Vit Bubenik

It's not a bad read; however, several negative factors stand out (it is always easier to explain the negative aspect, so that's what I do):
- The uneven level of presentation. Who is this book for? While the Introduction is quite clearly written, very detailed and with no prerequisites implied (cf. the prolonged section on writing systems, which sets the stage for a school-level discussion or an illustrated magazine article), some other sections are at times impenetrable for a non-professional taking special interest in the described field (e.g. Chapter 6 on phonological change, where a number of theoretical issues are thrown in a pile).
The section on change of grammatical categories (10) by one of the editors (Vit Bubenik) is an extremely long exposition of Afro-Asiatic (esp. Semitic) comparative grammar, which is interesting and insightful, but a complete lack of misplaced effort makes one wonder (supposedly, though, it had not been conceived as a contribution to this volume).
In an essay on computer-aided reconstruction by Hewson, most of the text as well as bibliography seems to have been borrowed from reviews as old as 15 years. Has anything been done in the field since then?
Sometimes, though, bibliography represented in an article seems to be very helpful and complementary to what one is supposed to learn from the essay at hand, or at least a salient feature of the collection of buzz-words in the form of an essay; sometimes one gets from the bibliographical entries a strong sense of a more or less closed companionship of authors - but that's a continuum companion, so no wonder.
However, many essays in the book are quite fascinating, well written and bring one further than a scrap paper filled with names and years to look up in JSTOR. Søren Wichmann and Elizabeth Traugott are exemplary, but they are not alone. Worth the effort of compiling as well as reading.… (más)