Well, my great uncle moved from England to Chile, and lived there alone for about 30 years. He refused to learn Spanish, and didn't have much contact with local English speakers. The last time I saw him he really had forgotten much of his spoken English. His only language skill was the ability to read and write in English. It was quite amazing to spend time with somebody who had such limited verbal language.

  103. Even non-statisticians can see this is OK by 2901 · · Score: 1

    The study had about equal numbers for monolingual and bilingual,
    132 in total when then focussed on lzheimer's.

    It is easy to code a simulation.

    Making a guess that Alzheimers comes on between 65 and 85 we write

    (defun onset ()
      (+ 65 (random 21)))

    Then we can simulate computing the average for 66 patients like this

    (/ (reduce (function +)
               (loop repeat 66 collect (onset)))
       66.0)

    You quickly see that the average sticks pretty much between 74 and 76.
    The article is reporting 71.4 versus 75.5. Even without understanding
    statistics I can see that that didn't happen by pure chance, something
    is going on.

    Code it in your own favourite language and see the kind of variability
    at issue with your own eyes/mind

    1. Re:Even non-statisticians can see this is OK by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      How does this "simulation" show causality? How were the participants selected in the first place? Aren't bilingual people self-selected individuals anyway? How was the bias of the research staff eliminated from their data-gathering process?

      I have many more such questions.

      The fact that you see a pattern in your results could be no accident. It could just as well be that your brain is fooling you into believing a preconceived conclusion.

      I know my mind works like this when I write a unit test after I've already designed and coded a program (instead of writing the unit test beforehand). And I know that my mind works like this when I make a life-like drawing and start making preconceived notions about its shapes (instead of thinking about its negative space which is one of the tricks used to clear your mind to draw properly).

      Now don't get me wrong, I'm not questioning the conclusions of this study. In my opinion, its conclusions follow common wisdom and I do happen to agree with that common wisdom. It's just that with the methodology they employed, and the small sample size, it could only be construed as a study that's very preliminary, and worth further investigation, that's it.

  104. Iraq by wytcld · · Score: 1

    Lots of testimony here that a language can be learned with some months of immersion - within a year anyway. Yet US troops in Iraq reportedly hardly speak the local language at all, even after repeated tours. This undoubtedly lowers their life expectancy in another way. Why does the US military fail to force troops to spend part of each day learning the language? When the Romans occupied Britain, did they go around barking orders only in Latin?

    --
    "with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
  105. Big claims are made for Go, the board game by 2901 · · Score: 1

    Here and here

  106. I knew I should've paid more attention at school! by Tim+C · · Score: 1

    Merde!

  107. Affixes by tepples · · Score: 1

    On the other side, Mandrin, the language spoken by over a billion people, also as a relatively small set of basic words, where "new" words are created by putting together the basic words.

    The trouble with learning a compounding language comes when some compounds have become fixed and their meaning shifts. How would one guess that doghouse means "a state of punishment"?

    An interesting fact is that some basic words have no longer any meaning in themselves and only occur in combinations with other basic words.

    English has those too: they're called affixes.

  108. Re:Effect on european population and retirement ag by Malc · · Score: 1

    I suspect life expectancy is based more on other factors, such as wealth and welfare. US is 29th

  109. Que Pasa? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You hablo dos o tres languages but, uh, what were we talking about again?

    Oh yeah. Old people living 4 years longer. At age 95 my grandmother (born Zelma Leila Lennon in May of 1903) told me "I don't know why people want to live to be a hundred, it ain't no fun bein' old!"

    She died in 2003 when she fell and broke her hip in the nursing home, mind still intact. Lucky for her she never learned a second language, I guess.

    -mcgrew

  110. Sure it does by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

    >Correlation does not imply causality.

    Oh come now, of course it does. If every time you ate oatmeal, your face swelled up, you would infer that perhaps there was a connection. The correlation would imply causation.

    So of course it implies it. But it can take careful investigation to prove it within a reasonable certainty.

  111. Frisian! by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1

    Whoah. I'm completely wrong: there are lots of people still speaking Frisian. Not so many where he grew up (Sylt) but still tens of thousands of them. Go, wikipedia!

    --
    Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
  112. Re: try again! :) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Wow, does that include Fortan and Cobal? (Couldn't be C# because it requires lifelong fluency.)
    No, no, and No. TFA is clearly talking about those who participated in early lesbian pr0n. They're cunning linguists, and we all know (or at least hope) that they're bi. What? You're saying that my dementia has already started? Perhaps...
  113. This just confirms the old adage... by terrahertz · · Score: 1

    "Use it or lose it!"

    --
    Slashdot? Oh, I just read it for the articles.
  114. You must be joking. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    I learnt English in 6 months, taking clases for 6 hours once a week every Saturday.

    My /. history shows that my English is not stellar, but I can sit through a Shakespeare play and get almost all of it.

    I also learnt French, in 2 one hour classes for 3 years in secondary school. By no means full time studying.

    O yes, I can speak some German: one year of hourly classes twice a week.

    And so on with many other people I know.

    Perhaps you have some learning difficulties you have not spotted?

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  115. No danger of balkanization by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    In 100 years everybody will speak Spanish in the US :P

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  116. note to immigrants by pitu · · Score: 1

    ... and that is why i tell my fellow immigrants to teach their children their native language first

  117. With a gato in your pantalones... by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    .... you may go nowhere, not even downhill.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  118. Ich heiße Grammatiknazi! by The+Monster · · Score: 1
    now call me grammar nazi.
    Sie sind Grammatiknazi!

    Ich heiße Grammatiknazi!

    Kinder alles Gottes heißt Grammatiknazi!

    --

    [100% ISO 646 Compliant]
    SVM, ERGO MONSTRO.

  119. Article and quotes from article don't match. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 1

    In my grandparent comment, I was only discussing this issue: The title of the article and the quotes from those who do the research do not match.

    Again, here is the quote: "Our study found that speaking two languages throughout one's life appears to be associated with [my emphasis] a delay in the onset of symptoms of dementia by four years compared to those who speak one language,"...

    No studies of which I am aware show a "protective effect", as you mentioned. All show association only.

    But the bigger issue is that the work, while it has some value, is "junk science". Real scientists try to make theories and test the theories. All the studies of brain function in older people are apparently by people who have no interest in theories. "Junk science" is so commonplace it makes it difficult to find and understand the real scientists.

    1. Re:Article and quotes from article don't match. by Derek+Pomery · · Score: 1

      I'll willingly admit that "protective effect" is my own arbitrary layman's wording.
      The actual research articles I have read, however, do go so far as to theorise (and some, offer brain scans to back up)
      the fact that mental activity keeps the brain flexible, less dependant on a small set of networks, allowing damage to be routed around. Like the internet used to be.
      This is testable both in showing that the damage is not reduced in autopsies, and in examining patterns of activity in the elderly.
      As for finding the articles... Sorry, this is slashdot, I'll concede your point before going to the trouble of digging through pubmed and a ton of science magazines.

      --
      -- perl -e'print pack"H*","6e656d6f406d38792e6f7267"' /. ate my old sig. Bastards.
  120. But that is a legitimate situation. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    You may be interested in polyglotism but not speak more languages than one for the life of yours...

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  121. Also: Genetics? by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

    Interestingly, I didn't see any mention of genetics among the eliminated compounding factors (at least in the slashdot summary).

    Lifelong bilingualism would be more prevalent in some population groups than others (if only for reasons of environment - i.e. growing up where multiple languages are in common use), different populations have different frequencies of various versions of genes (due to incomplete interbreeding of humanity), and susceptability to dementia (a biochemical problem) may be greater for some versions of some particular gene(s) than for others. So bilingualism could easily be correlated with an inherited lower susceptability to dimentia through pure historical accident.

    Another potential genetic compounding factor: Hybrid vigor. Billingualism could be expected to be more common in children of parents from distinct linguistic groups - who would be more likely to have two different versions of some gene rather than two identical ones. If resistance to dimentia is greater when some gene is present in two different forms you again have a correlation.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  122. Goethe's Erkenntnistheorie by johnrpenner · · Score: 1


    Denken... ist nicht mehr und nicht weniger
    Organ des Wahrnehmens wie Auge und Ohr.
    So wie jenes Farben, dieses Tone,
    so nimmt das Denken Ideen wahr.
    (GOETHES ERKENNTNISTHEORIE)

  123. Music? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have there been any tests on the onset of dementia on people who speak one language but also read (and play) music since an early age?

  124. (Obligatory BroTown reference) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not even, au!

  125. Co-ball by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is kinky sex

  126. Romani ite domum... by adamofgreyskull · · Score: 1

    History tells us the Romans forced the locals to speak Latin. Quod erat demonstrandum.

  127. Come on by WINSTANLEY · · Score: 1

    Is this really news? My french teachers
    were telling us about studies like these decades ago.
    They may not have been about dementia but about related
    topics like the bilingualism and the incidence of insanity.

    --
    It is by coff... er, will, alone I set my mind in motion...
  128. Scientific? by epee1221 · · Score: 1
    One nunnery they studied, whose order believes than an idle mind is the devil's playground, the incidence of mental disease was a fraction of the total population, and the overall lifespans were tremendously greater (the two librarians were 97 and 99 years old)
    Is that in comparison to the general population or in comparison to the average nunnery? I would expect most nunneries (and other places that encourage such a lifestyle) would have longer life expectancies and lower rates of both mental and physical illness.
    --
    "The use-mention distinction" is not "enforced here."
  129. check the methodology by doom · · Score: 1

    This is an interesting initial study, but result was no doubt skewed by the large prevalence of Americans in the monolingual set.

  130. Larger sample wouldn't help show causality by 2901 · · Score: 1

    I was responding to the suggesting that the sample was so small that another sample could easily be the other way round: onset at 71.4 years for bilingual and onset at 75.5 for monolingual. Putting it abstractly, I was responding to the question of statistical significance.

    I posted to encourage readers to take a cavalier attitude to statistical significance. Don't get hung up on difficult mathematics, t-test, F-test, etc. Just code up a simple simulation and get a feel for the kind of variability you should expect to be inevitable due to random chance.

    Two big reasons for being cavalier about statistical significance are:

    1. Non-significance tells you sod-all. Perhaps the phenomena is real and important but your sample size is too small, or perhaps there is nothing there at all.
    2. Significance gets you nowhere on the all important question of causality

    I'm painfully aware that one cannot deduce causality from correlation. The deeper reason for being casual about statistical significance is that one needs to save ones mental energy for thinking about causality. My guess would be that even if bilingualism came easily in childhood, it often requires effort to retain the less used language through adult life. So life long bilingualism is likely to work reasonably well as a proxy for being healthy and vigorous: one is checking if persons have done something that requires effort. Seeing that healthy and vigorous people have a later onset of Alzheimer's disease is unsurprising.

    It would be much more interesting to compare life long bilingualism with those who have run a marathon after the age of 50. Then one might get some sense of whether robust health is protective or whether there is something specific to mental exertion.

  131. Freedom Fries by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 1
    We French people like to be a bit flattered sometimes
    And definitely to a fault, at that.

    I can't tell you how many unrequested and unwelcome extemporaneous French lessons I received from snotty Parisians while I was visiting your beautiful country. It got to the point where I had to confide in people that, while I speak 3 languages, French isn't one of them, and that is because I don't find the French language to be important enough to learn.

    As the old saying goes, "France would be a great country, were it not for the French."
    --
    They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock