Yea..i think you articulated what I couldn't at the moment. I asked my question on the basis that because the LSAT is a logic based test, I assumed that acing it would be easier to do for a non native English speaker who might be good at math/engineering/philosophy vs a native English speaker who wasn't as good at those skills.
In other words, I was assuming that learning English for LSAT might be a surface level challenge relative to the challenge of mastering the logical/structural concept(I.g. if I had to solve word proboems in Spanish, translating the problems wouldn't be the hard part but applying the math would) .
Not saying that is accurate , but I just brought it up to see if there was anythunf, if at all, that he had to say about that .
LSATWiz.com wrote:I'd add that formal logic is particularly helpful for those who speak English as a second language because the notion of definitive, formulaic rules (e.g. "If crime x -> elements 1, 2, 3") is universal and dates back to the very first writings that have ever been unearthed, which indicates that formal logic likely predates written language. The better someone is at reducing arguments and blocks of text to their basic logical assertions, the less reliant they need to be on language.