> However, my reaction to 9nGQluzmnq3M's coment is mainly this: Why judge an article or opinion on what it's not instead of what it is?

To me, I'm judging the article based on what it's claiming to be.

He starts it with a faux linguistic analysis including numbers, faux cultural comparisons, and an analysis of the Japanese language -- which he professes not to know.

> I read the original article as an attempt to share some similar kind of feeling.

The way he opened his article and continued trying to pick at linguistics is what kept me from feeling that kind of thing. His own credentials and the location of the article also contributed to that.

If it were a personal blog and he were talking about subjective feelings, that's one thing -- but when he is writing an article on lithub and starting with numbers and apparently scholarly linguistic analysis, that's a completely different thing to me.

Edit to add: And one other point is that this is all to publicize a book of his called "A Beginner's Guide to Japan," which sounds very authoritative.