(click to see animation)
International Intelligent Language (IIL)
Language is a tool for private individual communicating the outside world. Therefore, the ideal language should be without learning yet knowing the whole
universe. Since we can’t get such a language, take a step back, we have to find out a language that with minimum learning to get maximum knowledge. In
other word, the best language, we can find, is a language that learning less knowing more. It is also the slogan of IIL. Someone said it is the Esperanto. I
am sure it is not. To learn Esperanto, for an European may be easier then their native language, but when you use Esperanto, you may find the
communication time turn longer, suppose through your life, the communication time doubled, isn't that means half of your life being wasted? With this
arrangement we would turn linguistics as physics that the characterization of them was the study of simplicity.
The IIL is focus on efficiency. I will show you, by good language, you can enjoy several times’ information over a bad language during life time, isn't it funny?
How the question started
born in China, my mother tongue was Mandarin. The first time, I met the English
word (pork), I felt strange. The English got words (pig) and (meat), why needed
another word as (pork)? My real fear was about learning. If we used a compound
word as pig-meat, I didn’t need to learn anything; people understood each other
very well. But with ‘pork’, I had to
learn a new word, it wasn’t smart, because as I had said: a good language
should be learning less knowing more. The example of (pork) showed me learning
more but knowing the same. For a new learner, I was afraid; if all of these
compound words were expressed by such integrate words, then, I had no chance to
master vocabulary of English. Later, I found what I had been afraid turned to
be partially true. Then I try to figure out by what reason the English language
chose such integrate words, instead compound words? After I learnt more
English, I found, it was a smart invention of the English ancestor for it put
two meanings in one form, and in this way people could reduce the number of
A strange thing for me was that why the Chinese language using the compound word pig-meat instead pork. For with this arrangement, the Chinese vocabulary could give each of the above animals a set of distinctive terms for their male, female and young, with less learning than English. The Chinese word for pig was 猪 [zhu] one syllable, 肉 [rou] one syllable, put them together was two syllables also. Were they stupid and their butcher uttered extra one thousand syllables than English butcher every day? The answer was not. To explain it we had to talk about the phonetic unit ‘syllable’. It was a bad unit and it couldn't reflect the truth in our speech. We could classify 猪肉[zhurou] as two syllables by what was stated in book, but by our feeling it sounded like the English ‘pork’. So we had to check what was wrong? I fount the problem was the unit ‘syllable’ itself. This unit was designed by some bookworm, who ignored people’s feeling but follow the dogma of some rules. If we didn't design a new unit for pronunciation we couldn't understand what language was and what grammar was. I defined the new unit of oral speech as ‘a simultaneously combined action of all vocal organs’, the abbreviation was SCAV. For example, (he, she, to, be, lang, teng, dan, ang, eng, an etc.) each of them was one syllable, while they were one SCAV too. In case (at, out, up, bit, fat, dot, beep, left, sprint) although they were one syllable, but they were not one SCAV, they had more than one SCAV. The funny thing was that ‘at’ was two SCAVs, while ‘ta’ was one SCAV. ‘Up’ was two SCAVs, ‘pu’ was one SCAV. Both ‘pig’ and ‘meat’ were two SCAVs; the pork had two SCAVs too. Using (pork) instead (pig-meat) saved two thousands SCAVs. The Chinese pig sounded like ‘zhu’ was one SCAV, meat ‘rou’ was still one SCAV, put them together ‘zhurou’ only two SCAVs, the same quantity of SCAV with ‘pork’. For this reason, Chinese language didn't need a word ‘pork’ while their butcher didn’t need to utter extra two thousands SCAVs too. That is to say syllable≥SCAV. Some linguists had stated that ‘be’ longer than ‘bit’ in pronunciation. That is not truth. You may repeat each of them 20 times, see which one longer. Besides, the first inventor of alphabetic letters was ancient Phoenician; their letters had only consonants, no vowel. The Phoenician were good sailors easy to understand, when they struggled with wild storm, they had to shout. So their words written by these consonants were quite loud and clear. Someone called them as syllabary. So, at the beginning both the two consonants, in ‘bit’, ‘b’ and‘t’ were loud and clear. Later people put vowel between consonants and pronounced them lighter deliberately, then we say there were some voiceless consonants. In fact, they were not voiceless, for you could still hear them accompanied by a very short vowel [ə]. If really voiceless, you don’t need any action for it. You can’t say, during the combined action of uttering the [t] some of your vocal organ, such as vocal-cords keeps unmoved at all. Anyway, the voiceless [t] takes time, it may be shorter than normal SCAV, but you could’t say it take no time. So, the [be] should be shorter than [bit]. The time of SCAV is roughly equal. I say ‘roughly’ because since the information explosion, the speed of speaking has been accelerated Now, different language may use different speed for speaking, so we can only say the time of SCAV is roughly equal. Yet the time of syllable was definitely unequal. On the other hand, we can count SCAVs to know the time, while can’t count syllables to know the time. For instance, we may say a broadcaster uttered 300 SCAVs in every minute. We can’t say a broadcaster uttered 200 syllables in every minute.
Once we established the relationship of time and humans pronunciation, we could start to count our information life.
Compare Chinese language with English, we may know the Chinese one could be a language of learning less knowing more, The following table shows it table 2:
Words written in blue are Esperanto. You may see, for a Chinese, once they learnt the characters of left column (9 characters) and top row (9 characters), they would be able to create all rest words by themselves. For instance the first one of left column is 猪 (pig) and the first one of the top row is 肉 (meat). Put them together is 猪肉 (pork). For English, they have to learn all the words that written in black; the blank box have to be compound words. For Esperanto, they have some property similar Chinese as ‘ajo’ for ‘meat’, ‘vir’ for male, ‘ino’ for female, ‘ido’ for ‘young’, but they have too many syllables to utter, not to speak of SCAVs. In fact, once they add ‘ajo’, ‘vir’, ‘ino’, ‘ido’ on a word, they add two syllables on it too. Besides this, they don’t give castrated animal either a prefix or a suffix.
Compound word is a good plan to reduce the burden of learning. Suppose very two basic words could form a compound word, then once you learnt 100 basic words, you could form 100x100=10,000 compound words by yourself. If every three words could form a compound word, then after you learnt 23 basic words, you could form 23x23x23=12167 compound words by yourself. The Chinese people normally learnt 3,000 characters. You might think each character was a basic word, then how many compound words could they know? Since every Chinese character only used a single SCAV so that most Chinese compound words were shorter than English term, for instance ‘sodium alkybenzenesulfonate’ was the main ingredient of detergent, the Chinese word was 烷基苯磺酸钠 six SCAVs, while the English one was ten SCAVs.
In following table, we found the word of Esperanto even longer table3:
You might count that each Chinese character is one SCAV. Then in the last box, the English ‘filly’ is two SCAVs, Chinese is three SCAVs, the Esperanto was five SCAVs, more than doubled the speaking time of English. Suppose, if we speak such a language, through the whole life, isn't that means to say we only enjoy half the information than current English?
Further example for Chinese is: slink is 早产羊 premature-sheep; springer is 孕羊 pregnant-sheep (ram would never pregnant so use sheep instead ewe. Besides the Chinese word for ewe is 母羊 female-sheep, using pregnant-sheep would save one character) ; yearling is一岁马one-year-horse; weanling is断奶马 stop-sucking-horse; juvenile is 两岁马 two-year-horse; maiden is 未赢马yet-win-horse; stud is 种马 seed-horse; bred is 本地马 native-horse; hinny is 驴骡donkey-mother- mule; mule马骡horse-mother- mule (in fact the character 骡is mule); equine is 马科 horse-family; charger is 战马war-horse.
Another funny thing is that the word ‘milk’. From dictionary, the original meaning is: an opaque white or bluish-white liquid secreted by the mammary glands of female mammals, serving for the nourishment of their young. But when we went to shopping center the
milk only meant cow’s milk, when a sort of milk came from other animals such as ewe, mare, sow or jenny-ass the meaning changed automatically. The linguist’s logic hasn't dealt with this phenomenon yet but ‘convenience’ is the answer of people. The Chinese character 奶is always the same meaning as:
an opaque white or bluish-white liquid ----.牛奶 is always cattle-milk (not cow-milk), even in shopping-center. The breast milk is 人奶 human-milk.
You may notice, the word cattle-milk is funny; but the Chinese regards that bull can’t offer milk, so they use the neutral word of cattle instead cow, table 4:Some English questions translated into Chinese turned to be a joke. For instance: What animal caused the plague 鼠疫 (mouse-disease). What is lowest
female voice? Answer: alto女低音 (female-lowest-voice), table 5:
Some English math book asked: what is the different between, pyramid四棱锥 (four- edges’-cone) and cone圆锥 (round-cone)
From the name of a certain disease Chinese one know which organ is wrong, but English one may not. Table 6:
Relative name was another hot topic for comparing languages. In Esperanto we find some name of relatives, as table 7:
While in Chinese the words for relative are created by around 30 characters, simpler than Esperanto but with more detail, they were:
1、爷or祖父 grand father
4、母or 妈means mother
Put them together 父母means parent.
5、伯uncle that elder than your father
6、叔uncle that younger than your father
Put them together invert 叔伯means uncle.
7、伯爷grand father’s elder brother, some time connect with his senerity, as first 伯爷， second 伯爷etc.
8、叔爷Grand father’s younger brother
9、姑 father’s elder sisters called 姑妈；younger sisters called姑姑 ；both husband is 姑父
Grand father’s sisters elder or younger all is called 姑奶奶
10、舅mother’s brother; his wife is 舅妈
11、姨mother’s sister; her husband is 姨夫
Grand mother’s brother is called 舅爷; his wife is 舅奶奶; grand mother’s sister姑奶奶; her husband is 姑爷
12、兄or哥means brothers that elder than you (pli maljuna gefrato);
13、弟 means brothers that younger than you (pli juna frato);
Put them together 兄弟means brother.
14、姐means sister that older than you；her husband is 姐夫
15、妹means sister that younger than you; her husband is 妹夫
Put them together 姐妹means sister.
Put them together 夫妇means husband & wife.
18、伯母wife of father’s older brothers, you may have many 伯母 eg, first伯母, second伯母 etc.
婶wife of father’s younger brothe, you may have many 婶 eg, fouth 婶，fifth 婶etc.
19、嫂means older brother’s wife； 弟妹 means younger brother’s wife
弟弟妹妹means younger brothers and younger sisters.
20、堂it means a relative from your father side who has the same surname with you. For instance 堂兄 means an older brother from your father’s brother, even the brother of your grand father.
21、表it means a relative from your mother’s side, your father’s sisters or your grand father’s sisters anyway they don’t have the same surname with you. So the son of your father’s brothers older than you is 堂兄，younger than you is 堂弟. The daughter of your brother’s brothers older than you is 堂姐， younger than you is堂妹.
The son of your father’s sisters and your mother’s brothers and sisters older than you is 表兄，younger is 表弟
The daughter of your father’s sisters and your mother’s brothers and sisters older than you is 表姐，younger than you is 表妹
22、继step; 继父step father, 继母step mother,
异different; brother with different father, older is异父兄, younger is 异父弟, sister older is 异父姐，younger is 异父妹。
Brother with different mother, older is 异母兄， younger is 异母弟，sister older is 异母姐，younger is 异母妹
23、同胞or兄弟姐妹sibling or brother and sister; either (gefratoj)
You may notice that to design the basic word is requiring some study. The Chinese character兄 (one SCAV) means ‘elder brother’ (6 SCAVs). 弟 (one SCAV) means ‘younger brother’ (5 SCAVs). When the Chinese expressed the meaning of ‘brother’ (3 SCAVs), they put them togher 兄弟 (2 SCAVs).
During the information age, more and more scientific words going into our sight, these words were funny, as the Oxford Dictionary said; they appeared
fast and disappeared fast too. Before any dictionary collected them, they went off. So, for this reason, we required a language that could create any
words by anybody and any body understood the new word without learning. Later, they might forget it carelessly. Only compound word could play this role. Just think about how many compound words that you could creat by your vocabulary and others could understand you without learning?
Some of the English words could be useless as well as Esperanto for instance, table 9:
So, nowadays, people used 46-sided-polygon for Tetracontakaihexagon, 28-sided-polygon for Icosikaioctagon, furthermore, many people even used the form n-gon, as in 46-gon, or 28-gon instead of these names. The Mandarin never had such an expression. For triangle, they used 3边形 and for the rest, they used 46边形， 28边形 etc.
The ablility of our memory
Scientist found a 9 to 15 monthes baby might know its first word, 17 to 19 monthes they might learn 50 words. Later, it might get 8 words for every week. As their understanding developed when they were 6 years old, their vocabulary might be 2500-13000. It seemed, after this age, no one had ever studied carefully. So the numbers were quite different, someone said an educated person had to have 50,000 words; other said it could be 70,000 words, the maximum was 250,000 words. Now let’s check the number by math. Suppose a new born baby, from the first day, it learnt 10 words daily and never forgot them again. During 365 days, it got 10x365=3650 words. When it was 10 years old, it got 36,500words. When it was 80 years old, it got 10x365x80=two hundred and ninety thousands words. Conincidently, it was the number that listed on last version of Oxford dictionary. Yet that dictionary only contained the word of literature, as for the scientific words, they said scientific words from appearing to disappearing was quick, before the dictionary was printed, the word might have gone. But the Webster Dictionary took scientific words, it was about 400,000 words. Today, the English could be two million words already. From history record, we know that Winston.Churchill was said to have 30,000 words, professor like Haldane was known as 50,000 to 60,000 words. At shakspears’ time, English only had 30,000 words, so scholars believed that shakspear only had 20,000 words. If the standard of educated person was 50,000 words, then both Churchill and Shakspear were illiterate, at least semiliterate. Comparing with the Chinese educated person, they only learnt 3,000 charaters that is enough. If they were smart as 6 years old knowing 2500-13,000 characters. Then they didn’t need to learn any words after this age. In the year 1988, China published a Chinese-English dictionary; they used 4,800 characters to match more than one hundred thousand English terms.
How to get deep impression
When we repeated a group of symbles, from variauce viewpoint and perspective, we would remember and understand it better and better, the impression would be stronger and stronger. Just think about the 26 alphabetic letters or the Arabic figures. Which we would never forget throughtout the life. But remember, when we were children, the first time we met these symbles we had to know them step by step.
That is to say with more practice, we would remember a certain group of symbles graudally. We know, currently the Chinese using around 3,000 characters and English using around 30,000 words for information. That means to say in average, whenever the Chinese repeats 10 times their characters, the English repeat one time their words. So the Chinese always remember their characters ten times stronger than English for words. It was the same reason, that Shakspear could use words fluently and idiomaticly because in his time the English had only 30,000 words, he mastered 20,000 words that means to say he mastered 66% of the total vocabulary. With this percentage of words, he could master the channel of English at that time. But today, even you mastered 30,000 words; you only mastered 1-2% of the English vocabulary.
Besides, the Chinese word normally is compound word; link two already known words is a sort of fun, comparing to learn a new integrate word is hard labor.
Someone had asked me that why Chinese could use compound words, while English couldn't? My answer was three reasons. Their first one was that
Chinese language was a tone language. That was to say, no matter how many syllables English had, the Chinese mandarin always could divide these
syllables into four times as many. For instance, if English had 400 syllables, then the mandarin could use them as 4x400=1600 syllables. What is a tone?
Just think about musical scale. Once you heard a piece of music, you may utter any syllable in many different tones according doh, reh, mih, fah, soh, lah,
tih. If you can distinguish them in everyday speaking, they will help you to send and relieve more information.
In youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZB9-vZFesk the girl will show you what tones in mandarin are. The mandarin had 35 vowels, with four tones, they turned to be 4x35=140 differnet vowels in English view (note: in Pygmalion, Professor Henry Higgins only knows 130 vowels). For the 35 vowels, you may find from youtub: 5 simple vowels in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Yav6Gs_lFA and 30 compound vowels in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peqJQQl6_fU
In fact, today, we may find the tone was starting to emerge in English. In the history, English had experienced a time called Great Vowel Shift, the result was long vowels and short vowels appeared. It was easy to understand why this happened. Suppose you wanted to use a SCAV ‘ma’ to express two different signals, what could you do? The only thing you could do was drawing one ‘ma’ longer and reducing other ‘ma’ shorter. Once you got use to this, the long and short vowel appeared. After some practice, people found that the long and short vowel was lasting similar time, but they still could be distinguished as well, why? That was the job of tone, comparing Mandarin, the English word ‘too’ was sounding like the fourth tone and the word ‘to’ like the first tone. Today, the difference of ‘too’ and ‘to’ is not the length but the tone. Before China turned to be a tone language, it experienced the same shifting too. And the current Mongolian is undergoing the same shifting in their language.
The second reason was that as the Chinese characters always using one SCAV, so they used every consonants and vowels carefully. On the other hand, English used their consonants and vowels carelessly. For instance, let’s put first consonant ‘b’ with all the vowels, to see how many SCAV is in use, they are ba, be, bi, bo, bu, bao, buo. Only ‘be’ is in use that means to say, plenty SCAVs had been wasted in English. Why the people use them so carelessly? The reason is that once you design a word with some prior concept, you can’t follow the scientific rule to choose them. For instance some English words come from onomatopoeia, such as:
Word start with ‘sl’
they could be either ‘hit’ something or slippery
When you design a word with this intention, you would not combine letters according scientific rule. This caused a huge waste of English SCAV. Only in recent years some single SCAV appeared in English for instance the word ‘yes’ turned to be ‘yea’ and ‘thank’ turned to be ‘ta’ (note: short oral expression had many benefit, for instance, we know the working memory is a period that after you meet an item, within 2 seconds during this time the ability of association around this item reach the top. With shorter words, we may put more items in this period).
The third reason is that Chinese charaters has special symble called radical, that English don’t have.
I knew a student who learnt Chinese but only focus on pronouciation. In just few weeks he spoke very good Mandarin, but I was sure he would get trouble with the language, for in Chinese, every SCAV has too many isomers. You may regard them as homophone or homonym. We know the basic Chinese characters is 3,000 while they are carried by 1186 SCAVs, it should be around three characters to share one SCAV. Some times, it cause mistake. The current solution is adding another character to distinguish two confused homophone characters. It is a bad solution. The good solution is increasing the species of SCAV; try to make each SCAV matching one character. How to increase? I prefer to borrow some SCAV from other language.
Now let’s come back to the radical. It is in fact a symbol helping people to distinguish the different isomers for the same SCAV. It is similar with English word ‘sea’ and ‘see’ or ‘gorilla’ and ‘guerrilla’. By the hearing, you may not distinguish them but put them in sentence, you can distinguish them very well. With different spelling, you may distinguish them better. The following table shows some of the English homophone, table10:
The Mandarin did the same thing. By the hearing, you could not distinguish them; only after the character combines another character you can understand it. Because there are too many homophones in Chinese, so they put different symbols on each of the homophones to make difference. It will help people to remember the meaning of a dozens homophones, just like these English words, by different spelling, you may distinguish them better. For instance, in Mandarin once you hear the SCAV ‘ｚì’ it maybe one of ‘字自梓孜渍’, then you heard another SCAV ‘ｄǐａｎ’ it could be one of典碘点踮, when these two SCAVs combined together, whitin the 5x4=20 combinations, only ‘字典’ ‘ｚìｄǐａｎ’ (dictionary) make sense. Suppose, if they assigned every these characters a SACV, it would cost them 9 SCAVs. Yet in their two-word combinations only one make sense, the rest combination would be wasted. But when the 9 characters share only two SCAVs, not only one out of the 20 combinations make sense, the rest character can also combine other SCAVs to make sense. To make a summary that a Chinese character can be divided into two parts, one is phonetic, and the other is radical. When few characters are homophones, the radical will distinguish them. The target is increase the utilization.
Besides these three reasons, there maybe an extra reason that is English has too many voiceless consonant. Some times they take time but doesn’t play any role in speaking. I think when people’s speaking speed getting faster, these silent consonant maybe turned to be voiced consonant, to do something in speaking, or disappeared totally to save the time.
Alphabetic reform hindered the development of pronouciation
When the Phoenician invented the alphabetic letters, there were only 22 consonants, no vowel. If all the later alphabetic languages followed this example, then until now, all the languages could only have 22 SCAVs in use. It was the Greece that invented the vowel. It increased SCAVs many times. That is to say, without vowel, the Phoenician regard ma，me，mo，mai as one SCAV, but with these four vowels, the Greek increased their SCAVs four times. The question is why the Greek could invent these new SCAVs, while the Phoenician couldn’t? The answer is that before Greece borrowed the letters, they could pronounce what they like, without any limits. When they met the limit of Phoenitic letters, they found there were some elements that they didn’t have. So they could invent letters for new SCAVs by their own feeling. But after the new writing system was settled, all pronounciation that other than their standard was regarded as intolerable and such pronounciation should be get rid of. Then the development of pronouciation stopped. So the alphabetic reform is a two-edge-sword, it give the benefit of easy to speak, yet it blocked the development of pronounciation. China had never had an alphabetic reform, so this language developed their pronouciation by tones. They developed the single SCAV ma as mā、má、mǎ、mà. That is to say after we chose the mandarin for the original verson of IIL; the new language may stope its pronounciation development. Unless, we allow new SCAV come in.
The universal law of language
Suppose in the world, there is a certain language, it has only two SCAVs A and B, from the computer theory, we know such a language can exist.
We may call it AB language. These two signals could be work like the Morse code. But such a language has a lower efficiency than any nature languages.
Suppose in the world, there are only 400 things need to be named, a language has 400 different SCAVs would employ each SCAV for each one among
the 400 things. But the speaker of AB language, some times has to utter 9 SCAVs to name one of the 400 things, as the nineth power of two can be
greater than 400, that is 2×2×2×2×2×2×2×2×2>400, correspondingly the word in AB language, could be like ABBAAABAB. Since each SCAVs
cost you ¼ second, (in recent years, as the information explosion the broadcasters speak faster and faster, someone can utter a SCAV in 1/5 or even 1/6
second.) 9 SCAVs will cost 9 time’s time as one SCAV. Just think about that John speaks a language with 400 SCAVs, while Sam speaks the AB
language, during the whole life, John enjoy information could be 9 times greater-than Sam. And we know, the process of thinking could be a sort of
‘speaking in mind’, if a sentence cross over your mind nine times faster than other language, your thinking speed will be much faster than the other
language too. From above calculation, we know a language has more SCAVs species would get many benefits than a language with less SCAVs species.
For the world, once we counting the species of SCAVs for all languages, we know their efficiency very well. In this way, we can classify the value of each
language. For instance,
the English has roughly 400 species of SCAV; while the Japanese has around 70 species and Chinese has 1186 species in use. Easy to understand, the
Chinese language faster than English, while the English faster than Japanes.
To prove it, we just think about that in the Japanese language, there are many characters borrowed from China, they have roughly the same meanings, yet many characters in Chinese using one SCAV, while in Japanese using two or three SCAVs. For instance广岛Hiroshima in Mandarin is two SCAVs as [guangdao] while in Japanese is four SCAVs as [ひろしま], 长崎Nagasaki is the same thing as [ながさき]. Private私 [わたくし][watakushi] in Chinese is one SCAV as [si] while in Japanese is four SCAVs. Body体 [からだ][karada]in Chinese is one SCAV, while in Japanese is three SCAVs. Force力 [ちから][chikara] in Chinese is one SCAV, in Japanese is three SCAVs. Leather革 [せいむがわ][seimugawa] in Chinese is one SCAV, in Japanese is four SCAVs etc. If in average, the Japanese characters always two SCAVs and the Chinese always one SCAV, isn't that means to say during the whole life, Japanese only enjoyed ½ of what Chinese enjoyed information?
For English, it is hard to compare with Chinese directly. But we may play a game to demonstrate the efficiency. One Chinese person takes a card from a deck of playing cards randomly, he asked his Chinese friend in English What this is? By these three words, his friend knows what the card is. While an English person asks the same question to his friend, he doesn't know what the card is. The trick is the tone. I have showed you above. The Chinese has four tones for any syllable, then ‘what’ can be whāt, whát, whǎt, whàt. They use the first one for spade, the second one for heart, the third one for diamond and the fourth one for club, (see table bellow). After this, they use the four ‘this’ for 1, 2, 3, 4, and four ‘is’ as well. 4x4=16>13, the 14 is red joker and 15 is black joker, table11:
From this example, you may understand that in every syllable, the English speaker miss out 4-1=3 information compare with Mandarin speaker. Within every two combined syllables, 4x4-1=15 information missed out. Within every three combined syllables, 4x4x4-1=63 information miss out. The formula is 4n-1. Just think about, during the whole life, how many information does English speaker miss out comparing a Mandarin speaker?
The Law of All Human Language: The function of human’s language is a dynamic balance between easy to learn and easy to communicate. The shorter integrate words are easy for expression but hard to learn. The longer compound words are easy to learn but hard for use. Whenever the species of SCAV increased, the balance is broken and people get benefit from both sides by a new balance.