I haven't read Chomsky's linguistic works for some time but I certainly did not find them boring. On the whole they are quite lucid and readable even by a non-expert. Jerrold Katz is certainly no more readable and Paul Ziff is much more difficult at times. But I have not read much in the area. Certainly works in the philosophy of language are not typically any more exciting as far as literary style is concerned. Kripke is not exactly a novelist and I do not find Grice or Searle all that exciting. Among philosophers of language John Austin, who has a definite literary flare, seems an exception rather than the rule.
I find your simile singularly innapropriate. Being dragged through a swimming pool full of razor blades ,whatever it might be, would not be boring! If Chomsky's linguistic works are like this then he must be writing at the cutting edge of the subject :)
Cheers, Ken Hanly
Scott Martens wrote:
>
> C
>
> Regardless of how I feel about Chomsky's linguistics, reading his books on linguistics is like being dragged through a swimming pool full of razor blades. How someone as clearly literate and erudite can write such dry, uninspiring tomes on his own subject is something I've never understood. Worse, other linguists seem to be picking up Chomsky's style.
>
> Scott Martens
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://im.yahoo.com
>
> ---- Fin du message original ----
>
> ---
>
> Envoyé par Moncourrier.com
> Vous aussi obtenez gratuitement votre adresse électronique sur Moncourrier.com