Mike

You're still doing it. Look. Demonstrating pretty much the same learning curve is *not* the same thing as "no difference". But I don't want to continue being side-tracked by nuance. For brevity sake let's break this down, and let's start by taking your example of MTC-trained missionaries, and my first two environmental conditions. MTC missionaries experience a high degree of saturation in the language. They experience (formally structured and officially planned) programs to minimize distraction forces. Children learning their first (and even secondary) language are quite similar because they experience a high degree of saturation in the language and they are less distracted than, say, a student in junior high school or high school trying to learn a language during an hour or so-long class room experience supplemented with some homework; and being only casually exposed to the language when all's said and done.

No, you're misquoting me. If you dwell on your misquote I think you can't possibly understand what I said nor respond adequately to it.

I'm not seeing anything for you to disagree with me about, frankly. I am not seeing where anything I said fails to match what you claim.

Yes, children learn by example. And, yes, children are observers. They remember, and they imitate much of what they observe. But the same is true of adults. I don't believe that these traits explain human language-learning, however, and I think it's a stretch to say that children are (so) quick to *master* language. Without regard at the moment for individual language-learning proficiencies beyond the average, or prodigies, etc., I submit that when at least three environmental conditions are present and similar [degree of saturation in the language, absence or minimization of distracting forces, and the number of years they have to devote their attentions to the task of learning said language] children and adults tend to demonstrate pretty much the same learning curve whether the language is primary or secondary.

I would at the very least change this: "... it is possible and likely *in some circumstances* they will not be capable of making such choices as adults." (I have additional objections, but I'll wait.)

When I thought about mugging I pictured someone simply cutting the chip out of the victims' hands not totally unlike muggers who cut off fingers or ears for a diamond.

I'll just wait until it comes out in a soft contact lens model.

When the bank I worked for back in about 1984 introduced it's version of ATMs with a promotion to give every demand-deposit account customer an ATM card an elderly lady chided me for it being part of a devilish plot to put the mark of the beast in all of our hands. Poor thing would just die today if she knew about the OP, haha.

But then they could put their own lyrics to it since it is a pretty old tune (and with small variations in notation has been used in folk songs such as "Unquiet Grave" and more recently "The Star of the County Down").

On the one hand (no pun intended) I wouldn't have to worry about losing my debit card. On the other hand I can picture another form of mugging to steal cards.

The language was Brazilian Portuguese

Hahaha, for "my people" thank Heavens for karaoke!

Well whether mine comes across an anecdote or a story it is true and you'll not find it on an anti-Mormon website, haha. If yours really was on an anti-Mormon website it strikes me as unexpected and as praising Elder McConkie for humility. One thing I took from what I observed at the Stake Conference with Elder McConkie was a desire for the opportunities to speak with a translator and to translate for a speaker. Months afterward I did get the opportunity to translate for Elder Pinegar at a District Conference. It began with my feeling apprehensive when he invited me, but less than a minute in to his talk it became a pleasing and uplifting experience.

I remember an experience I had watching Elder McConkie when he was the visiting General Authority at a Stake Conference in my missionary area in Brazil. Since he didn't speak Portuguese he utilized the help of a local member to translate to the audience, and as many of us have typically observed speakers do in such a setting he would speak, pause for the translator, and then continue. During his talk on Charity he quoted 1 Corinthians 13:1 and after he finished saying, "sounding brass and tinkling cymbal," he looked at the translator who paused longer than normal. The poor man looked back at Elder McConkie and then at the audience for mere seconds but I could see that he couldn't think of how the verse read in Portuguese or how to translate the "sounding brass and tinkling cymbal". What caught me off-guard was the manner that Elder McConkie "appeared" to become annoyed as he repeated the words more than once and the translator's countenance began to redden. Happily, a member in the audience stood up and handed a copy of the scripture in the native language for the translator to read.

Remembering the movie Arrival I agree that learning a language is more than just words. And I remember that it wasn't just the humans that were compelled to expand their "world view" of what language is. It's important to remember that the "aliens" were also compelled to have expanded their view (although they probably had enjoyed a much longer learning curve than the humans had to work through). With eye contact, and a smile, and a nod to the Bisaya People I just want to put it out there that to my people saying "sorry, I'm sorry, I'm so sorry" means a great deal. My people believe it's just a minuscule example of why God gave us lips and a voice box to begin with. My people don't find "hi" to be superfluous at all. We find it endearing or hypocritical or anywhere else along a spectrum of meanings depending upon circumstances. There's more, but I won't belabor it. We love eye contact although we've learned that with some other people any eye contact at all has occasionally been grounds for killing--again depending upon who we made eye contact with. I think the trick in any event and with any people, group, individual, etc. is to pay attention to the other person just as much as, and perhaps more than, we pay to ourselves.

Forgive me if I'm blatantly off-topic because I know the OP is directed at the Savior, and I may be guilty of equivocating but the link caused me to ponder what it means to understand failure. Could it be that the answer to the OP is in the possibility that it is we who don't truly understand failure in an earthly and in an eternal context? In our shallowness it's likely that we think of understanding failure in terms of merely experiencing what it is to be denied something we want (or think we want). But some of us are fortunate to recognize "failure" as growth, opportunities for growth, and sometimes a blessing. It may be that the only understanding (sorrow of sorrows) others of us will ultimately possess is failing to return to the presence of Father. ("For all sad words of tongue and pen, the saddest are these: it might have been." --Whittier)

Hmmm. I dislike pin-down approaches to the Sabbath, although I fully appreciate the utility of discussion. I prefer the Lord's summation in Mark 2:27.

I would give Tevye a break. I believe (and I'm applying my understanding of President Hinkley's remark about the church) that the commandments can make bad folks good and good folks better. With that in mind I believe that it's acceptable to see my neighbor's possessions and want the like, followed by whatever appropriate actions will enable me to achieve what my neighbor has achieved. Covetousness enters in when I want *my neighbor's possessions*, if you see the difference, followed by whatever inappropriate (leading on to evil) actions will enable me to take what my neighbor has.

Trying to stay faithful to the OP, I feel obliged to respect the customs and traditions of others. And I have observed that one person's actions are another person's substitutes for words; and one person's words are another person's "all too easy way off the hook" not desiring to act. But personally I prefer words *and* actions.

Hahaha, that reminds me of an old Bill Cosby standup routine about a dentist who says, "Oops"

I got asked out by girls when I was a teen (in the 70s) and I kinda liked it. I suppose "different strokes for different folks" applies here. I personally never felt intimidated by a girl or by a woman who would go for what she wanted. I'm reminded of the Graham Nash' lines from "Wasted on the Way: ... look around you now, you must go for what you wanted. Look at all my friends who did and got what they deserved. ...and there's so much time to make up everywhere you turn ..."

I agree with this.

After reading the definition and noticing it said that the traditional categories are no longer in technical use, I think that's a good thing and (alot of) time will perhaps excoriate them from memory--I personally think they are of little use and counter-productive.

Then I'll accept that

I don't know it. But the thread motivated me view a KSL television piece about her, and I watched a short little video where she talked about her experience. Moreover, I used reference to her merely to express my feelings in terms of parents, children, sin and repentance and my gratitude for my Savior.