or how to count in all languages: One, two, three, lots...Mark Changizi and Shinsuke Shimojo of the California Institute of Technology have been investigating the relationship of our visual recognition system to how we have developed language scripts. They have studied 115 different alphabets, and found most languages average three strokes per character.
This is no coincidence as three is the greatest number our brains can recognise without counting, they say.
Their comments are also interesting on inbuilt redundancy and other aspects – see
New Scientist of 12th Feb
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/being-human/mg18524865.000
Maverick I don't get it. What constitutes a "stroke".
Print English manages with only a two strokes average per character. Are we the shorthand language of human script?
blushchatcoolcrazyexclamationfilefrownidealaugh
linkmadnotequestionribbonshockedsmile
tonguetrophywink "three is the greatest number our brains can recognize without counting" Do you believe that?
That line in black just came up when I copied and pasted the line in blue. Have our machines gone mad? Scary. Ssssh! 
I don't believe that. How 'bout when someone holds up five fingers. We instantly think 'five' without counting because we have internalized the appearance of five fingers. Same with holding up ten fingers. We don't have to count to ten. We know its ten unless something looks wrong with the configuration and, after counting, we realize the person had an extra finger or sumfin' like that.
> five fingers. We instantly think 'five' without counting because we have internalized the appearance of five fingers.
Don't agree. Our visual quick recognition pattern is "ONE hand" which we then mentally translate as "I know that always means 5 fingers, unless there's an obvious clue to the contrary".
If you doubt this logic, try people's reaction times when offered a range of signals of between three and say eight fingers. I believe the reaction time on three or fewer is much quicker, suggesting a short-cut that is different to managing larger numbers.
Yeah,well maybe so, Maverick, but your studing people end human recognition at count "three". Why?
I guess I'll have to ask you once again...What the hollow vainglory contrivance constitutes a "stroke" to these academic airheads anyway? Huh?
exactly what is it that you folks don't understand about "making the screen go wide"?
I'm just askin'.
TSUWM. WHAT DID I SAY? I DID NOT MAKE YOUR SCEEEN GO WIDE.
GO KISS A DUCK. THE MACHINE MADE YOUR SCREEN GO WIDE.
milum, lower your tone of keyboard, and count the number of characters in your "line in black" above.
now count the width of my (and many a nother) screen, in characters. a simple <NL> in that string would enourmously lessen the aggregate total of scroll bar clicks required within this thread, without terribly inconveniencing the author; and, I daresay, without losing too much of the meaning of said "line in black". this would also be an enabler for the speedreaders amongst us (whose number, alas, does not include me).
-joe (lightening the burdens of the many) friday
For God's sake, tsuwm, take time and read the White!
]white[ That line in black just came up when I copied and pasted the line in blue.
Have our machines gone mad? Scary. Ssssh! ]/white[
Geez!
Edit: Oh, now I see...sorry.
>take time and read the White
Jumping Jehosephat milum, where do you think I got the "line in black" quote?
Edit: oops.
How 'bout when someone holds up five fingers.When the items being counted are in some recognizable pattern, e.g. pips on a die:
. .
.
. .
we immediately recognize the number, but when they're in a random array it's not so easy.
Yes, I agree Fong - but I would interpet that as recognition of 'one pattern' at a quick grab.
Milo, I don't know the answer to your question about what constitutes a single stroke in this academic analysis. Please elucidate when you find out :)
Same with holding up ten fingers. We don't have to count to ten. We know its ten
Well, I'm not so sure, Wordwind. I can prove you have 11 fingers.
Please hold up your left hand palm facing you, fingers outstretched.
Start counting backwards from 10 starting with your left thumb.
10 - 9 - 8 - 7 - 6 + five more on your right hand = 11.
Now, think how confusing it would be if you had your left hand in your pocket and you held up your right hand, palm facing someone in front of you, and they started counting down from your right pinky.