"... the notion of concepts pervading the characters is something the adherents of the Critique of the Ideographic Myth cannot acknowledge, for the Critique would collapse immediately. And that is why they have so little to offer when it comes to interpreting Chinese characters."
Continue reading "Ideographic Myth: Interpreting Chinese Characters" »
"Unger's construction is a straw man, bad enough, but it also reprises DeFrancis' use of the logical fallacy known as the false dilemma. It is also a second instance of Unger and Mair parroting each other's ideas."
Continue reading "Ideographic Myth: Inconsistencies in the Critique" »
Invective, distortion, allegations of mendacity, a bunker mentality: It's all more reminiscent of a defense of the true faith (or its secular cousin, a political campaign) than a sober defense of a scholarly position. The wonder is that the Critique of the Ideographic Myth has managed to go nearly three decades without attracting the critical attention it deserves.
Continue reading "Ideographic Myth: Advocacy of the Critique" »
"The notion of DeFrancis debunking the ideographic myth has, in the decades since his book was published, taken on a curious life of its own; we can speak of a myth within a myth. This mythologizing process itself merits consideration."
Continue reading "Ideographic Myth: Logical Weaknesses in John DeFrancis' Critique" »
Although Mair and other proponents of the Critique of the Ideographic Myth claim that John DeFrancis “debunked” the myth in his 1984 book“The Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy,” DeFrancis' conclusion is based on a logical fallacy: arguing from a special case to a general rule.
Continue reading "Ideographic Myth: Overview of a Response to Victor Mair" »