送交者: 言友 于 2011-04-27 00:56:14

新ID，请手下留情。

机缘巧合，鄙人朋友的朋友是一位语言学家。其人对肖方之争一无所知，只对语言现象感兴趣。在下将某系主任写给肖的信转去之后，得到了如下鉴定：

It\\'s a well-written forgery - after the first paragraph it lacks the usual ESL markers - but the writer simply could not forsake the habits of mind that s/he has been trained in sufficiently to sound like an actual scientist. Very interesting.

There are some idiomatic wierdnesses symptomatic of ESL in the first paragraph, and later on the purported writer professes to be alarmed about someone\\'s \\"integrity\\" - where an academic would work on the factual accuracy of what alarmed him/her - and emphasizes someone\\'s \\"diligence.\\" These are keywords in Chinese or Asian lexicons of praise, but not in American
academics\\'.

References to the tears in patients\\' parents\\' eyes is pure soap opera. And of course it\\'s completely political, not scientific, to tell someone that they have no right to write an article about somebody\\'s work without interviewing them.

And the reference to the Nobel Prize at the end is the clincher - clearly written for a lay audience.

In short, I officially declare this piece of writing to be bogus, written by an ad agency or propaganda expert. But not by a native English-speaking American academic.