From: jl@glen--canyon.com   
      
   On Mon, 2 Feb 2026 00:37:55 +1100, Bill Sloman    
   wrote:   
      
   >On 1/02/2026 10:10 pm, john larkin wrote:   
   >> On Sun, 1 Feb 2026 21:57:08 +1100, Bill Sloman    
   >> wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> On 1/02/2026 8:36 am, john larkin wrote:   
   >>>> On Sat, 31 Jan 2026 21:42:27 +0100, Jeroen Belleman   
   >>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> On 1/31/26 16:34, john larkin wrote:   
   >>>>>> On Sat, 31 Jan 2026 11:21:44 +0100, Jeroen Belleman   
   >>>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> On 1/31/26 00:53, john larkin wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> On Fri, 30 Jan 2026 22:49:12 +0100, Jeroen Belleman   
   >>>>>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> On 1/30/26 21:00, Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>> Bill Sloman  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>> |----------------------------------------------------   
   -------------------|   
   >>>>>>>>>> |"Languages aren't learned any faster if you learn them   
   young"           |   
   >>>>>>>>>> |----------------------------------------------------   
   -------------------|   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> It is much easier for a child to learn a language than it is for an   
   >>>>>>>>>> old person.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> An often repeated myth, entirely untrue.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Adults can learn a new language in much less time than a   
   >>>>>>>>> child, provided they are motivated and immersed. Those are   
   >>>>>>>>> the keys, motivation and immersion.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Jeroen Belleman   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Adults rarely acquire a new accent at native level.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> https://news.mit.edu/2018/cognitive-scientists-define-c   
   itical-period-learning-language-0501   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> John Larkin   
   >>>>>>>> Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center   
   >>>>>>>> Lunatic Fringe Electronics   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> True, but those natives probably don't have the linguistic   
   >>>>>>> abilities of the foreign speaker. Your thinking is shaped   
   >>>>>>> by language, and speaking more languages is enriching.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> I'm native Dutch, but I've been told I have a French   
   >>>>>>> accent now.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Jeroen Belleman   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Which language is best for thinking about electronics?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> I think circuits in pictures, not words, but people are very   
   >>>>>> different.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> John Larkin   
   >>>>>> Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center   
   >>>>>> Lunatic Fringe Electronics   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> That has to be English, I think. Anyway, for quite some time now,   
   >>>>> English has been the common language of science and technology,   
   >>>>> electronics included. It has been French for a while, and Latin   
   >>>>> for a long period before that. And ancient Greek before that, and   
   >>>>> and ,,,   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Jeroen Belleman   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> English is shockingly irregular.   
   >>>   
   >>> Not really. It's just another language which evolved. Imagining English   
   >>> was ever designed is plain silly.   
   >>>   
   >>>> One word can mean six things and   
   >>>> there are a zillion words to express a concept.   
   >>>   
   >>> Quite a lot of word meanings are context dependent. Dictionaries deal   
   >>> with this by quoting word use in the various different contexts.   
   >>>   
   >>>> Plus there are places like the UK with their own weird versions.   
   >>>   
   >>> At one level English is the language spoken in England, and the   
   >>> derivations spoken in the US and Australia are the weird versions.   
   >>>   
   >>> Some of the oddities of US English reflect the fact that some of the   
   >>> evolution of British English over the past few centuries didn't make it   
   >>> across the Atlantic.   
   >>>   
   >>>> Given the concept that ambiguity generates creativity, maybe English   
   >>>> is a good language to invent in.   
   >>>   
   >>> The idea that ambiguity generates creativity is one that I haven't come   
   >>> across. Google throw up a few examples from the past few years, so it   
   >>> may be currently fashionable word salad.   
   >>>   
   >>> Ambiguity didn't feature in any of the ideas I've had that ended up   
   >>> patented, nor in any of the 25-odd ideas that my father got patents for.   
   >>> I'm not familiar with all of Alan Dower Blumlein's 128 patents, but the   
   >>> none of the ones I do know about had anything ambiguous about them.   
   >>   
   >> With all the patents in your family, you must be very wealthy.   
   >   
   >If you are an employee you don't get any extra just because you have a   
   >patent. My father did end up pretty well off, but none of it came   
   >directly from the patents.   
   >   
   >The most significant one - for the counter-current cooking of wood chips   
   >into paper pulp - didn't earn much in the way of royalties. Kamyr, who   
   >made all the digestors used by the industry, chose not to pay royalties,   
   >and it wasn't worth suing them, or the people who used the process in   
   >continuous digestors that they'd bought from Kamyr.   
      
   Journal papers and patents are mostly vanity expenses.   
      
   Designing electronics can be a source of revenue.   
      
      
   John Larkin   
   Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center   
   Lunatic Fringe Electronics   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)