Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Asians are Often Better at Math

blog.studentrnd.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–29 of 29 posts

Re: Why Asians are Often Better at Math

#21

Post by [deleted] »

mistercow wrote: post #19
w1ntermute wrote: post #15

This is bullshit. The first example with memorizing the numbers doesn't work with Japanese - "hachi, ni, yon, roku, shichi, go, ichi" isn't faster than "eight, two, four, six, seven, five, one", but the Japanese are no different from the Chinese when it comes to their math prowess. I don't understand why it's so hard for Americans to admit that Asian success in areas like math is simply because they work harder at it…

> "hachi, ni, yon, roku, shichi, go, ichi" isn't faster than "eight, two, four, six, seven, five, one" Japanese has two sets of numbers. One is the one you gave, which is based on Japanese, and the other got imported along with kanji from China. Using the shortest forms of the kun readings, it would be "ya, fu, yo, mu, na, i, hito". I don't know if a typical Japanese speaker would memorize them that way, but since th…

[deleted]

Re: Why Asians are Often Better at Math

#22

Post by w1ntermute »

mistercow wrote: post #19
w1ntermute wrote: post #15

This is bullshit. The first example with memorizing the numbers doesn't work with Japanese - "hachi, ni, yon, roku, shichi, go, ichi" isn't faster than "eight, two, four, six, seven, five, one", but the Japanese are no different from the Chinese when it comes to their math prowess. I don't understand why it's so hard for Americans to admit that Asian success in areas like math is simply because they work harder at it…

> "hachi, ni, yon, roku, shichi, go, ichi" isn't faster than "eight, two, four, six, seven, five, one" Japanese has two sets of numbers. One is the one you gave, which is based on Japanese, and the other got imported along with kanji from China. Using the shortest forms of the kun readings, it would be "ya, fu, yo, mu, na, i, hito". I don't know if a typical Japanese speaker would memorize them that way, but since th…

> One is the one you gave, which is based on Japanese, and the other got imported along with kanji from China.

Wrong. "hachi", "ni", "roku", "shichi", "go", and "ichi" are Chinese-origin (on'yomi), not Japanese-origin (kun'yomi). The only number in my example that is Japanese-origin is "yon"[0], which is interchangeable with "shi" (the on'yomi equivalent) in many contexts.

> Using the shortest forms of the kun readings, it would be "ya, fu, yo, mu, na, i, hito".

Those readings are not used to count by native Japanese speakers (I speak Japanese and have lived in Japan), and I can't think of any examples off the top of my head where they would be used on their own.

> I don't know if a typical Japanese speaker would memorize them that way, but since those forms are ingrained in the language, they should be able to do so without significant effort.

They do not.

0: http://www.syvum.com/cgi/online/serve.cgi/squizzes/japanese/...

Re: Why Asians are Often Better at Math

#23

Post by damianpeckett »

mistercow wrote: post #13

Based on this concept, I've created a base-100 number system that encodes each digit into a single simple syllable which is designed so that they can be strung into unambiguous sequences. So if your mental phonological loop can hold 10 fast syllables, you can hold the equivalent of 20 decimal digits in this system. The system is logically arranged so it's pretty easy to memorize, and since it's base 100, the conversi…

Now that does sound intriguing.

Re: Why Asians are Often Better at Math

#24

Post by karamazov »

mistercow wrote: post #8
Jimmy wrote: post #2

Interesting, but your ability to memorize sequences of numbers is almost completely irrelevant to your ability to do higher-level math, and the hypothesis that memorization "compounds into more knowledge and better math skills for these Chinese children" is shaky at best. Also, the statement "Asians are better than Americans at math" needs some qualification. Most of the world's best mathematicians come from either t…

>Interesting, but your ability to memorize sequences of numbers is almost completely irrelevant to your ability to do higher-level math Your digit span does affect your ability to do mental arithmetic, and mental arithmetic is an indispensable tool when meditating on equations and algorithms so that you can understand their behavior.

Mental arithmetic is not that useful in higher math - past calculus you're more likely to use letters than numbers, and in many cases you're not working directly with numbers anyway.

Re: Why Asians are Often Better at Math

#26

Post by mistercow »

w1ntermute wrote: post #22
mistercow wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "hachi, ni, yon, roku, shichi, go, ichi" isn't faster than "eight, two, four, six, seven, five, one" Japanese has two sets of numbers. One is the one you gave, which is based on Japanese, and the other got imported along with kanji from China. Using the shortest forms of the kun readings, it would be "ya, fu, yo, mu, na, i, hito". I don't know if a typical Japanese speaker would memorize them that way, but since th…

> One is the one you gave, which is based on Japanese, and the other got imported along with kanji from China. Wrong. "hachi", "ni", "roku", "shichi", "go", and "ichi" are Chinese-origin (on'yomi), not Japanese-origin (kun'yomi). The only number in my example that is Japanese-origin is "yon"[0], which is interchangeable with "shi" (the on'yomi equivalent) in many contexts. > Using the shortest forms of the kun readin…

My bad on flipping kun and on, but that doesn't change my point.

>Those readings are not used to count by native Japanese speakers (I speak Japanese and have lived in Japan) ... They do not.

Have you asked a native speaker? Speaking Japanese as a second language is not the same as speaking it natively, so unless you have discussed this with a native speaker, I don't think that's a sufficient credential.

Re: Why Asians are Often Better at Math

#27

Post by mistercow »

karamazov wrote: post #24
mistercow wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Interesting, but your ability to memorize sequences of numbers is almost completely irrelevant to your ability to do higher-level math Your digit span does affect your ability to do mental arithmetic, and mental arithmetic is an indispensable tool when meditating on equations and algorithms so that you can understand their behavior.

Mental arithmetic is not that useful in higher math - past calculus you're more likely to use letters than numbers, and in many cases you're not working directly with numbers anyway.

I don't think when people say "Asians are often better at math", that they are talking about post-calculus.

Re: Why Asians are Often Better at Math

#28

Post by w1ntermute »

mistercow wrote: post #26
w1ntermute wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One is the one you gave, which is based on Japanese, and the other got imported along with kanji from China. Wrong. "hachi", "ni", "roku", "shichi", "go", and "ichi" are Chinese-origin (on'yomi), not Japanese-origin (kun'yomi). The only number in my example that is Japanese-origin is "yon"[0], which is interchangeable with "shi" (the on'yomi equivalent) in many contexts. > Using the shortest forms of the kun readin…

My bad on flipping kun and on, but that doesn't change my point. >Those readings are not used to count by native Japanese speakers (I speak Japanese and have lived in Japan) ... They do not. Have you asked a native speaker? Speaking Japanese as a second language is not the same as speaking it natively, so unless you have discussed this with a native speaker, I don't think that's a sufficient credential.

> Have you asked a native speaker?

Yes. I have been taught how to count correctly in Japanese in a college class by native Japanese instructors with graduate degrees in the instruction of Japanese to foreign learners.

And as for my experience not being "a sufficient credential", I don't think you realize (and I really do mean this in the nicest way possible) how ridiculously absurd your suggestion that anyone counts "eight, two, four, six, seven, five, one" as "ya, fu, yo, mu, na, i, hito" in Japanese sounds. It can be considered (very) roughly equivalent to suggesting that English speakers would memorize numbers using Latin or Greek prefixes.

Re: Why Asians are Often Better at Math

#29

Post by rdl »

mistercow wrote: post #27
karamazov wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mental arithmetic is not that useful in higher math - past calculus you're more likely to use letters than numbers, and in many cases you're not working directly with numbers anyway.

I don't think when people say "Asians are often better at math", that they are talking about post-calculus.

I think they mean algebra and higher, not arithmetic. So basically junior high school and better. Even algebra doesn't benefit that much from simple counting and arithmetic.

"Good at math" means different things based on age, but an adult who is good at adding numbers and doing percentages is probably at a supermarket or a waiter, or MAYBE a bookkeeper or a baseball fan, not a "good at math" engineer or scientist. I don't think people are complaining that Asians are taking all the valuable service industry jobs adding prices and computing tips in their heads.

I always found more (Russian) jews in upper level math classes than Asians, though. The most-Asian major at MIT was "anything plausibly pre-med", like bio, chem, or chem-eng. 8 and 18 were mostly Jewish, mostly non-US origin.

Post reply on HN