Paulescu etc.

[ronbutters]

From:   RonButters <ronbutters at AOL.COM>
Subject:    Re: AP: Spelling Bee protesters
Date:   June 5, 2010 10:11:43 AM EDT
To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
I did not "put down" Paulescu et al. I did suggest that what TZ had reported to be their conclusions might need to be reconsidered in light of scientific considerations that they perhaps had not taken into account. That is the way science works: we continually challenge each other's work. "Brutish cynicism" indeed! Rather than answer to the issues, TZ merely indulges in invective.

I did "put down" TZ's hugely mistaken conclusion that Paulescu et al.'s work implies that the learning of English spelling is especially difficult. Interesting that he says nothing about THAT topic--instead diverting the discussion to a couple of red herrings. 

There can be no more telling an indication of scientific amateurism than TZ's view that the difference between a scientist and a crackpot is the difference between who makes money from the enterprise and who does not. Science is not basketball. 

A scientific amateur does not bother to read or report on the scientific record in carrying out her research (e.g., do we really need research on the number of phonemes in French? if so, what is better about my account?). When she does report on scientific studies, it is often not taken from the work itself but from so me press report; often the reporting is to lend support to of some obsession of the amateur or promotional scheme of the amateur. She fails to publish her work in peer-reviewed journals and books. She by-passes scientific training and research in formulating her opinions, depending instead on the receved "wisdom" of the culture as reported by Wise Granny, the hot guy she met in a bar, and/or the popular press. She believes that complex questions have simple answers. Above all, she has a mind that is closed to the possibility that she might be proven wrong about something, ignoring the fact that other scientists may see things that she does not. 


-----Original Message----- 
From: Tom Zurinskas <truespel at hotmail.com> 
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2010 02:49:01 
To: <ronbutters at aol.com> 
Subject: RE: AP: Spelling Bee protesters 


Amateurish? You only do it for money, Ron? Why the brutish cynicism. You put down the work of Paulesu et al with a lot of speculations you have no proof of. Why should anybody pay any attention to your guesses about what might have been or not been done in the study? Why don't you research it for us and see if you guessed right? 



Meanwhile the proof of my "fiddling" is in the tables of my books. This is something you are most likely ignorant of, so you feel you can disparage them just as rightly as you've done Paulesu. You go to your phoneme count sources I've done mine. 

Tom Zurinskas, USA - CT20, TN3, NJ33, FL7+ 
see truespel.com phonetic spelling 

> ---------------------- Information from the mail header ----------------------- 
> Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU> 
> Poster: RonButters <ronbutters at AOL.COM> 
> Subject: Re: AP: Spelling Bee protesters 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> 
> Phoneme counts of languages were around long before TZ's amateur fiddling. 
> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry 
> 
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: Tom Zurinskas <truespel at HOTMAIL.COM> 
> Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2010 01:35:46 
> To: <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU> 
> Subject: Re: [ADS-L] AP: Spelling Bee protesters 
> 
> I lent my English only ears to apply truespel to French along with 12 other major languages in truespel book 1. I found French the language with the most different phonemes than English. 
> 
> Tom Zurinskas, USA - CT20, TN3, NJ33, FL7+ 
> see truespel.com phonetic spelling 
>  

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org