On Apr 6, 2006, at 6:53 AM, Katharine Thayer wrote:
> Etienne,
> A couple of general comments first, then a couple of specific
> comments embedded below:
>
> I'm not sure why everyone is beating me over the head with top-down
> theory. I "get" top-down theory. And if it makes y'all feel
> better, I'll say that top-down has always made more sense to me
> than, say, the paper-attracts-dichromate theory. I'm just saying
> there's very little evidence either way, and also there is this
> observation of the tonal inversion thing that makes top-down theory
> problematic for gum, which problem none of the advocates for this
> theory have addressed in this discussion. I've been accused of
> being a blind advocate of top-down theory because I had some
> questions about the dichromate-attracts-paper theory, and now it
> seems I'm being called an idiot because I say that there are
> observations that make top-down theory problematic for gum.
Since I addressed this post to Etienne, I should probably clarify
that it wasn't Etienne I was referring to here. Etienne's post seemed
an earnest and thoughtful attempt to consider the issues,
kt
Received on Thu Apr 6 08:23:33 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 05/01/06-11:10:24 AM Z CST