Scan barcode
rachelleahdorn's review against another edition
challenging
informative
lighthearted
fast-paced
4.0
I have a lot to say about this one, and the other reviews.
First, I pretty thorough enjoyed 8 of the 9 chapters.
The one about AI speech parsing the Turing test? Yeah, that didn’t age well. The author was all talking about how you couldn’t teach AI all the syntax rules. But here in the future (2024), we’ve all been learning about “large language models” and “predictive text”, so…he kinda missed the point. I would have been interested in a discussion of hallucinated facts or how predictive text from AI trained on a biased information set could impact language in the future, but that’s now what he knew in 2019.
Imo there was a lot in the rest of the book that was interesting for a non-linguist who’s interested in linguistics and has read a fair amount of just popular (non academic) books by Steven Pinker and John McWhorter and Gretchen McCulloch and others.
Also imo there are a bunch of reviewers of this book on Goodreads who are just obnoxious and rude in their reviews for no apparent reason. They seem to be ripping apart the author for nuance and for including an explanation of what some people believe about language and for not doing in a academic tone, all of which seemed to me to be the point of this book.
However, I did wish there was more exploration of the controversies around animals learning sign or spoken language. And I wish there had been discussion of how deaf communities without a shared language will
develop sign language with sophisticated grammar/syntax in the second generation, much like with creoles. How does that signed syntax relate to spoken languages? And how does depriving deaf kids of sign language impact their development—basically I wanted more about signed languages. And especially early on when , he explained that spoken language set us apart from animals without much consideration of how that overlooks the complexity of a signed language.
Regardless, this was mostly an enjoyable and fairly light read and I enjoyed it.
First, I pretty thorough enjoyed 8 of the 9 chapters.
The one about AI speech parsing the Turing test? Yeah, that didn’t age well. The author was all talking about how you couldn’t teach AI all the syntax rules. But here in the future (2024), we’ve all been learning about “large language models” and “predictive text”, so…he kinda missed the point. I would have been interested in a discussion of hallucinated facts or how predictive text from AI trained on a biased information set could impact language in the future, but that’s now what he knew in 2019.
Imo there was a lot in the rest of the book that was interesting for a non-linguist who’s interested in linguistics and has read a fair amount of just popular (non academic) books by Steven Pinker and John McWhorter and Gretchen McCulloch and others.
Also imo there are a bunch of reviewers of this book on Goodreads who are just obnoxious and rude in their reviews for no apparent reason. They seem to be ripping apart the author for nuance and for including an explanation of what some people believe about language and for not doing in a academic tone, all of which seemed to me to be the point of this book.
However, I did wish there was more exploration of the controversies around animals learning sign or spoken language. And I wish there had been discussion of how deaf communities without a shared language will
develop sign language with sophisticated grammar/syntax in the second generation, much like with creoles. How does that signed syntax relate to spoken languages? And how does depriving deaf kids of sign language impact their development—basically I wanted more about signed languages. And especially early on when , he explained that spoken language set us apart from animals without much consideration of how that overlooks the complexity of a signed language.
Regardless, this was mostly an enjoyable and fairly light read and I enjoyed it.
charlottereadshistory's review against another edition
2.0
I don't know if it's because I don't have a passion for learning about language, but even though I've read academic stuff in the past for uni, I found this so dense and hard to read. Some bits were fascinating, but I genuinely gave up and I am not usually the sort of person who stops reading a book. I'm really sorry!
rachelb36's review against another edition
3.0
3.5 stars
There is so much fascinating information here! I would definitely recommend it to the budding hobby linguist. I can't imagine there's anything new here for professionals.
A couple drawbacks:
Two chapters were very boring, and added virtually nothing to the book: the one on animals, and the last chapter. It was so boring, I can't even remember what it was about.
The author refereneces evolutionary theory as fact a few times.
Shariatmadari also uses the F-word as an example for some point, when something else could have been easily used instead (and been much less offensive).
He misinterprets a word in the Bible in a big way. "Word" with a capital W is always used to reference Jesus, and he acted as if it meant a literal word.
Definitely worth reading, still; and now I'm very curious to find similar books that are even better.
There is so much fascinating information here! I would definitely recommend it to the budding hobby linguist. I can't imagine there's anything new here for professionals.
A couple drawbacks:
Two chapters were very boring, and added virtually nothing to the book: the one on animals, and the last chapter. It was so boring, I can't even remember what it was about.
The author refereneces evolutionary theory as fact a few times.
Shariatmadari also uses the F-word as an example for some point, when something else could have been easily used instead (and been much less offensive).
He misinterprets a word in the Bible in a big way. "Word" with a capital W is always used to reference Jesus, and he acted as if it meant a literal word.
Definitely worth reading, still; and now I'm very curious to find similar books that are even better.
becandbooks's review against another edition
I love learning about the science behind language so I jumped on this book when I got the opportunity. And while I still found what was being said interesting, this book is just way too jargon-y for me to stay engaged.
Thank you to Libro.FM and the publisher for providing me a DLC in exchange for an honest review!
Thank you to Libro.FM and the publisher for providing me a DLC in exchange for an honest review!
ren_the_hobbit's review against another edition
funny
informative
lighthearted
slow-paced
3.0
I liked some chapters better than others. A few topics, I felt I knew more than the author. The main thing that bothered me was the way that each chapter started out discussing some theories as correct and the research behind them and then went on to the research that disproved them. Would have preferred not to have to read all the wrong stuff first. But I guess that is kind of how the title works too.
ashleylm's review against another edition
4.0
Quite an entertaining, informative, brisk read, although not quite as compelling as the high water mark (for me) of Guy Deustcher's The Unfolding of Language which completely blew my mind, but of course I can't keep re-reading it. Hadn't realized that Chomsky's Big Idea had (apparently) been disproven, so that's the main takeaway, but lots of fun and interesting details, and it gets more interesting later, as the beginning resembles other, similar books--great if you're new to this, a bit dull if you've read several on the subject.
(Note: 5 stars = amazing, wonderful, 4 = very good book, 3 = decent read, 2 = disappointing, 1 = awful, just awful. I'm fairly good at picking for myself so end up with a lot of 4s). I feel a lot of readers automatically render any book they enjoy 5, but I grade on a curve!
(Note: 5 stars = amazing, wonderful, 4 = very good book, 3 = decent read, 2 = disappointing, 1 = awful, just awful. I'm fairly good at picking for myself so end up with a lot of 4s). I feel a lot of readers automatically render any book they enjoy 5, but I grade on a curve!