Inj*n

[RonButters at AOL.COM]

Technically, I'm not sure that I totally agree with Larry Horn's parsing, 
though I do agree with his conclusion (and am for myself delighted to see 
postings on ADS-L such as Larry Uradangs). But see the ADS mission statement, printed 
on the ADS web site and inside the cover of AMERICAN SPEECH;

Founded in 1889, the American Dialect Society is dedicated to the study of 
the English language in North America, and of other languages, or dialects of 
other languages, influencing it or influenced by it.

In my years as editor of AMERICAN SPEECH (and I believe the later editors 
have done the same), we interpreted this policy liberally enough to publish 
articles on any variety of English, assuming that American English had achieved 
such a wide use that it would of necessity influence--and be influenced by--other 
languages and other Englishes. There would, of course, be a tendancy for 
authors to self-select, submitting articles pertraining exclusively to non-North 
American varieties of English to such fine journals as ENGLISH WORLD WIDE; and, 
all other things being equal, we tended to assign a somewhat lower priority 
to such articles. But my assumption has always been that ADS is a large tent.

It is also the case that the AMERICAN SPEECH mission statement goes on to 
indicate that articles of general theoretical interest are welcome in AS, which 
would tend to support LH's parsing, at least for submissions to the ADS 
journal, if not (technically) the ADS itself.

By the way, INJUN in American English is usually thought of as something of a 
derogatory spelling and pronunciation (though I see that NOAD lists it as 
merely "offensive").

In a message dated 9/16/07 1:28:38 PM, laurence.horn at YALE.EDU writes:


> At 8:45 AM -0700 9/16/07, Laurence Urdang wrote:
> >Perhaps I have assumed too much, but I regard
> >the American Dialect Society as an American
> >Society devoted to the subject of Dialect, not
> >neessarily American dialects alone, though I
> >assume somebody with check the original articles
> >and correct me.
> 
> You're right, as least as we've always
> interpreted those original articles.  It's been
> mentioned a few times over the years on the list
> that we're the [American [Dialect Society]], not
> the [[American Dialect] Society], so Indian
> English is definitely on topic.
> 
> LH
> 




**************************************
 See what's new at http://www.aol.com

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org