Re: Book REview

[ok@goanna.cs.rmit.EDU.AU (Richard A. O'Keefe)]

dave@gte.net writes:

>> Actually, it probably would not be a waste of time:  A-W would not risk any
>> sales in the American market by creating a special "Australian edition" --
>> or a special "International edition".  

>That last sentence will be less ambiguous if it is rewritten as follows:
>A-W would not be risking any sales in the American market if they created
>a special "Australian edition" -- or a special "International edition".

There can be no question of an "Australian" edition,
because such a thing would be no use.
An edition full of Australianisms would cause offence in the UK and NZ.

The issue is "US" -vs- "English-speaking other than US" editions.

Splitting the market _has_ to mean higher prices for _both_ editions,
which has to mean fewer sales or less profits in the US.

And the whole basis for such a split is the unsupported belief that
the accidental Americanisms in the book offer some advantage to US students.


Let me give an example from another book.
This one's "The Little Schemer".  on p13 we find

	=> Now go make yourself a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. <=

		+-------------------------------+
		|				|
		|   This space reserved for	|
		|				|
		|   JELLY STAINS!		|
		|				|
		+-------------------------------+

What's to cavil at here?
(a) There's something that seems to be a peculiarity of American English,
    the serial verb "go make" instead of the conjunctive "go AND make".
    I suppose that can't be helped.

(b) Peanut butter and jelly is an American cultural item.
    Much of the rest of the world finds the idea disgusting.
    (Rightly or wrongly.)

(c) The commonest food allergy in this country is to peanuts, followed
    by milk.  If my wife had a peanut butter and jelly sandwich, it
    would probably kill her.  A _lot_ of people are allergic to peanuts.

(d) The biggest words on the page (jelly stains) are an unjustified
    insult to the readers.

(e) Many non-US readers find this kind of thing, even were the food item
    familiar and innocuous, nauseatingly patronising.  Not all, of the
    book wouldn't have any non-US sales, but enough to matter.

On p147 we find

	----------------------------------------------------
	Whew! Is your brain twisted up now?
		Go eat a pretzel; don't forget the mustard.
	----------------------------------------------------
What's here?
(a) Another insult:  the reader is in effect told "you are too stupid
    to understand this without strain."

(b) Another American food item.  The things I know as pretzels are
    never eaten with mustard.

(c) I can't stand the smell of mustard, and actually eating more than
    a tiny amount makes me vomit.  Surely I cannot be alone in this.

(d) Still nauseatingly patronising.


Do a patronising tone, gratuitous insults, and instructions to prepare
and eat an assortment of American cultural items really help students
to learn Scheme?  Do they help _all_ students in America?  Would a
book with a less patronising tone, fewer insults, and references to
something more neutral really do worse with _any_ students?

Actually, it strikes me that "The Little Schemer" is a small enough
book that it might be feasible to conduct a serious educational
experiment by preparing a couple of alternative versions and trying
them out.

-- 
Fifty years of programming language research, and we end up with C++ ???
Richard A. O'Keefe; http://www.cs.rmit.edu.au/~ok; RMIT Comp.Sci.