Why Bilinguals Are Smarter

[tooblue]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/18/op...me&ref=general

SPEAKING two languages rather than just one has obvious practical benefits in an increasingly globalized world. But in recent years, scientists have begun to show that the advantages of bilingualism are even more fundamental than being able to converse with a wider range of people. Being bilingual, it turns out, makes you smarter. It can have a profound effect on your brain, improving cognitive skills not related to language and even shielding against dementia in old age.

[Colly Wolly]

I already knew I was a genius, but thanks for the heads up.

[wuapinmon]

[YOUTUBE]u38xZsCTCOY[/YOUTUBE]

[Jacob]

That's interesting. While a agree that bilingualism has "obvious practical benefits" these practical benefits are rarely used making them "seldom used practical benefits" for most people. For this reason, I haven't been worked up about getting my kids into the spanish immersion program in their elementary school, despite my speaking spanish. If there are other benefits like those mentioned, I may have to rethink my position.

[wuapinmon]

That's interesting. While a agree that bilingualism has "obvious practical benefits" these practical benefits are rarely used making them "seldom used practical benefits" for most people. For this reason, I haven't been worked up about getting my kids into the spanish immersion program in their elementary school, despite my speaking spanish. If there are other benefits like those mentioned, I may have to rethink my position.

Education is not vocational training. I can't say it enough. If you're worried about the practical benefits of what your children are learning in grade school, may I suggest that you examine the issue a bit more closely.

Spoiler for One of the wisest Spaniards/Romans of all, Seneca, said this::

Seneca. Moral Epistles, Richard M. Gummere, trans.
Epistle 88
On Liberal and Vocational Studies

[...] I have been speaking so far of liberal studies; but think how much superfluous and unpractical matter the philosophers contain! Of their own accord they also have descended to establishing nice divisions of syllables, to determining the true meaning of conjunctions and prepositions; they have been envious of the scholars, envious of the mathematicians. They have taken over into their own art all the superfluities of these other arts; the result is that they know more about careful speaking than about careful living. Let me tell you what evils are due to over-nice exactness, and what an enemy it is of truth! Protagoras declares that one can take either side on any question and debate it with equal success — even on this very question, whether every subject can be debated from either point of view. Nausiphanes holds that in things which seem to exist, there is no difference between existence and non-existence. Parmenides maintains that nothing exists of all this which seems to exist, except the universe alone.[35] Zeno of Elea removed all the difficulties by removing one; for he declares that nothing exists. The Pyrrhonean, Megarian, Eretrian, and Academic schools are all engaged in practically the same task; they have introduced a new knowledge, non-knowledge. You may sweep all these theories in with the superfluous troops of "liberal" studies; the one class of men give me a knowledge that will be of no use to me, the other class do away with any hope of attaining knowledge. It is better, of course, to know useless things than to know nothing. One set of philosophers offers no light by which I may direct my gaze toward the truth; the other digs out my very eyes and leaves me blind. If I cleave to Protagoras, there is nothing in the scheme of nature that is not doubtful; if I hold with Nausiphanes, I am sure only of this — that everything is unsure — , if with Parmenides, there is nothing except the One;[36] if with Zeno, there is not even the One.

What are we, then? What becomes of all these things that surround us, support us, sustain us? The whole universe is then a vain or deceptive shadow. I cannot readily say whether I am more vexed at those who would have it that we know nothing, or with those who would not leave us even this privilege. Farewell.

[Non Sequitur]

Education is not vocational training. I can't say it enough. If you're worried about the practical benefits of what your children are learning in grade school, may I suggest that you examine the issue a bit more closely.

Spoiler for One of the wisest Spaniards/Romans of all, Seneca, said this::

Seneca. Moral Epistles, Richard M. Gummere, trans.
Epistle 88
On Liberal and Vocational Studies

[...] I have been speaking so far of liberal studies; but think how much superfluous and unpractical matter the philosophers contain! Of their own accord they also have descended to establishing nice divisions of syllables, to determining the true meaning of conjunctions and prepositions; they have been envious of the scholars, envious of the mathematicians. They have taken over into their own art all the superfluities of these other arts; the result is that they know more about careful speaking than about careful living. Let me tell you what evils are due to over-nice exactness, and what an enemy it is of truth! Protagoras declares that one can take either side on any question and debate it with equal success — even on this very question, whether every subject can be debated from either point of view. Nausiphanes holds that in things which seem to exist, there is no difference between existence and non-existence. Parmenides maintains that nothing exists of all this which seems to exist, except the universe alone.[35] Zeno of Elea removed all the difficulties by removing one; for he declares that nothing exists. The Pyrrhonean, Megarian, Eretrian, and Academic schools are all engaged in practically the same task; they have introduced a new knowledge, non-knowledge. You may sweep all these theories in with the superfluous troops of "liberal" studies; the one class of men give me a knowledge that will be of no use to me, the other class do away with any hope of attaining knowledge. It is better, of course, to know useless things than to know nothing. One set of philosophers offers no light by which I may direct my gaze toward the truth; the other digs out my very eyes and leaves me blind. If I cleave to Protagoras, there is nothing in the scheme of nature that is not doubtful; if I hold with Nausiphanes, I am sure only of this — that everything is unsure — , if with Parmenides, there is nothing except the One;[36] if with Zeno, there is not even the One.

What are we, then? What becomes of all these things that surround us, support us, sustain us? The whole universe is then a vain or deceptive shadow. I cannot readily say whether I am more vexed at those who would have it that we know nothing, or with those who would not leave us even this privilege. Farewell.

Como se dice "pretentious load of shit"?

[Donuthole]

Como se dice "pretentious load of shit"?

Pretencioso carretón de mierda

[wuapinmon]

Como se dice "pretentious load of shit"?

Of course it's pretentious, he was a wealthy Roman citizen.

[Non Sequitur]

Pretencioso carretón de mierda

Your Spanish is much better than mine. I'm better than 20 years off the mission...mierda is the only word that I recall.

[pellegrino]

Your Spanish much better than mine. I'm better than 20 years off the mission...mierda is the only word that I recall.

he doesn't speak Spanish, he just used google to translate it.

[Donuthole]

he doesn't speak Spanish, he just used google to translate it.

I didn't, but I also didn't know the word for "load" so I used "wheelbarrow" (which is a word I didn't learn on my mission but doing landscaping after my mission).

[wuapinmon]

I didn't, but I also didn't know the word for "load" so I used "wheelbarrow" (which is a word I didn't learn on my mission but doing landscaping after my mission).

A more natural way of saying it would be something like this:

"Esto no es nada más que un montón de mierda presuntuosa que no vale nada en el mundo real."

[Donuthole]

A more natural way of saying it would be something like this:

"Esto no es nada más que un montón de mierda presuntuosa que no vale nada en el mundo real."

Hey, why don't you leave the turning-what-can-be-said-in-four-words-into-19-words to the lawyers, alright?

[Pelado]

Hey, why don't you leave the turning-what-can-be-said-in-four-words-into-19-words to the lawyers, alright?

That could have been said in two letters.

[Solon]

Of course it's pretentious, he was a wealthy Roman citizen.

I don't blame Nero for persuading Seneca to open his veins.

Have you read Seneca's plays?:igiveup:


BTW, Seneca's brother Gallio is in the NT (Acts 18).