Therefore, some people say that if you don't have literary talent, you can't think. Of course, if you can write, you can say it. If you can say it, you may not be able to write. There are 90 million farmers in China, each of whom can speak, but they have no literary talent, because the mouth is only a tool to express literary talent, without which there can be no eloquence.
Therefore, some people say that mouth is the most direct and quickest way to express one's thoughts, and it is also the most primitive way of communication between people. When the ability to write and the ability to tell are put together, the latter is really the easiest to be accepted and understood by others. If one can't convince others, what's the use of profound words? What did you say?/Sorry?
Understanding of "more important": the key to judging who is more important is to judge who is more in line with the needs and trends of society on the premise that both literary talent and eloquence have developed to a certain level and there is room for use.
Scholars originally come from the brain, and eloquence is formed through the brain. Literati is the basis for a person to speak well, that is to say, there is no eloquence without literary talent. In contrast, of course, literary talent is more important than eloquence
Although communication in today's society depends on eloquence, there is no literary talent. If you want to say it, you can't say it. You can speak eloquently.
It often happens that two people say the same thing, but the effect is completely different. This is the role of literary talent, right?
Therefore, literary talent is more important than eloquence. It is the foundation of eloquence and the god of eloquence. Without literary talent, it is equivalent to the dumb eating coptis, isn't it?
From Baidu