I am pleased by the opportunity taken here to review this article, as it represents, I believe, my first publication in this not only august but also auspicious journal. I should like to be clear at the outset that I have done all necessary preparation for this debut. Having painstakingly counted the letters in all author(s) names† and cross-
I am thus ready to commence, and I thank the editor(s) for this most graciously given occasion.
I should like to declare as boldly as possible that there are, in fact, several premises in this work which appear to me to be statements or propositions from which another follows
Clearly, there is little more which need be said here. I would, of course, be glad to expand, republish or further clarify these remarks should that eventuality arise.
* Honestly, we lost the title of the article being reviewed here, but it seems almost as if it could apply to any article, and so we suggest you take it as an exhortation to spelunk the entire SpecGram Archives. —Eds.
†, ‡, §, ‖, ¶ I am not certain whether a convention as mundane as a footnote is desirable in an article review, but in the case that there are any officious unschooled pedagogues assessing this text for publication, I should wish to offer reassurance here that, in a truly scholarly review such as the one before you, minutiae such as measurement scales, accuracy of geographic and other measurements, missing supporting figures, or specificity of knowledge one might glean from reading the article assigned, are, of course, less important than the erudite presentation of theory and elaborate duplication of any and all qualifiers and appositives embedded in complex and, (one is generally given to hope) obfuscatory lexical choice and syntax.
|“Modern and Historical Graphical Representations of Structural Relationships in Spoken and Written English Sentential Utterances”
|SpecGram Vol CLXXI, No 1 Contents|