I don't understand why he uses "exceeding".

That's a non-native speaker (who has actually posted in this sub), and those are mistakes.

fsome is almost certainly not a native English speaker. All of your queries are valid examples of common English expressions; "exceeding", "to tackle it this way", and "alike" are all used, but not in the way fsome has used them. It's difficult to say what fsome's paragraph means at all.

This was not written by an English speaker.

It wasn’t written by a native speaker and contains a lot of mistakes — of which you caught one! Good catch!

As others have said, that sentence is definitely not correct. If I had to guess, fsome may have meant "excellent" instead of "exceeding", and "like a" instead of "alike"

as someone who’s constantly learning english, i can help u: - “exceeding” is a synonym for “extraordinary”, “exceptional” ect.. - “alike” is the same thing as “like” or “the same as” - “to tackle it this way” can be interpreted as “to deal with something, to approach something..” hope i could help

Oxford comma is mia

The word is misused. Nice catch.

I think he meant that the info is more than you can get from books. What you can learn from playing is more than (exceeding) what you can learn from books. The others are mistakes

/u/fsome

Mistake. Probably meant to be " exciting". Alike is a mistake here. " To tackle it this way". Is awkward. Not really wrong but awkward. More naturally it would be " look at it this way" or " put it this way" which are just ways of saying " my way of explaining it is..." Like is an adjective or adverb " These two things are alike" Like is a preposition, or conjunction. "This thing is like that thing" Edit: actually in context here " exceeding" was probably meant more like " superfluous" Since he goes on to say it's better to practice.

The exceeding seems like a mistake, like it should have been “exceedingly easy” or “exceedingly good” or “exceptional”. It reads like a non-native English user.

The entire post you’re referring to is poor English, the patterns suggest they are a non-native speaker, and it doesn’t really make sense. Here’s what I *think* they meant from context clues: “Chess is too complicated a topic to learn just by reading about it. Think of it this way: chess is like language. Practice makes perfect.”

If I were a chatbot, I might re-write fsome like this: *Chess exceeds the limits of what can be taught in books. One way to put it is, learning chess is like learning a language. The best way to learn is by playing constantly, analyzing your games, and developing your own tactics.* Of course, there are a million language books and a million chess books on all aspects of the game, many written by masters. It could be that none of them are as good as struggling with the problems directly, if you are (A) and absolute beginner or (B) an absolute genius.

Because Autocorrect?

They aren't a native speaker, they are probably refering to the fact chess has "too many" books about chess when you need to actually play to learn, which is idiotic btw.

Do not use Redditors as examples of proper or even conversational English. Stick to books, magazines, and newspapers. Things that have copy editors.

He's not speaking real English. I know people will angrily say "language evolves", but he's making up rules/definitions. 

I wonder if fsome has been reading Dickens or something older, and got confused by archaic usage of these words... Using "exceeding" as an adverb is archaic and you might see it if you read older texts. The King James version of the bible has an example of this in 1 Samuel 2:3, " Talk no more so exceeding proudly..." In modern conversation and writing, we would say something like "Don't speak so proudly anymore" or "Stop speaking so proudly" instead. Similarly, using "alike" as a synonym for "like" is incorrect, but you could say something like "Chess is alike unto a language" and you would sound pompous and overly formal but be technically correct.

I think what they are trying to say is that there are many books on the subject of chess. That chess is like a language the more you play the better you understand, and can build your own play style and tactics. However it’s very incorrect in the way it is written.

They might have meant "exceedingly good topic" or "exceedingly bad topic." Given what they said afterwards, it sounds like they probably meant exceedingly bad, as they then talk about how personal experience is better rather than wrote or book learning from someone else.

Probably fsome uses translator, the way fsome talks looks like translation of literal meanings in fsome's native language. Translators translates what you says, not what you mean.

fsome is probably an indian guy, they like to learn some fancy words but they dont know how to use them

They meant to say exciting. There is another mistake in there as well. The sentence “Chess is alike language.” It should be rather “Chess is like a language.” Not “alike” in this way but they could say “chess and language learning are alike” then go on and explain why that is.

I don’t understand it, either.

As a native, the way they type is strange. They sound like bots. Honestly, I wouldn’t worry about it too much. Exceeding is a word meaning “very great,” “extremely,” or “to surpass.” The way they used it is kind of unnatural. I’m guessing that they’re trying to say that “Chess was a very good topic for books.” “To tackle it this way,” used in the context of his comment seems to mean he’s explaining something in a certain way. It’s similar to saying “to say it this way,” “or to put it this way.” The word tackle can refer to dealing with problems, and the problem is how he explains himself. The way he said it, with that punctuation, is confusing however. I don’t know why he said “alike” instead of “like.” I also don’t understand why he wrote his last sentence like that. If I were to rewrite what he was saying into more natural English I might say: “Chess was a very good topic for books. To put it another way: chess is like language. 😹 It’s best to play a lot while reading books that analyze chess so that you can build your own tactical ability.” But that’s still kind of confusing. He doesn’t really articulate why chess and books are alike at all.

I think what he is trying to say is expansive, not exceeding. They have somewhat similar concepts (both refer to something greater than a measured space) but they aren't interchangeable. Basically I think he means chess is better learned from practice and experience, like a language, because there is too much to go into a single book. But it's a non-native speaker for sure. It's close to what he wants to say but far enough out that context is difficult.