I confess that reading the Mother Tongue in highschool is a large part of the reason I went on to study linguistics, so my perception of it is probably unduly rosy. This being said, I do think that it's a very accessible discussion of many of the interesting topics surrounding language, and it's usually not hopelessly inaccurate. For this reason, I've recommended it to people as a good 'one book to read if you want to have some idea what might be interesting about language'.
And citizens of Toronto are indeed Torontonians according to everyone I've ever heard mention them. However, given that I have no idea what to call someone from Ottawa (Ottawan? Ottawanian?), I'm willing to cut non-Canadians some slack on that one.
I suppose I forgave him all the inaccuracies when I read it, since I expected it to be chock full of folk etymologies and the like. I found it to be a cute little introduction to some fun facts and quirks about language, especially suited to someone who's not intent on a serious study of language, but you're right that it should never, ever be used for any academic purpose, given his inaccuracies and lack of perspective.
I really enjoyed it seven years ago. I do remember an inaccuracy about the French word "mutin", which he claims has no morphological derivatives, when in fact there is the word "mutinerie". But anyhow. Yeah.
Comments 7
And citizens of Toronto are indeed Torontonians according to everyone I've ever heard mention them. However, given that I have no idea what to call someone from Ottawa (Ottawan? Ottawanian?), I'm willing to cut non-Canadians some slack on that one.
Reply
But.
I think it's something of a grey area. I don't know if there is a correct term.....
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment