A.Dimitriadis at UU.NL
Tue Nov 15 18:07:48 UTC 2011
On 15/11/2011 17:23, Frank Seidel wrote:
> I very much like the idea of a freely or easily accessible prestigious
> online publication platform and I would like to encourage thinking
> about ways of using such a platform that makes use of the strengths of
> the genre. The following two come readily to mind:
> 1) Easily changeable output that creates a history of article versions.
While I am in favour of the idea of open access publication (and who
wouldn't be?), I think that reaching parity in prestige with traditional
publications requires a very conservative approach. As Martin Haspelmath
pointed out during a similar discussion years ago, traditional
publication provides three things: a means of distribution, the quality
control implied by the publisher's endorsement, and the permanence of
the published text. The best way for open access to gain equal status is
by matching the whole trifecta.
Digital media have many advantages, but I would ensure that these are
provided as add-ons, and do not come to the detriment of matching the
strengths of print media. Without archive-level stability for online
publications, I worry that tenure boards (and nervous job applicants)
will be reluctant to consider online content as truly equivalent to
print publications. Besides, stability and reproducibility are essential
to scholarly work-- it is difficult to cite or respond to an article
that keeps changing, even if the new versions are better, and the old
versions are archived.
PS. Similar problems have troubled the creators of linguistic databases
(which do not count as "publications"). Some of them wisely recommend
citation in a form that treats a database as if it were a publication.
A.Dimitriadis at uu.nl
Utrecht Institute of Linguistics OTS
3512 JK Utrecht
More information about the Lingtyp