[RNLD] Best practice wrt authentic data
joe.blythe at mq.edu.au
Thu Jun 8 03:01:33 EDT 2017
In just about every linguistics paper I’ve written, I’ve always mentioned which recording an example comes from (with a recording reference and time-codes), or which field notebook an example comes from, if elicited. I always thought that this practise speaks to the authenticity of the data. I assumed that if such a trail is trackable then you are unlikely to be accused of making stuff up!
I know that there are many other researchers that do this, so I’m wondering there are references to this being best practice, or at least being advisable.
Also, turning this around, is it reasonable to expect (in 2017) that researchers writing about an endangered language follow such a protocol, if is in fact a protocol?
Dr Joe Blythe
Department of Linguistics
Room 566, Building C5A
Balaclava Rd, North Ryde, NSW 2109, Australia
Ph: +61-2-9850-8089 | Mob: +61-409-88-1153
E: joe.blythe at mq.edu.au<mailto:joe.blythe at mq.edu.au> | Web<https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/nbpzB5SdYlN1i0?domain=mq.edu.au>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Resource-network-linguistic-diversity