“Where he can be compared with any of the best is in anything related to moral qualities and virtue, goodwill. Then, the fact that he did not rise over the average in terms of genius, makes him the appropriate index of trends, desires and currents of his time: he was influenced more than he influenced. Thus, in the language struggle, in which he takes immediately the lead among the parts of archaists, he shows as in a perfect manner the way that language archaism has followed in our land”.(pp. 343)

“In other words, in the question of language, Doucas appears to support views that were absolutely progressive at the time or at least when he was young. And if he rather failed to weigh the exact significance of the teaching of natural science for the new generations of Greeks, this is due to his exclusively linguistic education and we can see it once again in yet another form in another scholar like Korais.

The conflict with Korais came about very early; we do not need to give a full account of it, of all its diverse phases […]. What ought to be noted is the following: On the one hand, the critical mind of Doucas and his satirical mood, having already made its appearance in his time, and on the other hand, against an impeccable polemic, the somewhat nervous and personal attack by the group of Korais. […] Doucas is not pugnacious; neither does he feel that in terms of language he needs to reverse the current situation and thus to fight for this cause: he is more incline to serve in a positive way, to facilitate with his work the prevalence of the right language rules”. (p.  345-346)