Relevance Book

I first read this when it was first published and I was beginning my PhD, 30 years ago. I have moved away from this field so I don't know how well its ideas have stood the test of time. Reading it again, I am struck by how comprehensive and radical is its attack on the then-prevailing (and possibly still-prevailing) ideas about communication and cognition. But I am also struck by its complete absence of any hard scientific evidence: no meaningful citations of psycholinguistic or psychological experiments. Finally, I am struck at how prolix it is (although, admittedly, it does have huge scope), so much so that it is hard to pin down a precise theory here; possibly all sorts of lacunae are hidden by this writing style. Perhaps my criticisms are unfair: the book launches a programme of work with some real insights, rather than summarizes a firmly established theory.