wcroft at UNM.EDU
Thu Apr 4 14:53:29 UTC 2013
But the problem is, a good-quality but open-access or inexpensive publication does not have the quality of peer review, the track record of quality publication, and the marketing presence that Publisher X has, so it is not surprising that a tenure committee takes such a publication less seriously even if the author chose that publication outlet precisely to make her/his grammar accessible to a wider audience, including the language's speakers. I don't think the protestations of professional societies would change that. For this reason, Publisher X has no reason to reduce its prices; it doesn't have to.
On Apr 4, 2013, at 12:20 AM, Johanna NICHOLS <johanna at BERKELEY.EDU<mailto:johanna at BERKELEY.EDU>> wrote:
Later I'll log in to the LSA Ethics blog and comment there, but quickly: Publisher X conducts peer review, has a history of publishing grammars that meet the field's standards, prints on archive-quality paper, and has advertising, distribution, and a conference presence that make its publications known to the world. When my university judges publications by "quality", this is what it means.
But the issue of price is critical, and no academic should have to singlehandedly fight to have a good-quality but open-access or inexpensive publication recognized by a tenure committee. This is why we have professional societies.
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Mark W. Post <markwpost at gmail.com<mailto:markwpost at gmail.com>> wrote:
Dear LINGTYP Listmembers,
I am sending the following link on behalf of Robbins Burling, who has written a piece on the LSA's Ethics Blog to do with the high costs of many published grammars from an ethics perspective. This relates to an extended discussion on this topic on LINGTYP some months ago, so may be of interest to listmembers. Rob has invited comments on the piece, and especially any proposed solutions.
Dr. Mark W. Post
Institut für Sprachwissenschaft
3000 Bern 9
Tel +41 31 631 37 07
Eml markwpost at gmail.com<mailto:markwpost at gmail.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Lingtyp