Reviews That Were

[Martin Haspelmath]

I think it would be good if we as a field realized -- sooner rather than 
later -- that the traditional way of commenting publicly on each other's 
work, in the form of book reviews that sometimes appear many years after 
the book, is becoming rapidly outdated.

The future of scientific communication evidently lies in online 
publications, blogs, etc., and online publications can easily be 
enhanced by online reviews, online comments, etc.

In a few years' time, we will probably have the first linguistics 
journals that work in the following way: As soon as a paper is 
submitted, it is made available on the journal's site, and public 
comments are invited. After a brief veetting procedure, most of these 
are published alongside the paper, and after a while the editors decide 
whether to give the contribution "officially published" status (perhaps 
after suitable revision). If a paper is denied that status, it can stay 
there (in limbo, but still accessible) or it can be withdrawn and 
submitted elsewhere.

Well, this is just one model of so many possibilities. But we should not 
invest many energies into the good old book review anymore. It will be a 
nice memory for the older generation, but the future lies elsewhere.

Greetings,
Martin

-- 
Martin Haspelmath (haspelmath at eva.mpg.de)
Max-Planck-Institut fuer evolutionaere Anthropologie, Deutscher Platz 6	
D-04103 Leipzig      
Tel. (MPI) +49-341-3550 307, (priv.) +49-341-980 1616

Glottopedia - the free encyclopedia of linguistics
(http://www.glottopedia.org)