Title: not a perfect perfect reproduction
Product review: This book is essentially a photocopy of a book originally published in 1893 (you can download it off google books, since the copyright has expired). What disappointed me the most was that in the glossary section, the root symbol is missing for some verbal roots, making the verbal root appear to be part of the previously defined word, making look up said verbal roots much harder. I have seen other version of this reader, and the root symbol is present in them.
Would you say this review depicts the product in a flattering or unflattering light?
