7/11/2017 Why Japanese people are poor speakers of English

              I think Japanese people are the poorest speakers of English in the world. There are several reasons for the poor ability.
The first is that Japanese and English are completely different languages. The word orders of the two languages are almost opposite. For example, an object is placed before the corresponding verb in Japanese.
The second is that there are virtually no etymological similarities between the words of the two languages. * Hence, it is hard for Japanese to memorize English words.
The third is that few Japanese people have necessity for English speaking ability. Most university students can learn their specialized fields using Japanese textbooks only. Almost all businessmen work speaking Japanese.
The fourth is that Japanese people rarely have opportunities to practice English. There are many Japanese who are interested in English and would like to speak it. However, an average Japanese does not have even one chance to speak it in a few months, though there are many foreigners in Japan.
I think that Japanese is a beautiful and efficient language that foreigners can learn relatively easily. I want to talk about it later.

*I would like to inform Western language maniacs that there is at least one Japanese word that has common etymology. My dictionaries say that the English word ‘aqua’ is from Latin and that the Japanese word ‘aka’ is from Sanskrit. The latter means water that is put on a Buddhist altar. This Japanese word began to be used more than a thousand years ago but is seldom used today.

Comments are welcome.
Kazuhiro Arai’s Japanese blog:         　https://araikazuhiro.blogspot.jp/

Kazuhiro Arai’s Japanese home page:   http://araikazuhiro.world.coocan.jp/







Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Nature of Economics (3)

Image
The Nature of Economics (3) A crucial defect of neoclassical economics related to the above discussion is that it analyzes seriously only markets, more specifically organized markets. It does not seriously analyze firms or households. It ignores government, the environment, and international relations. Although the real economy has a variety of market types, it treats all markets as the same type. Can the demand-supply analysis (with auctioneers) be applied to medical markets or education markets? This implies that neoclassical economics analyzes only a limited part of the economy. Although it deals with firms, it does not seriously analyze them in the sense that it fails to explain how a particular set of input levels achieves the level of output given by the production function. In other words, it does not describe the process of production or how production is carried out. Firms in the real economy try hard to improve their technologies. They also try to invent new products
Read more

The Nature of Economics (7)

Image
The Nature of Economics (7) Neoclassical economics does not consider efficiency of the whole economy because the production function and utility function are exogenously given. Since I do not think that this point is made clear in books or papers, I would like to discuss it in some detail. Consider two economies E1 and E2. The workers in E1 are more cooperative and hard-working. Those in E2 are selfish and lazy. Hence, the labor productivity in the firm in E1 is higher for equally given levels of physical inputs. However both economies are efficient in neoclassical economics! Both E1 and E2 are efficient as far as all firms maximize their profits subject to exogenously given (different) production functions! It is obvious that E1 is more affluent than E2. I would like to emphasize that efficiency differs from affluence in neoclassical economics. Next consider two economies E3 and E4. The people in E3 are more harmonious and other-regarding within the household. Those in E4 ar
Read more

The Nature of Economics (5)

Image
The Nature of Economics (5) We see here a good example for the fact that the values researchers possess affect their choice of the topic and method of research generating bias in ‘scientific works.’ 　 Researchers who want to support individualism do not analyze firms or households seriously. They simply introduce exogenously given production functions and utility functions. Economists tend to ignore or distort social aspects that are inconvenient to build models with conclusions they like. It is really hard to establish social sciences that are value-free. Researchers need to recognize this. On the other hand, a unified theoretical model may be formed to explain the cultural difference mentioned in the example given in the above third reason. It may be done by introducing a measure of the degree of cooperativeness as an exogenous variable. In such a model different types of equilibrium may arise for different values of the measure. If we can endogenize the variable for that m
Read more