From sonia.cristofaro at unipv.it Thu Aug 1 11:35:22 2013 From: sonia.cristofaro at unipv.it (Sonia Cristofaro) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 12:35:22 +0100 Subject: First call for papers - Syntax of the World's Languages VI (SWL6), Pavia, Italy, 8-10 September 2014 Message-ID: ***Apologies for cross-posting*** The sixth `Syntax of the World's Languages' conference (SWL6) will be held at the University of Pavia, Italy, on 8-10 September 2014. In the same spirit as previous conferences in this series (SWL I - Leipzig 2004, SWL II - Lancaster 2006, SWL III - Berlin 2008, SWL IV - Lyon 2010, and SWL V - Dubrovnik 2012), the conference will provide a forum for linguists working on the syntax of less widely studied languages from a variety of perspectives. The main purpose of the conference is to enlarge our knowledge and understanding of syntactic diversity. Contributions are expected to be based on first-hand data of individual languages or to adopt a broadly comparative perspective. The discussion of theoretical issues is appreciated to the extent that it helps to elucidate the data and is understandable without prior knowledge of the relevant theory. All theoretical frameworks are equally welcome, and papers that adopt a diachronic or comparative perspective are also welcome, as are papers dealing with morphological or semantic issues, as long as syntactic issues also play a major role. Abstracts of no more than one page (plus possibly one additional page for examples), should be sent in PDF format to swl6.conference at gmail.com by January 31st, 2014, with ''SWL6 abstract'' in the subject line (authors will receive notification of acceptance by March 31st, 2014). Submissions should be anonymous and refrain from self-reference. Please provide contact details (name, phone, fax) and the title of your presentation in the body of the email. Participants may not be involved in more than two abstracts, of which at most one may be single-authored. The conference will be held in English and abstracts must be submitted in English. For further information, please refer to the conference website ( http://swl-6.wikidot.com/). -- -- Sonia Cristofaro Dipartimento di Studi Umanistici Sezione di Linguistica Universita' di Pavia Strada Nuova, 65 I-27100 Pavia Italia Tel. +390382984484 Fax +390382984487 E-mail: sonia.cristofaro at unipv.it From jrubba at calpoly.edu Sun Aug 4 22:47:05 2013 From: jrubba at calpoly.edu (Johanna Rubba) Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2013 15:47:05 -0700 Subject: career advice: tenure salary/sabbatical In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, Shannon, The first thing I would do is be certain that you meet the requirements for tenure and promotion. These can be very nebulous, and, if not written down, difficult to discover. If you have close friends or a mentor who is tenured, they may be able to help. At Cal Poly, our college has specific requirements for publication, and they are written down. Other colleges in the U are not so specific, and tenure candidates stay on tenterhooks through the review process. The second thing I would do -- and I don't want to be overly discouraging about the process -- is not rely totally on former reviews to assure tenure and/or promotion. In spite of a fine post-tenure review, I was denied promotion to Full Professor, and had to file a grievance to get it rectified. Once again, close friends, mentors, and other faculty with a lot of experience at your college would be good guides. If your faculty has a union, immediately make an appointment with your chapter president or your faculty rights specialist; these people will have institutional memory of any possible difficulties with tenure and promotion. As to salary, you need to find what the official policy is, if there is one written down. In the Cal State system, the fixed salary raise for tenure and promotion is 7.5%, but it is possible, and has happened, for a professor to negotiate a higher raise if they have special accomplishments or (most effectively) an offer of a better salary or position at another institution. Once again, the union might help, though this is less out of their bailiwick, but there's always a grapevine. If you teach at a public institution in a state with transparency laws (like CA), you can study the salary history of any public employee; the admin can throw obstacles your way, but they cannot outright refuse you; yet again, if you have a union, they generally have this information and should not hesitate to give you access to it. I really don't want to make you unduly frightened of this process; if you have good student evaluations and a good publication record, there should be no problem. Best of luck, and feel fee to send further questions! Johanna Dr. Johanna Rubba, Professor, Linguistics Linguistics Minor Advisor English Department Cal Poly State University, San Luis Obispo Tel. 805.756.2184 Dept. Tel 805.756.2596 E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu URL: http://cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba ******************************************* "Justice is what love looks like in public." - Cornel West On Jul 31, 2013, at 12:21 PM, s.t. bischoff wrote: > Hello all, > > Please ignore the previous post...I sent it before I had a chance to proof > it by mistake. > > I'm a junior faculty member in the US who is currently up for tenure. I > anticipate no problems with the process and to receive tenure next year > (based on previous evaluations and our departments policies). Though I > think I have a healthy bit of nervousness regarding the process. I wanted > to ask if anyone might have advice regarding salary negotiation upon > receiving tenure and promotion, e.g. is it appropriate and how best to go > about it if so. I know this will vary from institution to institution and > linguist to linguist, but I'm hoping to get some idea if it is something I > should consider. > > Provided I do get tenure, I will be eligible for sabbatical in two years. I > will have the option to take a full or half-year. Like with my query > regarding salary negotiation, I wonder if anyone might have advice > regarding preparing for sabbatical and possibly securing a research or > teaching opportunity outside the US. I am familiar with the Fulbright > program and would appreciate hearing about experience with it or any other > programs. > > Thank your time, > Shannon Bischoff From bischoff.st at gmail.com Tue Aug 6 15:36:15 2013 From: bischoff.st at gmail.com (s.t. bischoff) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2013 08:36:15 -0700 Subject: tenure/promotion query Message-ID: Hello all, Thanks to everyone that responded to my earlier query on list and off. Here is a summary of what I learned. Nearly everyone responded with the following regarding tenure/promotion: 1. schedule a meeting with your universities union (if there is one on your campus); 2. be sure you are familiar with all tenure/promotion requirements (be sure you are familiar with department, college, and university requirements as these may differ); 3. be sure you have the most recent requirements for tenure/promotion in writing...if your department does not have a written policy, try to get something from the department chair or relevant committee (do the same at the college and university level); 4. be aware that prior reviews are not necessarily an indicator of how things will go (a number of folks noted examples of folks with excellent prior reviews who did not get tenure/promotion); 5. go to all tenure/promotion workshops; 6. pay increases may be set, may have a range, and may be negotiable, but regardless chat with someone you are comfortable with about negotiating a raise, also speak with your union rep about this...many public institutions are required to make public salaries and salary records public, these can be reviewed; 7. go on the market--primary reasons given were "just in case you don't get the tenure/promotion" and "it could put you in a good position when negotiating a salary"; A few also recommended that outside reviewers be chosen carefully. This is the one thing I wish I had spent more time on as our institution requires six external reviewers. Regarding Fulbright, folks had the following to say: 1. stay home, write, and publish (this was the most frequent response); 2. popular locations (e.g. Western Europe, Australia, New Zealand) are very competitive and often go to "stars", some regions maybe under applied to; 3. other countries have good programs for research/teaching exchanges e.g. Japan has programs with the Japanese Society for the Promotion of Science and Germany has the Research in Germany website with various resources. 4. Folks that have participated in Fulbright programs report having very good experiences and suggest "just follow all the guidelines" when applying and be sure to have a sponsor in the host country. Thanks again, Shannon From elc9j at virginia.edu Tue Aug 6 15:56:54 2013 From: elc9j at virginia.edu (Ellen Contini-Morava) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2013 11:56:54 -0400 Subject: tenure/promotion query In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear Shannon, Thanks very much for the helpful post. One point about external reviewers: I wouldn't expect the candidate to have complete control over who is asked for a review. Sometimes they have no say at all in this. At U.Va. candidates are asked to provide a list of potential reviewers, but the department is also asked to provide its own list, and usually equal numbers of requests go out to people from each list. But the department must specify in its report which reviewers come from which list, and there's also a widespread belief that letters from the candidate's list get paid less attention to by the P&T committee than ones from the department's list. So in deciding who to include on his/her list, the candidate might not want to include the heaviest lifters, in hopes that the department will think of them on its own. All the best, Ellen ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ellen Contini-Morava Professor, Department of Anthropology University of Virginia P.O. Box 400120 Charlottesville, VA 22904-4120 USA phone: +1 (434) 924-6825 fax: +1 (434) 924-1350 On 8/6/2013 11:36 AM, s.t. bischoff wrote: > Hello all, > > Thanks to everyone that responded to my earlier query on list and off. Here > is a summary of what I learned. Nearly everyone responded with the > following regarding tenure/promotion: > > 1. schedule a meeting with your universities union (if there is one on > your campus); > > 2. be sure you are familiar with all tenure/promotion requirements (be sure > you are familiar with department, college, and university requirements as > these may differ); > > 3. be sure you have the most recent requirements for tenure/promotion in > writing...if your department does not have a written policy, try to get > something from the department chair or relevant committee (do the same at > the college and university level); > > 4. be aware that prior reviews are not necessarily an indicator of how > things will go (a number of folks noted examples of folks with excellent > prior reviews who did not get tenure/promotion); > > 5. go to all tenure/promotion workshops; > > 6. pay increases may be set, may have a range, and may be negotiable, but > regardless chat with someone you are comfortable with about negotiating a > raise, also speak with your union rep about this...many public institutions > are required to make public salaries and salary records public, these can > be reviewed; > > 7. go on the market--primary reasons given were "just in case you don't get > the tenure/promotion" and "it could put you in a good position when > negotiating a salary"; > > A few also recommended that outside reviewers be chosen carefully. This is > the one thing I wish I had spent more time on as our institution requires > six external reviewers. > > Regarding Fulbright, folks had the following to say: > > 1. stay home, write, and publish (this was the most frequent response); > > 2. popular locations (e.g. Western Europe, Australia, New Zealand) are very > competitive and often go to "stars", some regions maybe under applied to; > > 3. other countries have good programs for research/teaching exchanges e.g. > Japan has programs with the Japanese Society for the Promotion of Science > and Germany has the Research in Germany website with various resources. > > 4. Folks that have participated in Fulbright programs report having very > good experiences and suggest "just follow all the guidelines" when applying > and be sure to have a sponsor in the host country. > > Thanks again, > Shannon From mewinters at wayne.edu Tue Aug 6 16:47:27 2013 From: mewinters at wayne.edu (Margaret E. Winters) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2013 12:47:27 -0400 Subject: tenure/promotion query In-Reply-To: <52011CC6.5060801@virginia.edu> Message-ID: To add to Ellen's note - you may also, depending on policies/practices where you are, be shown the entire list before it is narrowed down by the chair, department P&T committee or whoever makes the choices. At Wayne State the candidate is allowed to strike up to two names (someone the candidate as clashed with, whose review of the candidates work has in the past been very negative)... But otherwise it all that Ellen stated is very much what I've told groups in various universities about this part of the process. Margaret ------------------------------------------ Margaret E. Winters Interim Provost Wayne State University Detroit, MI 48202 Phone: (313) 577- 2433 Fax: (313) 577-5666 e-mail: mewinters at wayne.edu ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ellen Contini-Morava" To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2013 11:56:54 AM Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] tenure/promotion query Dear Shannon, Thanks very much for the helpful post. One point about external reviewers: I wouldn't expect the candidate to have complete control over who is asked for a review. Sometimes they have no say at all in this. At U.Va. candidates are asked to provide a list of potential reviewers, but the department is also asked to provide its own list, and usually equal numbers of requests go out to people from each list. But the department must specify in its report which reviewers come from which list, and there's also a widespread belief that letters from the candidate's list get paid less attention to by the P&T committee than ones from the department's list. So in deciding who to include on his/her list, the candidate might not want to include the heaviest lifters, in hopes that the department will think of them on its own. All the best, Ellen ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ellen Contini-Morava Professor, Department of Anthropology University of Virginia P.O. Box 400120 Charlottesville, VA 22904-4120 USA phone: +1 (434) 924-6825 fax: +1 (434) 924-1350 On 8/6/2013 11:36 AM, s.t. bischoff wrote: > Hello all, > > Thanks to everyone that responded to my earlier query on list and off. Here > is a summary of what I learned. Nearly everyone responded with the > following regarding tenure/promotion: > > 1. schedule a meeting with your universities union (if there is one on > your campus); > > 2. be sure you are familiar with all tenure/promotion requirements (be sure > you are familiar with department, college, and university requirements as > these may differ); > > 3. be sure you have the most recent requirements for tenure/promotion in > writing...if your department does not have a written policy, try to get > something from the department chair or relevant committee (do the same at > the college and university level); > > 4. be aware that prior reviews are not necessarily an indicator of how > things will go (a number of folks noted examples of folks with excellent > prior reviews who did not get tenure/promotion); > > 5. go to all tenure/promotion workshops; > > 6. pay increases may be set, may have a range, and may be negotiable, but > regardless chat with someone you are comfortable with about negotiating a > raise, also speak with your union rep about this...many public institutions > are required to make public salaries and salary records public, these can > be reviewed; > > 7. go on the market--primary reasons given were "just in case you don't get > the tenure/promotion" and "it could put you in a good position when > negotiating a salary"; > > A few also recommended that outside reviewers be chosen carefully. This is > the one thing I wish I had spent more time on as our institution requires > six external reviewers. > > Regarding Fulbright, folks had the following to say: > > 1. stay home, write, and publish (this was the most frequent response); > > 2. popular locations (e.g. Western Europe, Australia, New Zealand) are very > competitive and often go to "stars", some regions maybe under applied to; > > 3. other countries have good programs for research/teaching exchanges e.g. > Japan has programs with the Japanese Society for the Promotion of Science > and Germany has the Research in Germany website with various resources. > > 4. Folks that have participated in Fulbright programs report having very > good experiences and suggest "just follow all the guidelines" when applying > and be sure to have a sponsor in the host country. > > Thanks again, > Shannon From hsimpson at umail.ucsb.edu Sat Aug 10 19:15:36 2013 From: hsimpson at umail.ucsb.edu (Heather Simpson) Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2013 12:15:36 -0700 Subject: Cognition and Language Workshop (CLaW): Aug 31-Sept 1 Message-ID: *Cognition and Language Workshop: Conference schedule* **University of California, Santa Barbara, August 31-September 1 2013** The schedule for the Cognition and Language Workshop (CLaW) is now available: http://www.linguistics.ucsb.edu/claw/schedule.html CLaW will feature 13 talks and 6 poster presentations, as well as a keynote address from Luca Onnis (Associate Professor at University of Hawaii at Manoa) on topics relevant to language and cognition from empirical data-driven perspectives. CLaW is organized by SCUL (Studying the Cognitive Underpinnings of Language), an interdisciplinary research group at the University of California, Santa Barbara. See below for the keynote address abstract. If you would like to attend, please email claw.ucsb at gmail.com to register! There is a $10 registration fee, payable on site. --------------------------------------- Abstract for keynote address: Language is a complex ability comprised of multiple component skills. A sizable body of research now suggests that language learning and processing could be subserved by statistical learning (SL) abilities — implicitly tracking distributional relations in sequences of events. Languages contain many probabilistic regularities (for example, a listener who hears "the" can predict that a noun will occur after it), so sensitivity to statistical structure in the input can play an important role in mastering language. The first generation of SL studies provided important proofs of concept' that infants and adults can track statistical relations in miniature artificial grammars, but the arguably simplified nature of these learning scenarios could only offer indirect evidence that the same processes underlie the discovery of a natural language. Recently, however, a series of new studies have established more robust links between SL abilities and language. In addition, this relationship can go both ways, as language experience can modify individual preferences for statistical learning, potentially affecting subsequent learning. I will provide an overview of how corpus analyses, behavioral, and brain imaging methods can be combined to further strengthen our understanding of the underpinnings of statistical language learning. --------------------------------------- ****************************************************** Heather Simpson Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Linguistics Program Manager, Cognitive Science Program University of California, Santa Barbara hsimpson at umail.ucsb.edu From evelien.keizer at univie.ac.at Thu Aug 29 14:38:02 2013 From: evelien.keizer at univie.ac.at (Evelien Keizer) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 16:38:02 +0200 Subject: Call for Papers: Workshop "Outside the clause: form and function of extra-clausal constituent" Message-ID: Outside the clause: form and function of Extra-clausal constituents Workshop: Vienna, 4-5 July 2014 FIRST CALL FOR PAPERS Keynote speakers · Karin Aijmer (University of Gothenburg) · Laurel J Brinton (University of British Columbia, Vancouver) · Bernd Heine (University of Cologne) Dates of workshop Fr 4 July – Sat 5 July 2014 Location Department of English, University of Vienna, Austria Organisers Evelien Keizer, Gunther Kaltenböck, Arne Lohmann Conference website https://otc-workshop.univie.ac.at/ Conference email otc-workshop at univie.ac.at General topic In recent years there has been increased interest in linguistic elements which are outside ordinary sentence grammar. These elements are subsumed by Dik (1997) under the term Extra-clausal constituents (ECCs), but have also been referred to as supplements (Huddleston & Pullum 2002) or theticals (Kaltenböck, Heine & Kuteva 2011). They are taken to include a variety of different units ranging from single words to phrases and whole clauses, such as the following: parentheticals, discourse markers, appositions, non-restrictive relative clauses, tails and afterthoughts, insubordinate clauses, vocatives, interjections, left-dislocands, formulae of social exchange, etc. What unites these elements is their syntactic independence from the linguistic environment. This is reflected in their positional mobility with regard to the host construction or their ability to occur as stand-alone items. Prosodically, they tend to be set off from the rest of the utterance. Semantically, ECCs are non-restrictive, that is their meaning is not determined by the structure of the host clause or its constituents. Instead, their meaning is shaped by the immediate situation of discourse, where they play an important role in interaction management, the expression of speaker attitude, discourse organization, etc. As shown by numerous corpus studies, ECCs are by no means a marginal linguistic phenomenon, but are highly frequent in occurrence, especially in spoken language. They have also been shown to fulfil essential communicative functions. At the same time, however, ECCs are a challenge for syntactic modelling. Being only loosely associated with a host construction, they cannot easily be accounted for in terms of clause-internal rules of sentence grammar. Aim The aim of the workshop is twofold: To bring together descriptions of specific constructions used as ECCs and theoretical perspectives on how ECCs can be accounted for in a linguistic model. The assumption is that both theoretical and descriptive approaches will benefit from each other and are necessary for deepening our understanding of ECCs. While trying to keep a broad perspective, we particularly invite contributions within a cognitive-functional framework and qualitative as well as quantitative analyses of naturally occurring language data. The focus is on English, but contributions comparing English with other languages are also welcome. Specific topics More specific topics to be addressed may include the following: · Formal properties of (specific) ECCs: their external and internal syntax, position in the host construction, prosodic realisation · Functional properties and use of (specific) ECCs in language corpora · The link of ECCs to their host construction and their interaction with the level of sentence grammar · Criteria for determining whether a linguistic unit can be identified as extra-clausal · Distinction of different subtypes · Historical genesis and possible developmental pathways of ECCs · Analysis and representation in linguistic models Presentation format 20 minute papers + 10 minutes for discussion Submission of abstracts >>From 1 October 2013 to 1 January 2014. · Abstracts should not exceed 400 words (exclusive of references) and should clearly state research questions, approach, method, data and (expected) results. · Please submit as a .doc or .docx to otc-workshop at univie.ac.at · Notification of acceptance of all abstracts will be sent out by 15 February. Prof. Dr. M.E. Keizer Institut für Anglistik und Amerikanistik / Department of English Universität Wien Campus d. Universität Wien Spitalgasse 2-4/Hof 8.3 1090 Wien Austria Homepage: http://anglistik.univie.ac.at/staff/keizer/ From sonia.cristofaro at unipv.it Thu Aug 1 11:35:22 2013 From: sonia.cristofaro at unipv.it (Sonia Cristofaro) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 12:35:22 +0100 Subject: First call for papers - Syntax of the World's Languages VI (SWL6), Pavia, Italy, 8-10 September 2014 Message-ID: ***Apologies for cross-posting*** The sixth `Syntax of the World's Languages' conference (SWL6) will be held at the University of Pavia, Italy, on 8-10 September 2014. In the same spirit as previous conferences in this series (SWL I - Leipzig 2004, SWL II - Lancaster 2006, SWL III - Berlin 2008, SWL IV - Lyon 2010, and SWL V - Dubrovnik 2012), the conference will provide a forum for linguists working on the syntax of less widely studied languages from a variety of perspectives. The main purpose of the conference is to enlarge our knowledge and understanding of syntactic diversity. Contributions are expected to be based on first-hand data of individual languages or to adopt a broadly comparative perspective. The discussion of theoretical issues is appreciated to the extent that it helps to elucidate the data and is understandable without prior knowledge of the relevant theory. All theoretical frameworks are equally welcome, and papers that adopt a diachronic or comparative perspective are also welcome, as are papers dealing with morphological or semantic issues, as long as syntactic issues also play a major role. Abstracts of no more than one page (plus possibly one additional page for examples), should be sent in PDF format to swl6.conference at gmail.com by January 31st, 2014, with ''SWL6 abstract'' in the subject line (authors will receive notification of acceptance by March 31st, 2014). Submissions should be anonymous and refrain from self-reference. Please provide contact details (name, phone, fax) and the title of your presentation in the body of the email. Participants may not be involved in more than two abstracts, of which at most one may be single-authored. The conference will be held in English and abstracts must be submitted in English. For further information, please refer to the conference website ( http://swl-6.wikidot.com/). -- -- Sonia Cristofaro Dipartimento di Studi Umanistici Sezione di Linguistica Universita' di Pavia Strada Nuova, 65 I-27100 Pavia Italia Tel. +390382984484 Fax +390382984487 E-mail: sonia.cristofaro at unipv.it From jrubba at calpoly.edu Sun Aug 4 22:47:05 2013 From: jrubba at calpoly.edu (Johanna Rubba) Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2013 15:47:05 -0700 Subject: career advice: tenure salary/sabbatical In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, Shannon, The first thing I would do is be certain that you meet the requirements for tenure and promotion. These can be very nebulous, and, if not written down, difficult to discover. If you have close friends or a mentor who is tenured, they may be able to help. At Cal Poly, our college has specific requirements for publication, and they are written down. Other colleges in the U are not so specific, and tenure candidates stay on tenterhooks through the review process. The second thing I would do -- and I don't want to be overly discouraging about the process -- is not rely totally on former reviews to assure tenure and/or promotion. In spite of a fine post-tenure review, I was denied promotion to Full Professor, and had to file a grievance to get it rectified. Once again, close friends, mentors, and other faculty with a lot of experience at your college would be good guides. If your faculty has a union, immediately make an appointment with your chapter president or your faculty rights specialist; these people will have institutional memory of any possible difficulties with tenure and promotion. As to salary, you need to find what the official policy is, if there is one written down. In the Cal State system, the fixed salary raise for tenure and promotion is 7.5%, but it is possible, and has happened, for a professor to negotiate a higher raise if they have special accomplishments or (most effectively) an offer of a better salary or position at another institution. Once again, the union might help, though this is less out of their bailiwick, but there's always a grapevine. If you teach at a public institution in a state with transparency laws (like CA), you can study the salary history of any public employee; the admin can throw obstacles your way, but they cannot outright refuse you; yet again, if you have a union, they generally have this information and should not hesitate to give you access to it. I really don't want to make you unduly frightened of this process; if you have good student evaluations and a good publication record, there should be no problem. Best of luck, and feel fee to send further questions! Johanna Dr. Johanna Rubba, Professor, Linguistics Linguistics Minor Advisor English Department Cal Poly State University, San Luis Obispo Tel. 805.756.2184 Dept. Tel 805.756.2596 E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu URL: http://cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba ******************************************* "Justice is what love looks like in public." - Cornel West On Jul 31, 2013, at 12:21 PM, s.t. bischoff wrote: > Hello all, > > Please ignore the previous post...I sent it before I had a chance to proof > it by mistake. > > I'm a junior faculty member in the US who is currently up for tenure. I > anticipate no problems with the process and to receive tenure next year > (based on previous evaluations and our departments policies). Though I > think I have a healthy bit of nervousness regarding the process. I wanted > to ask if anyone might have advice regarding salary negotiation upon > receiving tenure and promotion, e.g. is it appropriate and how best to go > about it if so. I know this will vary from institution to institution and > linguist to linguist, but I'm hoping to get some idea if it is something I > should consider. > > Provided I do get tenure, I will be eligible for sabbatical in two years. I > will have the option to take a full or half-year. Like with my query > regarding salary negotiation, I wonder if anyone might have advice > regarding preparing for sabbatical and possibly securing a research or > teaching opportunity outside the US. I am familiar with the Fulbright > program and would appreciate hearing about experience with it or any other > programs. > > Thank your time, > Shannon Bischoff From bischoff.st at gmail.com Tue Aug 6 15:36:15 2013 From: bischoff.st at gmail.com (s.t. bischoff) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2013 08:36:15 -0700 Subject: tenure/promotion query Message-ID: Hello all, Thanks to everyone that responded to my earlier query on list and off. Here is a summary of what I learned. Nearly everyone responded with the following regarding tenure/promotion: 1. schedule a meeting with your universities union (if there is one on your campus); 2. be sure you are familiar with all tenure/promotion requirements (be sure you are familiar with department, college, and university requirements as these may differ); 3. be sure you have the most recent requirements for tenure/promotion in writing...if your department does not have a written policy, try to get something from the department chair or relevant committee (do the same at the college and university level); 4. be aware that prior reviews are not necessarily an indicator of how things will go (a number of folks noted examples of folks with excellent prior reviews who did not get tenure/promotion); 5. go to all tenure/promotion workshops; 6. pay increases may be set, may have a range, and may be negotiable, but regardless chat with someone you are comfortable with about negotiating a raise, also speak with your union rep about this...many public institutions are required to make public salaries and salary records public, these can be reviewed; 7. go on the market--primary reasons given were "just in case you don't get the tenure/promotion" and "it could put you in a good position when negotiating a salary"; A few also recommended that outside reviewers be chosen carefully. This is the one thing I wish I had spent more time on as our institution requires six external reviewers. Regarding Fulbright, folks had the following to say: 1. stay home, write, and publish (this was the most frequent response); 2. popular locations (e.g. Western Europe, Australia, New Zealand) are very competitive and often go to "stars", some regions maybe under applied to; 3. other countries have good programs for research/teaching exchanges e.g. Japan has programs with the Japanese Society for the Promotion of Science and Germany has the Research in Germany website with various resources. 4. Folks that have participated in Fulbright programs report having very good experiences and suggest "just follow all the guidelines" when applying and be sure to have a sponsor in the host country. Thanks again, Shannon From elc9j at virginia.edu Tue Aug 6 15:56:54 2013 From: elc9j at virginia.edu (Ellen Contini-Morava) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2013 11:56:54 -0400 Subject: tenure/promotion query In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear Shannon, Thanks very much for the helpful post. One point about external reviewers: I wouldn't expect the candidate to have complete control over who is asked for a review. Sometimes they have no say at all in this. At U.Va. candidates are asked to provide a list of potential reviewers, but the department is also asked to provide its own list, and usually equal numbers of requests go out to people from each list. But the department must specify in its report which reviewers come from which list, and there's also a widespread belief that letters from the candidate's list get paid less attention to by the P&T committee than ones from the department's list. So in deciding who to include on his/her list, the candidate might not want to include the heaviest lifters, in hopes that the department will think of them on its own. All the best, Ellen ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ellen Contini-Morava Professor, Department of Anthropology University of Virginia P.O. Box 400120 Charlottesville, VA 22904-4120 USA phone: +1 (434) 924-6825 fax: +1 (434) 924-1350 On 8/6/2013 11:36 AM, s.t. bischoff wrote: > Hello all, > > Thanks to everyone that responded to my earlier query on list and off. Here > is a summary of what I learned. Nearly everyone responded with the > following regarding tenure/promotion: > > 1. schedule a meeting with your universities union (if there is one on > your campus); > > 2. be sure you are familiar with all tenure/promotion requirements (be sure > you are familiar with department, college, and university requirements as > these may differ); > > 3. be sure you have the most recent requirements for tenure/promotion in > writing...if your department does not have a written policy, try to get > something from the department chair or relevant committee (do the same at > the college and university level); > > 4. be aware that prior reviews are not necessarily an indicator of how > things will go (a number of folks noted examples of folks with excellent > prior reviews who did not get tenure/promotion); > > 5. go to all tenure/promotion workshops; > > 6. pay increases may be set, may have a range, and may be negotiable, but > regardless chat with someone you are comfortable with about negotiating a > raise, also speak with your union rep about this...many public institutions > are required to make public salaries and salary records public, these can > be reviewed; > > 7. go on the market--primary reasons given were "just in case you don't get > the tenure/promotion" and "it could put you in a good position when > negotiating a salary"; > > A few also recommended that outside reviewers be chosen carefully. This is > the one thing I wish I had spent more time on as our institution requires > six external reviewers. > > Regarding Fulbright, folks had the following to say: > > 1. stay home, write, and publish (this was the most frequent response); > > 2. popular locations (e.g. Western Europe, Australia, New Zealand) are very > competitive and often go to "stars", some regions maybe under applied to; > > 3. other countries have good programs for research/teaching exchanges e.g. > Japan has programs with the Japanese Society for the Promotion of Science > and Germany has the Research in Germany website with various resources. > > 4. Folks that have participated in Fulbright programs report having very > good experiences and suggest "just follow all the guidelines" when applying > and be sure to have a sponsor in the host country. > > Thanks again, > Shannon From mewinters at wayne.edu Tue Aug 6 16:47:27 2013 From: mewinters at wayne.edu (Margaret E. Winters) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2013 12:47:27 -0400 Subject: tenure/promotion query In-Reply-To: <52011CC6.5060801@virginia.edu> Message-ID: To add to Ellen's note - you may also, depending on policies/practices where you are, be shown the entire list before it is narrowed down by the chair, department P&T committee or whoever makes the choices. At Wayne State the candidate is allowed to strike up to two names (someone the candidate as clashed with, whose review of the candidates work has in the past been very negative)... But otherwise it all that Ellen stated is very much what I've told groups in various universities about this part of the process. Margaret ------------------------------------------ Margaret E. Winters Interim Provost Wayne State University Detroit, MI 48202 Phone: (313) 577- 2433 Fax: (313) 577-5666 e-mail: mewinters at wayne.edu ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ellen Contini-Morava" To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2013 11:56:54 AM Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] tenure/promotion query Dear Shannon, Thanks very much for the helpful post. One point about external reviewers: I wouldn't expect the candidate to have complete control over who is asked for a review. Sometimes they have no say at all in this. At U.Va. candidates are asked to provide a list of potential reviewers, but the department is also asked to provide its own list, and usually equal numbers of requests go out to people from each list. But the department must specify in its report which reviewers come from which list, and there's also a widespread belief that letters from the candidate's list get paid less attention to by the P&T committee than ones from the department's list. So in deciding who to include on his/her list, the candidate might not want to include the heaviest lifters, in hopes that the department will think of them on its own. All the best, Ellen ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ellen Contini-Morava Professor, Department of Anthropology University of Virginia P.O. Box 400120 Charlottesville, VA 22904-4120 USA phone: +1 (434) 924-6825 fax: +1 (434) 924-1350 On 8/6/2013 11:36 AM, s.t. bischoff wrote: > Hello all, > > Thanks to everyone that responded to my earlier query on list and off. Here > is a summary of what I learned. Nearly everyone responded with the > following regarding tenure/promotion: > > 1. schedule a meeting with your universities union (if there is one on > your campus); > > 2. be sure you are familiar with all tenure/promotion requirements (be sure > you are familiar with department, college, and university requirements as > these may differ); > > 3. be sure you have the most recent requirements for tenure/promotion in > writing...if your department does not have a written policy, try to get > something from the department chair or relevant committee (do the same at > the college and university level); > > 4. be aware that prior reviews are not necessarily an indicator of how > things will go (a number of folks noted examples of folks with excellent > prior reviews who did not get tenure/promotion); > > 5. go to all tenure/promotion workshops; > > 6. pay increases may be set, may have a range, and may be negotiable, but > regardless chat with someone you are comfortable with about negotiating a > raise, also speak with your union rep about this...many public institutions > are required to make public salaries and salary records public, these can > be reviewed; > > 7. go on the market--primary reasons given were "just in case you don't get > the tenure/promotion" and "it could put you in a good position when > negotiating a salary"; > > A few also recommended that outside reviewers be chosen carefully. This is > the one thing I wish I had spent more time on as our institution requires > six external reviewers. > > Regarding Fulbright, folks had the following to say: > > 1. stay home, write, and publish (this was the most frequent response); > > 2. popular locations (e.g. Western Europe, Australia, New Zealand) are very > competitive and often go to "stars", some regions maybe under applied to; > > 3. other countries have good programs for research/teaching exchanges e.g. > Japan has programs with the Japanese Society for the Promotion of Science > and Germany has the Research in Germany website with various resources. > > 4. Folks that have participated in Fulbright programs report having very > good experiences and suggest "just follow all the guidelines" when applying > and be sure to have a sponsor in the host country. > > Thanks again, > Shannon From hsimpson at umail.ucsb.edu Sat Aug 10 19:15:36 2013 From: hsimpson at umail.ucsb.edu (Heather Simpson) Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2013 12:15:36 -0700 Subject: Cognition and Language Workshop (CLaW): Aug 31-Sept 1 Message-ID: *Cognition and Language Workshop: Conference schedule* **University of California, Santa Barbara, August 31-September 1 2013** The schedule for the Cognition and Language Workshop (CLaW) is now available: http://www.linguistics.ucsb.edu/claw/schedule.html CLaW will feature 13 talks and 6 poster presentations, as well as a keynote address from Luca Onnis (Associate Professor at University of Hawaii at Manoa) on topics relevant to language and cognition from empirical data-driven perspectives. CLaW is organized by SCUL (Studying the Cognitive Underpinnings of Language), an interdisciplinary research group at the University of California, Santa Barbara. See below for the keynote address abstract. If you would like to attend, please email claw.ucsb at gmail.com to register! There is a $10 registration fee, payable on site. --------------------------------------- Abstract for keynote address: Language is a complex ability comprised of multiple component skills. A sizable body of research now suggests that language learning and processing could be subserved by statistical learning (SL) abilities ? implicitly tracking distributional relations in sequences of events. Languages contain many probabilistic regularities (for example, a listener who hears "the" can predict that a noun will occur after it), so sensitivity to statistical structure in the input can play an important role in mastering language. The first generation of SL studies provided important proofs of concept' that infants and adults can track statistical relations in miniature artificial grammars, but the arguably simplified nature of these learning scenarios could only offer indirect evidence that the same processes underlie the discovery of a natural language. Recently, however, a series of new studies have established more robust links between SL abilities and language. In addition, this relationship can go both ways, as language experience can modify individual preferences for statistical learning, potentially affecting subsequent learning. I will provide an overview of how corpus analyses, behavioral, and brain imaging methods can be combined to further strengthen our understanding of the underpinnings of statistical language learning. --------------------------------------- ****************************************************** Heather Simpson Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Linguistics Program Manager, Cognitive Science Program University of California, Santa Barbara hsimpson at umail.ucsb.edu From evelien.keizer at univie.ac.at Thu Aug 29 14:38:02 2013 From: evelien.keizer at univie.ac.at (Evelien Keizer) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 16:38:02 +0200 Subject: Call for Papers: Workshop "Outside the clause: form and function of extra-clausal constituent" Message-ID: Outside the clause: form and function of Extra-clausal constituents Workshop: Vienna, 4-5 July 2014 FIRST CALL FOR PAPERS Keynote speakers ? Karin Aijmer (University of Gothenburg) ? Laurel J Brinton (University of British Columbia, Vancouver) ? Bernd Heine (University of Cologne) Dates of workshop Fr 4 July ? Sat 5 July 2014 Location Department of English, University of Vienna, Austria Organisers Evelien Keizer, Gunther Kaltenb?ck, Arne Lohmann Conference website https://otc-workshop.univie.ac.at/ Conference email otc-workshop at univie.ac.at General topic In recent years there has been increased interest in linguistic elements which are outside ordinary sentence grammar. These elements are subsumed by Dik (1997) under the term Extra-clausal constituents (ECCs), but have also been referred to as supplements (Huddleston & Pullum 2002) or theticals (Kaltenb?ck, Heine & Kuteva 2011). They are taken to include a variety of different units ranging from single words to phrases and whole clauses, such as the following: parentheticals, discourse markers, appositions, non-restrictive relative clauses, tails and afterthoughts, insubordinate clauses, vocatives, interjections, left-dislocands, formulae of social exchange, etc. What unites these elements is their syntactic independence from the linguistic environment. This is reflected in their positional mobility with regard to the host construction or their ability to occur as stand-alone items. Prosodically, they tend to be set off from the rest of the utterance. Semantically, ECCs are non-restrictive, that is their meaning is not determined by the structure of the host clause or its constituents. Instead, their meaning is shaped by the immediate situation of discourse, where they play an important role in interaction management, the expression of speaker attitude, discourse organization, etc. As shown by numerous corpus studies, ECCs are by no means a marginal linguistic phenomenon, but are highly frequent in occurrence, especially in spoken language. They have also been shown to fulfil essential communicative functions. At the same time, however, ECCs are a challenge for syntactic modelling. Being only loosely associated with a host construction, they cannot easily be accounted for in terms of clause-internal rules of sentence grammar. Aim The aim of the workshop is twofold: To bring together descriptions of specific constructions used as ECCs and theoretical perspectives on how ECCs can be accounted for in a linguistic model. The assumption is that both theoretical and descriptive approaches will benefit from each other and are necessary for deepening our understanding of ECCs. While trying to keep a broad perspective, we particularly invite contributions within a cognitive-functional framework and qualitative as well as quantitative analyses of naturally occurring language data. The focus is on English, but contributions comparing English with other languages are also welcome. Specific topics More specific topics to be addressed may include the following: ? Formal properties of (specific) ECCs: their external and internal syntax, position in the host construction, prosodic realisation ? Functional properties and use of (specific) ECCs in language corpora ? The link of ECCs to their host construction and their interaction with the level of sentence grammar ? Criteria for determining whether a linguistic unit can be identified as extra-clausal ? Distinction of different subtypes ? Historical genesis and possible developmental pathways of ECCs ? Analysis and representation in linguistic models Presentation format 20 minute papers + 10 minutes for discussion Submission of abstracts >>From 1 October 2013 to 1 January 2014. ? Abstracts should not exceed 400 words (exclusive of references) and should clearly state research questions, approach, method, data and (expected) results. ? Please submit as a .doc or .docx to otc-workshop at univie.ac.at ? Notification of acceptance of all abstracts will be sent out by 15 February. Prof. Dr. M.E. Keizer Institut f?r Anglistik und Amerikanistik / Department of English Universit?t Wien Campus d. Universit?t Wien Spitalgasse 2-4/Hof 8.3 1090 Wien Austria Homepage: http://anglistik.univie.ac.at/staff/keizer/