--- In Nostratica@yahoogroups.com, erobert52@... wrote:

> Yes, in languages that have tones, people listen to the tones. So
> It's the CONCLUSIONS the evolutionary psychologist school always
make of
> their research that are the problem, and then what non-academics
make of these
> conclusions. Let's look at what is being implied:
> "Chinese is harder than English." This is bollocks. Chinese and
English are
> roughly equivalent in difficulty, and probably more so than some
other pairs of
> languages that could be mentioned. All human languages that are
> by normal inheritance are roughly equivalent in complexity, despite
> diversity.
> "Tones are something weird and people that have tones, like the
> think differently from "us"." This is bollocks. Languages that have
tones can lose
> them and languages that don't have them can acquire them. Look at
> "The English language is suitable for imposition on the rest of the
> because thicko foreigners with half a brain can cope with it, and
native speakers
> of English can be forgiven for not bothering to learn anything
else". I don't
> think so.
> Let's not even bother remarking about pieces of research that look
at English
> and A.N. Other and claim to have discovered something about
language in
> general. There are enough linguists doing this without lay people
> psychologists starting.
> I stand by what I said. Evolutionary psychologists are obsessed
with trying
> to prove there are differences between ethnic groups. Then racists
use these
> "findings" to justify differences in esteem for different ethnic
> Ed.

I don't believe that the article even purports to make such
conclusions. With all due respect, I think you're reading too much
into this.

- Rob