Doug Ewell wrote:

>
> Peter T. Daniels <grammatim at worldnet dot att dot net> wrote:
>
> > I don't really believe in dyxlexia -- there can't be a single neural
> > anomaly having to do with reading/writing because the abilities to
> > read/write aren't the result of evolution/adaptation -- but I
> > occasionally see chapters or articles.
>
> Uh, Peter... you may not remember this, but one of your main objections
> to my invented script, back in November 2000, was that it would be
> difficult for readers with dyslexia.
>
> >From http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qalam/message/130:
>
> > Rotations and reflections are a Bad Thing. We've got p b d q , which
> > are problematic enough for learners and dyslexics. You (and Shaw) have
> > lots more sets like that. (I shudder to think of the amount of
> > dyxlexia in Cree-script societies!)
>
> Same "dyxlexia" spelling, BTW.

"Dyslexia" is shorthand for all sorts of reading difficulties. As I
said, and have said often, I don't believe that it's possible for there
to be a single brain disorder giving rise to all the manifestations of
dyslexia, because, as I put it in the Blackwell Handbook, literates have
not reproduced more successfully than nonliterates for the last few
millennia.
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...