More Pages: Butler Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57


Look elsewhere if you want a real grammar.
As good as useless due to complete lack of structurehelpful to the advanced student trying to check up on things they
already sort of know and to fill in gaps in their knowledge; it's
completely indispensable for the student (especially the autodidact)
at a somewhat earlier stage of study who needs to get an overview of
what there is to learn and how different topics relate.
So then, how should a comprehensive grammar be structured? This
question is especially difficult in the case of a grammar written in
English for a language such as Japanese whose grammatical categories
are often not strictly comparable to those of English. For instance,
what should be done with the Japanese words that correspond to English
adjectives? Many of them share some (though not all) properties with
what we'd call verbs. Others have (some) properties in common with
nouns. Yet others straddle both categories. How should sections on
these topics be divided? A tough problem, requiring lots of thought
and experimentation and compromise and pedagogical experience and
feedback from readers of drafts etc. etc.
Unfortunately, the compilers of this grammar have apparently decided
to spare themselves all this hard work and simply throw a bunch of
information at us without as good as no structure to speak of. The
actual "organizational" principle of the book is an "alphabetical
order" of grammar. Whatever that means. Many of the entries are just
Japanese words and morphemes. OK. But many others are grammatical
terms as heterogeneous as the following:
"Conjoining by comma";
"Morphology";
"Nationality";
"Sentence types";
"Spontaneous sentences" [??];
"Vocabulary" [!!]
Want to know about the past tense? Sorry, no entry on that. You can
of course go to the index in the back and find 7 different pointers to
"past (tense)". But these pointers don't give any indication of what
they relate to: verbal tense? adjectival tense? sequence of tenses
with "tara"? the use of the past form "hoshikatta" of the word
"hoshii"??? (yes, that's what the index pointer to page 486 is about).
So it's back to: flip flip flip... Honestly, I really believe a more
useful set-up would be a completely unstructured heap of stuff which
was electronically searchable.
What the compilers of course could've and should've done would be:
compromise on some division of topics, put "past tense" sections in
chapters on verbs or adjectives or whatever, and provide ample
cross-referencing. An example of this strategy in action is "Master
the Basics" Japanese grammar by Akiyama & Akiyama (ISBN
0-8120-9046-2): a less ambitious undertaking and not my favorite book,
but at least some thought went into the structure.
This is all such a shame, since it's not as if the compilers of
*Comprehensive Japanese Grammar* are a lazy bunch. It's packed with
lots of examples for every topic, many of them real ones culled
unedited from newspapers etc. A huge amount of effort obviously went
into this, only to be essentially wasted since no one bothered to
organize the results.
One has to ask further, why would the authours bother to release an
alphabetically "organized" Japanese grammar when a one already exists
in Makino & Tsuitsui's *Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar* (ISBN
4-7890-0299-3)? That one at least has some (albeit
frustration-tainted) usefulness, since what it really is is a
dictionary of Japanese "grammatical words" and morphemes, with basics
of word order, morphology (like formation of past tense), etc. put in
a separate, organized 50+ page section instead of being littered
throughout the entries. (*Comprehensive Japanese Grammar* does indeed
cover more material than *Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar*, but
for that very reason it needs MORE structure rather than less.)
Lastly, an open question as to why this alphabetic (non)organizational
principle seems to keep reappearing in Japanese grammars. One wonders
if there isn't some notion that the "exotic" character of Japanese
makes it inherently untameable by the careful organization found (for
example) elsewhere in the Routledge comprehensive and essential
grammar series. But then how exactly does Routledge's grammar of
Chinese (ISBN: 0415135354), also spoken way out there in the
"mysterious East", pull off a reasonable division into chapters on
"verbs", "nouns", etc.? Is it the complex morphology of Japanese that
makes it untameable? But then why does Routledge's Finnish grammar
(ISBN: 0415207053) manage to tame that language's even more complex
(and equally non-Indo-European) morphology? Please.
IN SUMMARY: bought this book, hated it, sold it, found other better
ones (see above). I advise skipping steps 1--3.
One of the best.

Don't waste your time and money
Useful
get it

The Templar Continuum
What a Struggle
The Illuminati Manifesto Compliments This Great Book!The Illuminati Manifesto makes public the secret of the Craft for the first time ever!


Not Bad... But not good either.
It was alrightThe inheritance of her father's vast fortune and contact with a variety of people with suspicious motives trigger a series of attempts on Lucinda's life in her isolated island home, which is a stronghold of Spain within the boundaries of the United States.
This used to be one of my favoritesWhen he dies, Lucinda is left alone, with very few people she can trust.


dilettantism at its worst
Irascible SpeechHowever, by reading Butler's Excitable Speech in tandem with a whole host of other works of a theoretical/critical sort, I came to realize that there is in fact one thing that is truly unendurable for what appears to be just about every latter-day theoretician: viz., poststructuralist discursive determinism, especially the agentless, discursively animated individual that such determinism entails. Hence Butler's insistence upon the fundamental citationality of speech, which strikes me as the continental philosopher's version of the notion of "weak voluntarism" popular among certain ethicists of an Anglo-American bent. Butler's notion of the subject's agency is certainly a qualified one, in that the subject can only exhibit agency in and through language. But nevertheless, it appears that Butler considers this deterministic influence of language to be less than rigidly absolute. Agency does not in fact emerge ex nihilo, because it is impossible to produce positive effects by using absolutely nothing. The subject must have at her disposal something with which to demonstrate her agency, because agency is observed through its effects--just as "government" [an abstraction] is manifested only through people's comportment in a manner understood to be in accordance with the principles of such an abstraction. Language is a medium as well as a matrix. However, if agency is manifested empirically, that is, through effects, then it follows that agency is a posteriori synthetic, because we observers ascribe causal necessity to the action in relation to its source, the performer of the action. Therefore, I remain uncertain as to how these effects point to a capacity for agency that is intrinsic to the subject as constitutive of the subject a priori. Perhaps the answer lies in the distinction Butler draws between "agency" and "mastery," the latter of which connotes an absolute agency which is inimical to the "weak voluntarism" thesis she advances in Excitable Speech."
EmbarrassingButler's concern in 'Excitable Speech' is to critique legal representations of hate speech from a post-structuralist perspective. Why a post-structuralist perspective? It's unclear. Really the only thing that she accomplishes, as far as I can tell, is to put a real-world debate in the vocabulary of a cloistered group of irrelevant intellectuals such as herself.
None of Butler's arguments are "post-structuralist," really at all. Rather than bringing to bear a strong application of her earlier theorization of performativity, Butler appears to abandon her earlier theses all together and just re-hash liberal arguments about free speech. What makes her book unique is that instead of saying, "Legal scholars are wrong to say that hate speech automatically deprives people of their rights," she makes the reader listen to several pages of irrelevant Foucault quotes about the decline of juridical models of power to establish her perspective as being authoritatively "post-structuralist." As if needlessly re-hashing the history of bio-power wasn't enough, she then begins invoking speech act theory (especially the distinction between perlocutionary and illocutionary speech acts) when all she really needs to say is, "Terms such as .... aren't intrinsically injurious." Rather than saying, "Hate speech is an arbitrary category," she has to make those typical outlandish-sounding postmodern truisms ("the real is no longer real!") such as "the State produces hate speech." She then immediately acknowledges how stupid that sounds and explains what she really means (that the State produces the category of hate speech).
What I'm trying to get across is that Butler has nothing profound to say about hate speech. She takes simple arguments for free speech that everyone's already familiar with, draws them out, laces them with Foucault quotes, and tosses in fairly large quantities of postmodern jargon. What's weird is that she herself seems to find the theoretical apparatus she invokes to be needlessly unwieldy. But instead of hitting the "delete" key on her keyboard, she wastes even more of our time by backing away from the rhetorical power (or at least the rhetorical authority) of her initial formulations.
This book isn't interesting. It's nothing you haven't heard before. However, if you think that taking a very significant national debate and translating it into jargon so that you can discuss it with a bunch of Ivy Leage graduate students is a worthy endeavor, then go ahead... I guess.
What a waste of time. I wish Butler would stick to making interested, substantiated arguments instead of throwing out platitudes and saying, "Foucault said something kinda like this in The History of Sexuality!" That's great, Professor Butler. Really. We're soooo proud.


Circular evidence
An easy read and an interesting thesis, but heavy on guesses
A fascinating and thought provoking read.

Very disapointing
Great photos, misleading captions.
Fantastic military photography and commentary

Not so much...
A fine mix of history and modern examples.Further proof that you can have any sort of wedding you jolly-well want, this book features several firsthand accounts of the planning and experience of commitment ceremonies. It starts with a very educational section on the history of lesbian relationships in the Western world, which I would highly recommend to anyone ignorant on the subject.
This isn't a wedding planner and doesn't advertise itself as such, but it's an excellent introduction to the subject of women marrying women.


The game is to find your way out of this book...So, what we have are two enigmatic main characters and a fluff of a dog, several murders, and the usual display of Gwendoline Butler's flakes and perverts. The plot is filled with twists and turns, some of which lead to undisclosed past events and some of which are a result of the characters' own dark secrets.
Do we have a good book? Not exactly. Things do get logically put together in the end, and the motives are sex, money, and revenge. But somehow, there's an integration lacking here--too much of the plot and the characterization seems to be decorations which are not integrated with function. Like lace doilies on the arm of a flowered chintz sofa, there's too much "stuff" to be anything but a distraction.
A Good Writer but Not the Best of Her WorkStella Pinero goes on a short R&R to calm her inner demons, the ones that seem to wake her in the middle of a performance and ask, "What are you doing and why are you doing it?" She leaves shortly after two explosions (presumably placed by terrorists) occur in one day in the Second City. Stella disappears for several days, but her purse turns up at the scene of a murder, along with her clothing on the body of the deceased. There is also a disturbing photograph of Stella chewing on a human arm. Even the Chief Commander admits:
"It's like a Victorian melodrama ... The heroine's handkerchief turns up to incriminate her."
Of course, when Stella shows up, she acts as if nothing has happened. Oh, those actresses and their pesky secrets!
The investigation continues, along with much agonizing on everyone's part for having to suspect the Chief Commander's wife. Archie Young tries to get along with Inspector Lodge, a specialist in terrorism brought in to help out with the bombings. Phoebe Astley is as competent as ever, but her boss is worried about who she's sleeping with. But these have little to do with the overall plot and don't really do much to advance the story.
Coffin's "game" turns out to be little more than an investigation technique of walking the witness through familiar places. He turns it into a game of trust between him and his wife, trying to determine whether she will trust him with the truth, and it plays out rather like the melodrama Coffin alludes to earlier as he uncovers once of Stella's secrets from the past.
Butler's focus on her main character is overwhelmingly ponderous throughout the book. Coffin never seems to grow out of his staid isolationism. The seconary characters -- even the criminals -- are more interesting. While it's admirable that the author focuses on people to tell the story rather than the plot alone, it's obvious she didn't give enough attention to the plot in this police procedural. Her die-hard fans will find only a small growth in the relationship between John Coffin and Stella Pinero, but little else of interest.


Sappy and cliched story of a female auctioneer
Not a Repeat of A Good Scent from a Strange MountainThe stories in Good Scent/Strange Mountain are told from the perspectives of Vietnamese immigrants, both male and female, living in the United States after the war. Fair Warning is told from the point of view of an attractive, successful young professional woman in modern New York. Neither is the vantage one expects from a white American male. I found this approach astonishing in Good Scent/Strange Mountain, but just entertaining in Fair Warning.
The subject of the latter book is the worthy matter of peoples' relationships to objects of possession. This is potentially its most interesting aspect, but is treated too lightly to be completely fulfilling.
There are moments of wry humor in Fair Warning, but not quite enough to overcome the lack of originality in the characters. I would recommend Fair Warning only as light reading. It is not for the reader seeking emotionally stimulating, thought-provoking literature.
Well Done Romance
a strong background in linguistics and have read many, many grammars. This one is not a grammar at all in the usual sense of the word. It is more like an encyclopedia with every entry arranged alphabetically.
Want to study Japanese syntax? Sorry, there is no entry for syntax, instead you must pick through the table of contents again and again to find the scattered references. Want to look at verbal morphology, well, there is a very brief entry on verb forms and then its back to more of the scattered references.
I am keeping it only because its the best I have but somewhere,
there MUST be a real Japanese grammar and when I find it, this
goes to the used bookdealer ASAP.