Editor for this issue: Karen Milligan <karen
linguistlist.org>
Re: Linguist 14.1837 I agree with Professor McDonald's comments. I also wondered why they did not check their results on, for example, Thai speakers, and why they did not do brain scans of bilingual people (as a control for their study if nothing else). Also, I have to admit that my initial reaction was, ''_Mandarin_ is extraordinarily difficult for English speakers to learn to speak?!'' What a lot of nonsense! It is difficult to find many languages that are as similar to English as Mandarin is, or as easy for English speakers to learn to speak. This statement caused me to doubt everything else that has been claimed by the researchers. Tones are not easy for some students to learn, but this is partly due to the methods used to teach them. And many learners who cannot acquire tones correctly nevertheless do just fine in Mandarin, partly because the tones are radically different from dialect to dialect, and few Chinese speak perfect 'standard' Mandarin. I have met fluent foreign speakers of Mandarin who cannot produce a single correct tone. How then is it possible for them to communicate with Chinese (as I have personally witnessed them do) under the usual assumptions? It is notable that the standard example of the syllable [ma] in four tones (one could add the toneless form too) is hard, if not impossible, to replicate with any other syllable, indicating that phonemic tone does not _actually_ occur in isolated monosyllables in Mandarin, with very few exceptions. All that does not mean tone is subphonemic, but I really wonder if the preconceptions of the researchers did not suggest their results. (Why otherwise did they do brain scans of Mandarin speakers?) Either the science has been very badly misrepresented in the news report or it isn't science, despite all the equipment and prestigious institutions involved. (Prof.) Christopher I. Beckwith Indiana UniversityMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue