paris
The quality of Mufwene's scholarship cannot be argued.
Several of the essays within, however, contained information that was refuted by other essayists, or would be better informed with more extensive research, or even exposure to Brazilian scholarship. My personal pet peeve was the lack of consistent understanding amongst the essayists on how many forms of Nheengatú existed between the colonial era and today: the fact that they could not agree on basic facts such as that (let alone the inability of understand the nuance of Brazilian racial "categorizations") despite being collected in a single volume under one editorship was disappointing and frustrating. I will note that Denny Moore's essay was particularly good.
I did not read the sections concerning non-Brazilian matters, as they were outside of the scope of my research.
The quality of Mufwene's scholarship cannot be argued.
Several of the essays within, however, contained information that was refuted by other essayists, or would be better informed with more extensive research, or even exposure to Brazilian scholarship. My personal pet peeve was the lack of consistent understanding amongst the essayists on how many forms of Nheengatú existed between the colonial era and today: the fact that they could not agree on basic facts such as that (let alone the inability of understand the nuance of Brazilian racial "categorizations") despite being collected in a single volume under one editorship was disappointing and frustrating. I will note that Denny Moore's essay was particularly good.
I did not read the sections concerning non-Brazilian matters, as they were outside of the scope of my research.