SUBJECT: that of a reasonable academic, UPenn
NAME: Young-Won Kim
DATE: 2007.02.24 - 15:15
----- Original Message -----
From: ygwnkm
To: ********.upenn.edu
Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2007 2:55 PM
Subject: that of a reasonable academic

> Your attitude is certainly not that of a reasonable academic.    

* Invitation/challenge to the forum or whatever is reasonably academic, when oppositions/etc. are raised.  

> You claim that the websites you posted were "(totally) wrong and useless...".     Do you really think your ideas are totally correct and useful?      Do you really think that everything you say is the truth and perfect without error?      

* As you see, I so often/continuously modify/improve/develop my writings/scope, which means open mind to be ready to correct error/mistakes/insufficiency/etc. whenever found.    

> If not, then you have no right whatsoever to take such a tone with academics and researchers who have spent lifetimes doing research to better our understanding of language in general, and phonetics and phonology in specific.          Theories are just that, theories.      They are not law.       They are not true or false except when supported/refuted by observation and real data.         They are constructs which try to help us model the physical/mental world.

* You and I, and other phonetics-related persons, can be said professionals who can instinctively (at a glance) know/penetrate whether any alternative/new or existing idea/theories are right or wrong.     Not only phoneticians but also many people spend lifetimes doing something.     Are their theories ready to any refutations/modifications/etc. (by observation and real data)?       I frankly acknowledge their constructs have been very helpful to my study of pronunciation/phonetics;       but now no longer helpful to any people/students since general people (and students) want (not tentative/temporary but) ultimate knowledge,     which I now show, I dare say.      

> Clearly you don't have any idea about the development of scientific theories over time, and you have no interest in waging an intelligent discussion.      That's too bad and you should feel ashamed.

* Now it is time to find conclusion on phonetics for pronunciation at least.      Biology/anatomy/etc. for phonetic organs such as the diaphragm are the job of people/scientists of other types/branches.      What type of discussion can be more intelligent than my challenge/invitation to the forum/etc., when it is possible which of the existing or alternative/new theories can instinctively (at a glance) be understood/penetrated ultimately right or wrong?  

----- Original Message -----
From: <*****.upenn.edu>
To: "ygwnkm" <ygwnkm@yahoo.co.kr>
Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2007 12:57 AM
Subject: Re: >> What kind of response are you expecting?