Talk:The Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate, you can edit the article. You can discuss the Project at its talk page. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary at in the comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. |
[edit] Permission to use text
I have the copyright on the text in [1], and have given permission for its use on Wikipedia. --Alvestrand 07:25, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Rebuttal
Since this is a page about this book, and probably acurately, would it be appropriate to add a rebuttal to this article. For example there was a SCMP article about a study that used neuroimaging to monitor brain patterns of subjects reading. In western subjects reading was associated with increased activity in the part of the brain associated with hearing, they literally heard the word as they read it however in Chinese subjects reading Chinese brain activity increased in the part of the brain associated with sight and action not hearing. This suggests that Chinese characters do not merely function as a "lousy phonetic script". KTo288 03:40, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
- I think the discussions of the merits of the theory would fit very well on Written Chinese. If there's a specific report that styles itself as a direct rebuttal of deFrancis' theory, I think it would fit well here, but it would have to reference this book explicitly. --Alvestrand (talk) 11:58, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
