Not really, compare it to Spanish. China will also have to understand that the World is bigger then China, the rest of the World accepted English as THE technical language of "choice". Chinese have to learn English, like it or not.

Aside from that, english is just such a meh language. Asian kids get higher math scores in part because mandarin's numbering system actually makes sense ('eleven, twelve, thirteen' don't include the words one, two, or three, while the numerical representations include 1, 2, 3). You can consistently memorize a phone number in mandarin, but you can't in english because the syllables are too long. Thinking about money in mandarin biases people towards long term saving, while thinking about money in English biases people towards short term spending.

Basically, it's like a less drastic version of the movie 'Arrival'. I think not long after the idea that language can actively be designed to our benefit becomes more popular, we might be speaking an entirely language altogether. Language design is unlike city design or technology design in that there are no technological or budgetary constraints, no 'real world' tradeoffs to make. You can theoretically invent the perfect language tomorrow and it wouldn't cost you anything except time. One of the only things that can improve humans for basically free.

This doesn't represent a fact of any sort of linguistic truth whatsoever.

Ease of counting numerals doesn't necessarily translate to overall mathematical ability. French and Russian have fairly complicated numerals, but many of the world's best mathematicians also happen to be French and Russian speaking... and of course, English speaking.

At the higher levels of mathematics, abstract thinking becomes more important than arithmetic. It's not obvious to me that facility at arithmetic is necessarily advantageous then. In fact, I wonder if highly inflected languages (Latin-derived) or those with complex grammars (Hungarian, Slavic) train the brain to work with symbols more efficiently.

Than English...that article is complete bullshit, the Inuits have 30 different words for snow = more information density, but is it usable for every culture?

That has absolutely nothing to do with usability.

I'm not sure what this means. I do memorize phone numbers in english, albeit not very much these days due to the phone address book. But this made me contemplate whether I am memorizing the words or the numbers. When I repeat my phone number to myself, I "hear" the english words, but I "see" the numbers.

There are more authoritative sources but this is what I found: https://www.npr.org/sections/krulwich/2011/07/01/137527742/c...

Also, when I say them aloud or in my head, mandarin numbers are clearly shorter.

Upon further research, it seems like Vietnamese is also very information dense.

I have an instant reaction doubting that statement. Not because the numbers are obviously wrong in themselves or I think you made them up or the source was lying.

It implies a precision such that 1/3 s != 1/4 s. The difference is 80 ms.

To be a meaningful statement, it implies that the speed measured can be characterized to some fraction of 80 ms, and that the variance within english and mandarin speakers is also significantly smaller. I cannot conceive of that being the case.

That has nothing to say, compare it to programming languages, is the language with the least LOC's the best language? No, often its a mix.

Suddenly, bandwidth decreases by 20%, downloads are 20% faster, server costs decrease 20%, data centre energy usage decreases by 20%, greenhouse gases from data centres decrease by 20%, and so global warming slows down by _% and on and on. Sure it won't be 20%, it might not be nearly that in many cases, but think about the magnitude of the rube goldberg of unknown efficiency increases you'll set off.

>Suddenly, bandwidth decreases by 20%, downloads are 20% faster

Who is thinking from a programmer perspective now? Compression is not always a good thing, and for sure not in natural language.

This sounds like absolute baloney. What is your basis for claiming this?

Here's a starting point: https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=222702...

What are the odds of that happening with Mandarin?

Sure, it might be “central“ to understanding the discourse of almost a quarter of the world’s population, but then the same argument could be made for Hindi.

Also, let’s not forget that Chinese discourse is not free, and that will negatively affect the centrality of all of its languages.

I can't see how China can ascend much further. They are hedged in by powerful nations who see China's military ambitions as their own loss. They have no allies of note and are bordered by several unstable regions (some of whom possess nuclear weapons).

Economically, they have already converted the bulk of their regional citizens to urban workers. Their growth is largely bound to the debt expansion they promote and, while they are hardly alone in this, they are centralising and making their economy more rigid rather than making it flexible enough to cope with the inevitable restructure.

Politicians and public servants appear (from my perspective) to make decisions based on who these will make happy and who they will upset.

The Chinese culture does not appear to be making any headway into selling itself to the world. Few people want to immigrate to China and become Chinese (outside of academic interest of course), but the West remains a destination for people who want to take a chance on making a fortune.

Lastly China has walled off its internet. While they are happy for brigading to occur on certain topics, they must balance this need with the possibility that someone might compare Xi to a certain pooh bear or be reminded of Tienanmen Square for all the wrong reasons.

There are paths China might take to global ascendancy. There are no signs that they are willing, much less capable, of walking them.