* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
LINGUIST List logo Eastern Michigan University Wayne State University *
* People & Organizations * Jobs * Calls & Conferences * Publications * Language Resources * Text & Computer Tools * Teaching & Learning * Mailing Lists * Search *
* *
LINGUIST List 16.2925

Mon Oct 10 2005

Media: NYT: Review of 'Slam Dunks and No-Brainers'

Editor for this issue: Amy Renaud <renaudlinguistlist.org>

To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form at http://linguistlist.org/LL/posttolinguist.html.
        1.    Karen Chung, NYT: Review of 'Slam Dunks and No-Brainers'

Message 1: NYT: Review of 'Slam Dunks and No-Brainers'
Date: 09-Oct-2005
From: Karen Chung <karchungntu.edu.tw>
Subject: NYT: Review of 'Slam Dunks and No-Brainers'

The New York Times

'Slam Dunks and No-Brainers': Whassup? Don't Ask
October 9, 2005


'Slam Dunks' is neither prescriptive nor descriptive, nor is it in fact
about language at all. It is about Leslie Savan's opinions of language:
'from the high-strung Hel-lo?! to the laidback hey, from the withering
whatever to the triumphant Yesss!, an army of brave new words is occupying
our social life. . . . The catchwords, phrases, inflections and quickie
concepts that Americans seem unable to communicate without have grown into
a verbal kudzu.' Opinions of language are as interesting as opinions of

A little information makes any book about language a pleasure. Very
little information is found in 'Slam Dunks.' Much effort is expended citing
the use of catchphrases. ...


Free registration with the New York Times is required to access the review.

Karen Chung


Linguistic Field(s): Anthropological Linguistics
                            Discourse Analysis
                            Language Description

Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Please report any bad links or misclassified data

LINGUIST Homepage | Read LINGUIST | Contact us

NSF Logo

While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed
on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents.