Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

trucorsair t1_iqvurb5 wrote

Reply to comment by orgtre in The returns to learning the most common words, by language [OC] by orgtre

“Returns to learning”….means exactly nothing to the average person. The TITLE is especially cryptic

And now the downvote because someone pointed out that the title is non informative….what a surprise

−2

orgtre OP t1_iqvwyu3 wrote

Sorry, not by me though. I kind of like the title as it's short while still being reasonably descriptive, but can change it if many people agree with you.

1

dailycyberiad t1_iqzxfym wrote

You've certainly heard of the "law of diminishing returns"? It means that there's a point where you have to put a lot more effort to get only a little more profit out of something, so eventually it just stops being worth it and you stop trying to improve your process.

"Return" is what you get out of something. In this case, "returns to learning" means "what you get out of your efforts if you learn whatever amount of words".

Maybe it's not a familiar expression for you, but it's a concise way to convey that very specific idea.

Keep in mind that this subreddit is about data and their graphical representation. "Returns" are a familiar concept to many people here and to pretty much anybody who knows about data.

I don't think it's cryptic, u/ortgre.

1

trucorsair t1_ir0d9fq wrote

The title is unclear. You just spent how many words to explain a TITLE, does that not suggest it is cryptic? No one mentioned the graph itself….

Your not thinking it is cryptic does not discount that other people find it cryptic. Your opinion is equal to any others, no more-no less.

The title COULD have been “Minimum number of words needed to be learned to be able to read a book in a foreign language”. Longer, sure but also much clearer as to intent

0

dailycyberiad t1_ir1wmaq wrote

I used a lot of words to explain it to you, because you didn't understand. Many other people didn't need the explanation. And your opinion seems to be the minority, seeing how most comments focus on the graph itself.

0