Linguistics — Book Reviews

Because Internet: Understanding the New Rules of Language

There is as much detail packed into every page of Because Internet as there is meaning packed into a period at the end of a short text message. Sometimes having information bursting at the seams means there is little room for authorial voice, quirky digressions, or the myriad other pleasantries that make modern non-fiction fun to read. Not so Because Internet. Maybe because I love Internet Culture Books (note the capital letters? I used to assume this was a convention of SFF [double brackets, but I won’t make you play my twitter game if you don’t know SFF is Science Fiction & Fantasy] genre when talking about Talents or Powers or Magic, but it tends to be deployed in writing across styles to convey impact!), but the author finds a way to push voice and appealing examples on every page.

David DinaburgMay 14, 2022Culture, Language, Linguistics, slang

Wordslut: A Feminist Guide to Taking Back the English Language

The writing is ultracasual, colloquial, conversational. Its subject matter is linguistic didacticism, phonetic gestalts, Sapir-Whorf boundaries. The writing takes deep and engaging subject matter and makes it approachable. Most importantly, it is fun to read.

David DinaburgSeptember 7, 2019Non-fiction, Feminism, Linguistics, Conversational

The Fall of Language in the Age of English

Close attention to the text—constant engagement with the language itself rather than just the concepts the text is attempting to explain—is what it means to actually read a book.

David DinaburgSeptember 5, 2019Linguistics, Japan, Non-fiction

Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal About the Mind

Unlike cricket, which technically I suppose I only vaguely understand, the category termed objectivist means almost nothing to me. Meant. Meant almost nothing to me, before this book. So when I say a solid third of this book is spent dismantling objectivism, well, it’s not fun for the neophyte. Have you ever heard someone talking—at length—about why Sachin Tendulkar, given modern bowls, should be considered as good a batsman as Don Bradman? You might end up knowing a bit about both Bradman and Tendulkar if you put your mind to deciphering their discourse, but you probably won’t walk away learning any fundamentals of cricket, the sport of choice for the two I just mentioned.

David DinaburgAugust 20, 2019Non-fiction, Linguistics