Scan barcode
mapricot1's review
fast-paced
1.0
this book SUCKS, do not recommend.
pros:
- this book did a decent job of displaying chomsky's inspirations and situating his theories in the broader academic and social landscape he aas living in
- i learnt a bit more about horrific US foreign policy in the 20th century (altho, this barely had anything to do with chomsky, except that he opposed it and used comparison to point out its flaws. idk why 10-15 pages was spent on this when it couldve been said in 2)
cons:
- this book is so bad at explaining. it dedicated like, a 2 page spread to a theory and then simply immediately moves on. not enough time to adequately explain anything
- why do they use SO much technical language?? for what?? what warrants the use of words like "vivisectionist" and "intelligentsias" in a book marketed as 'introducing' someones works and as accessible. none of these terms explained either
- used some outdated racist language at some point that i was not a fan of
- none of the sections seemed.....connected? there was no, for lack of a better word, arc to this book - it looked at various things chomsky had done and various things happening at the time but barely drew connections between how these ideas developed and influenced each other
- page layout and spread was often confusing. many different fonts, for reasons i could not ascertain. random bits in speech bubbles so that it can be called a "graphic guide" and while yes it does make it more interesting visually, it feels weird to have something in a graphic format when the spacing and visuals isnt actually adding anything to the books contents or explanations.
- this book made me realise that you can in fact use too many examples. if you use phrases or other linguistic examples, it feels obvious to think that when explaining those examples you refer back to the example sentences you just gave, rather than create new examples for that same explanation??? except this book creates new examples each time. why would you make your book even more disconnected like this
final comment is i didnt know much about chomsky's linguistics before this book and after reading it, i still don't. nevertheless i disagree with most of his theories regardless so that isn't too much of a loss. this is the longest book review I've written a) so that i can come back to it for silly little lingcomm stuff but also b) it just makes me so angry lol
pros:
- this book did a decent job of displaying chomsky's inspirations and situating his theories in the broader academic and social landscape he aas living in
- i learnt a bit more about horrific US foreign policy in the 20th century (altho, this barely had anything to do with chomsky, except that he opposed it and used comparison to point out its flaws. idk why 10-15 pages was spent on this when it couldve been said in 2)
cons:
- this book is so bad at explaining. it dedicated like, a 2 page spread to a theory and then simply immediately moves on. not enough time to adequately explain anything
- why do they use SO much technical language?? for what?? what warrants the use of words like "vivisectionist" and "intelligentsias" in a book marketed as 'introducing' someones works and as accessible. none of these terms explained either
- used some outdated racist language at some point that i was not a fan of
- none of the sections seemed.....connected? there was no, for lack of a better word, arc to this book - it looked at various things chomsky had done and various things happening at the time but barely drew connections between how these ideas developed and influenced each other
- page layout and spread was often confusing. many different fonts, for reasons i could not ascertain. random bits in speech bubbles so that it can be called a "graphic guide" and while yes it does make it more interesting visually, it feels weird to have something in a graphic format when the spacing and visuals isnt actually adding anything to the books contents or explanations.
- this book made me realise that you can in fact use too many examples. if you use phrases or other linguistic examples, it feels obvious to think that when explaining those examples you refer back to the example sentences you just gave, rather than create new examples for that same explanation??? except this book creates new examples each time. why would you make your book even more disconnected like this
final comment is i didnt know much about chomsky's linguistics before this book and after reading it, i still don't. nevertheless i disagree with most of his theories regardless so that isn't too much of a loss. this is the longest book review I've written a) so that i can come back to it for silly little lingcomm stuff but also b) it just makes me so angry lol
vankouseonfrostification's review
5.0
A clear,condensed explanation of Chomsky's linguistics.
The section on his politics provides an insightful critique of capitalism and American policy.
The section on his politics provides an insightful critique of capitalism and American policy.
joelanman's review
2.0
An 'introducing' book should be accessible, this isn't. Uses complex language and moves through difficult concepts too fast with little time spent explaining them
More...