3-430msg1.txt

贝叶斯学习算法源码

Subject: syntax textbook - - a summary

about a week ago , i ask reader to share experience with the cowper and haegeman syntax textbook . here 's what they say . = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = here 's a summary of response about syntax textbook : it be clear from the response that cowper 's book be a bite too new to have be use by many people . i get one favorable evaluation from a respondant who have read the text in manuscript , but i do not hear from anyone who have use it in a class so far . response on haegeman 's textbook be mix . i have excerpt / paraphrase comment below . there be five generally positive evaluation : " . . . better than most text . . well-receive by the student , but it be full of annoy mistake and misprint " " . . . quite happy with it . . . there be no complaint from the student " " . . . it be harder than radford , but most student prefer haegeman to radford , which they find long-wind , condescend , or just plain moronic " " . . . student find it lucid , funny , and well-organize " " . . . relatively happy with it . . . generally understandable and well - organize . criticism : tend to introduce theoretical concept first and the justification for them later . . . " and three mostly negative evaluation : " . . . tend to digress . . . choose to focus on unclear example , e . g . the theta-criterion and implicit argument early on in the book ; . . . case-mark be frequently exemplify with ecm verb , which the student find unconvinc - ing " " student unanimously despise it . . . incredibly unclear . . . poorly organize . . . i recommend against it . " " . . . on the positive side , it be well-organize and have good reference . on the negative side , there be poor argumentation and datum that do n't support the claim make in the text . . . there be also no mention of any non - gb syntax . . . . i find it useful for teach student how to identify poor argumentation . " as a generalization , it seem that gb practictioner tend to be significantly happier with the book than other . ( there be also vote for lasnik and uriagereka 's * a course in gb syntax * and for chomsky 's * managua lecture * . ) thank to all who write .