<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 04.07.15 08:37, Kilu von Prince
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAK3VzUnZ_vKfhcqP4UZASwjGyH8-oJeQw-TO1dRt56rrzVP6zA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Dear all,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I agree that acceptance of articles in LaTeX format should
be more widespread than it is at the moment. I may add that
the style guides of many linguistics journals could be
significantly improved if they incorporated more of the
established best-practices in typesetting that are
automatically implemented by default LaTeX styles.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Moreover, it would be better if linguistics journals agreed on a
single style guide, see
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.frank-m-richter.de/freescienceblog/2015/03/18/how-to-make-linguistics-publication-more-efficient-use-discipline-wide-style-rules/">http://www.frank-m-richter.de/freescienceblog/2015/03/18/how-to-make-linguistics-publication-more-efficient-use-discipline-wide-style-rules/</a><br>
<br>
These issues should ideally be discussed by a committee of
linguistics editors, such as the LSA's CeLxJ (<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://celxj.org/">http://celxj.org/</a>).<br>
<br>
There will be a meeting of European linguistics editors just before
the next SLE meeting in Leiden (see <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://sle2015.eu/programme">http://sle2015.eu/programme</a>,
"pre-conference mini-workshop"), which will primarily discuss other
issues, but where we may decide to found such a committee of the
SLE.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Martin<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAK3VzUnZ_vKfhcqP4UZASwjGyH8-oJeQw-TO1dRt56rrzVP6zA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Also, to share a related anecdote, it is sometimes in fact
the editors rather than the publisher who insist on a
submission in .doc format. I once submitted an articles to a
Benjamins journal. When the editors requested a .doc version,
I asked them to speak with their publisher if they couldn't
work with a LaTeX or PDF file. Then I learned that it was the
editors themselves who needed the .doc file for their workflow
during the revisions process. I'd like to appeal to editors to
have mercy on their LaTeX-using authors and try to develop a
workflow that is compatible with PDFs. Converting LaTeX to
.doc is time-consuming and depressing.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Kind regards,</div>
<div>Kilu</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 1:35 PM,
Guillaume Jacques <span dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:rgyalrongskad@gmail.com" target="_blank">rgyalrongskad@gmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">Dear Don,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>It is obvious to anyone who has learned LaTeX that
word-processors like "word" or "open office" are
completely inadapted to the typesetting of linguistics
dissertations or articles. LaTeX is superior in
particular for handling aligned glossed examples
(package gb4e), complex figures (tikz), Stammbäume,
cross-references, bibliography, complex scripts and of
course math formulas. I actually now require from all my
new MA and PhD students to write their dissertations in
LaTeX (in general, three days are enough to master the
most important commands).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Fortunately, the number of linguistics journal and of
publishers accepting LaTeX is now growing year after
year. At the present moment, most if not all linguistics
journals published by the following major publishers
accept LaTeX submissions (only those I have personnally
tested; the list is not exhaustive):<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Mouton de Gruyter</div>
<div>Benjamins</div>
<div>Brill</div>
<div>Elsevier</div>
<div>MIT Press</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I rarely have to convert my articles into word format
anymore.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Publishers that are still lagging behind with LaTeX
include (we should collectively give them some pressure
to catch up with the rest of the world):</div>
<div>Cambridge University Press (for instance, Journal of
the IPA)</div>
<div>Chicago University Press (IJAL)</div>
<div>(perhaps also Wiley)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Some journasl do not use LaTeX files, but will
convert them for you (from my personal experience,
Anthropological Linguistics and Journal of Chinese
Linguistics)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>If you submit to a collective volume for Mouton de
Gruyter or Benjamins, they should be able to handle a
LaTeX submission even if most of the volume is in word,
but the editors of the volume may have to insist a
little bit.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Best wishes,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Guillaume</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div>
<div class="h5"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">2015-07-04 11:22 GMT+02:00
Don Killian <span dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:donald.killian@helsinki.fi"
target="_blank">donald.killian@helsinki.fi</a>></span>:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px
0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">Dear
all,<br>
<br>
After fighting with Microsoft Word for the past
few weeks, I was wondering if there is any way
we can find additional standards for article and
chapter submission?<br>
<br>
It seems that a majority of editors still have a
fairly strict requirement of Microsoft Word and
Times New Roman, even if the publisher itself is
more open to other formats. Times New Roman is
more flexible, but I have not had very much luck
with alternatives to Word (such as Open Office
or pdfs made from LaTeX).<br>
<br>
This is a problem for more than one reason. The
biggest problem I can see (in addition to the
fact that both Word as well as Times New Roman
are proprietary!) is that the technological
requirements do not actually support the
formatting requirements we suggest. Neither Word
nor Times New Roman support the IPA in its
entirety.<br>
<br>
While these problems do not affect all linguists
(such as those who do not have certain sounds in
their languages they work on), it definitely
affects plenty of others.<br>
<br>
For instance, there is no way to change glyph
selection in Word, and <a> changes to
<ɑ> when italicized. It is relatively
common to italicize words when you mix languages
in text. But if you are discussing a language
which has both a and ɑ, this is problematic.
Furthermore, Word has no way of rendering the MH
or HM tonal contours properly, in any font.
Those symbols are only supported in Charis SIL
and Doulos SIL fonts, and Word renders them
incorrectly.<br>
<br>
There are plenty of other difficulties (e.g.
making a vowel chart), so these are just some
examples.<br>
<br>
I realize the main reason for using Word/TNR is
simplicity and what people are used to, but I do
find it problematic that our technology
requirements do not support or make it easy to
deal with common problems in our field.<br>
<br>
Is there any way to change this? LaTeX does
support almost everything I have ever needed,
but I admit it is not always very easy to learn
or use. I would be happy to hear alternative
views or suggestions.<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
<br>
Don<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>