where to go next?

Hi all!

I’ll be happy to resume my blog, but I wonder WHICH sets of non-historical topics might be of most interest! Votes, etc? (Queries first if need be, of course!) Thanks! Mark

Language (itself sometimes mysterious) from mysterious sources (alien, channelled, etc)
Reversals and other alleged mysterious aspects of ‘normal’ language
Allegedly mysterious scripts, texts, etc. (non-historical issues)
Alleged animal ‘languages’ and language-learning abilities
Non-mainstream theories of language and the mind, and non-mainstream general theories of language
Language reform and language invention (as proposed by non-linguists)
Skepticism (by linguists and others) about mainstream linguistics

10 Responses to where to go next?

  1. My vote is for skepticism about mainstream linguistics.

  2. Supriem Rockefeller says:

    My vote would be for channelled communications (esp. alien ones), as this phenomenon seems to gain momentum around the internets (pleiadians and the like).

  3. J says:

    Allegedly mysterious scripts, texts, etc. (non-historical issues)

  4. L.Long says:

    My vote is for skepticism about mainstream linguistics and Allegedly mysterious scripts, texts, etc.

  5. Pacal says:

    My vote goes for something about the “click” languages of Southern Africa. Esspecially some of the far out stuff.

  6. Bob says:

    Oooh! Oooh! Animal languages!

  7. Would my work be part of mysterious texts and does it really have anything to do with linguistics?


    I wanted to call it “Textual mysteries of the Hebrew Bible”, but I am not sure if that sounds good.

    Kenneth Greifer

    • marknewbrook says:

      Hi again, Kenneth! As you know, I’m saying a little about your material in my book. It is arguably peripheral to my main theme (which is why I don’t try to say more), but a Hebraicist-linguist might have something to say about it. Mark

  8. Mark,

    I can see why no publisher wanted your book. Mainstream scholars and scholarly people don’t care at all about non-scholars’ opinions, and fringe people don’t care about skeptics’ opinions. Plus, linguistics might not be the most popular subject to begin with. How many scholars and scholarly people are interested in this subject?

    I am not trying to be mean considering no one at all is interested in my work, but I am just curious. How many books did that guy Leonardi (?) or any of the other fringe writers sell, if you know? How big a market is there for fringe linguistics anyway?

    Kenneth Greifer

    • marknewbrook says:

      Thanks for your comments, Kenneth. It’s true that readership for discipline-specific skeptical books is likely to be limited, especially when the discipline in question is, as here, itself not widely known. But my book HAS now been accepted by a publisher. Mark

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: