I've been told he has a bad reputation among linguists as being intolerant, brow-beating, and intellectually hyperconservative.
--- On Sat, 6/6/09, Michael Smith <mjs at smithbowen.net> wrote:
> From: Michael Smith <mjs at smithbowen.net>
> Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] munchers
> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
> Date: Saturday, June 6, 2009, 11:43 PM
> On Sat, 06 Jun 2009 22:32:20 -0400
> shag carpet bomb <shag at cleandraws.com>
> wrote:
>
> > [Chomsky's]
> > arrogance, his boring writing style are all criticisms
> he's also earned in
> > academia, and for several decades.
>
> Ah! "Academia" has spoken? Well, that settles it, then.
>
> "Boring writing style" seems an odd observation to me. I
> woulda said
> he was rather trenchant. Of course he avoids abstract nouns
> -- a big
> academic fetish. Just the facts, Ma'am, is more his style.
>
>
> As a theoretical linguist, of course, he's been proven
> wrong
> time and time again.
>
> He's like Marx that way.
>
> --
>
> Michael Smith
> mjs at smithbowen.net
> http://stopmebeforeivoteagain.org
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>