Subscribe to

Chris Shioyama at Gyaku has a great review that not only likes the book (thank you) but discusses it in detail. I’m very comfortable with how Chris explains the book.

At the end, he criticizes me for not crediting the importance of language and, in particular, for not seeing that the post-geographic divisions will be linguistic. (Chris cites Clay on this point.) FWIW, I certainly agree that linguistic divisions are real. In EiM’s terms, they matter because they are under-girded by semantic differences that can’t ever be fully overcome (because translation is always rewriting).

4 Responses to “Chris Shioyama on the English-centricity of EiM”

  1. on 24 Jul 2007 at 5:43 pmChris Salzberg

    Hi David,

    Thanks for reading the review so fast! The point about translation is exactly what I was thinking — didn’t want to drag out the review any longer but if I had that’s where I would have gone with it.


    p.s. By the way “shioyama” is just kind of a tag I use at gyaku (no great secret), my last name is Salzberg. Although I do kind of like the ring of Chris Shioyama ;)

  2. on 24 Jul 2007 at 6:29 pmDavid Weinberger

    Hah! Because of the irony of my getting your name wrong, I’m going to leave it uncorrected (if you don’t mind). Sorry, Chris Salzberg!

  3. on 14 Aug 2007 at 1:55 amsdf;lksjfd

  4. Welcome