A journal on gender and language?

[Sally McConnell-Ginet]

Mary makes some good points here, I think.  It would be possible, tho' I'm
not sure how productive, to push harder on Cambridge or to approach some
other publisher--Blackwell's?

> I'm very grateful to Bonnie and Sara for writing such a strong proposal
> outlining their ideas for a new journal on language and gender. The issues
> that the reviewers raised are important to consider as we decide as an
> organization how to proceed given Cambridge's decision not to go forward
> with a print journal. My own feeling is that the field of language and
> gender needs a journal in order to continue to grow and develop. My
> responses to the specific concerns raised by the reviewers are below.
>
>> (1)       The field would not necessarily benefit from a new, dedicated
>> journal.  Such a journal could marginalize work in the area.
>
> I don't see institutional recognition in the form of a journal as leading
> to marginalization but countering it, especially if the journal is issued
> by an academic press. Maybe this was more of a concern a decade ago (or
> more), but language and gender has gained a lot of ground since then.
> While
> the field is still far from central to most departments, in the past 10
> years or so it has increased its institutional recognition in a number of
> ways in linguistics and related disciplines.
>
> More generally, I haven't ever seen a situation in which an area of
> research didn't benefit by the creation of a specialist journal. Besides
> lending legitimacy to a marginal field of study, a journal can help
> consolidate related work that is conducted in disparate disciplines or
> subfields. Certainly journals in other areas of linguistics such as
> historical pragmatics (Benjamins), applied psycholinguistics (Cambridge),
> clinical linguistics (Routledge), critical discourse analysis (Sage),
> gesture (Benjamins), and humor (Mouton), to name only a few, have gained a
> much higher profile for those fields and have attracted new readers and
> researchers. The same is no doubt true for other disciplines in which
> language and gender research is conducted.
>
>> (2)       There is no shortage of first-rate outlets for publishing work
>> on lg, and gender, and good work on language and gender has had no
>> difficulty in being published in top-tier journals.  It would be
>> difficult to convince scholars to publish good work in a new journal
>> with
>> little brand-name recognition, no track record or formal ranking when
>> other outlets exist.
>
> While it's true that the publication of language and gender research in
> top
> journals has been booming in recent years, this seems to me to argue for,
> not against, the need for a specialist journal--if that work is being
> published in a generalist journal, it could just as easily be published in
> a specialist one. Nor do I see any difficulty in recruiting authors to
> publish in such a journal; one important role of the editorial board is to
> do exactly that, and I know that Bonnie and Sara have planned to encourage
> senior scholars to publish in early issues to raise the journal's profile.
> Speaking for myself, I would be very eager to publish in a specialist
> journal of language and gender published by a respected academic press.
> And
> as the webmaster of the Language and Gender Page, I've received numerous
> queries from scholars around the world who want to know if there is such a
> journal where they could publish their work. Moreover, there's an
> abundance
> of language and gender work being presented at conferences (not only IGALA
> but many others as well), and much of it is appropriate for journal
> publication.
>
> It's also the case that not all language and gender articles fit well in a
> general sociolinguistics or discourse analysis; some are aimed at
> specialists and might not be as attractive to journals with a broader
> mandate. Such articles are well suited for publication in a specialist
> journal and currently have no other outlet.
>
>> (3)       There is not enough outstanding work in the area to sustain a
>> key journal.  Much of the strongest work is already being published in
>> key
>> journals, and work published elsewhere is not of the highest quality.
>>
> I have to disagree--although there is some weak research in language and
> gender, I don't think the ratio is any higher than in other fields, and a
> lot of useful, interesting work is currently being published within a
> variety of approaches. One reason for the impression that the field isn't
> producing strong work may be that our conferences tend to be run on
> feminist principles of inclusion, and some presentations may be based on
> work-in-progress or research by scholars or students who have little
> support from their departments for the kind of work they're trying to do.
> This seems to me to be one of the strengths of the IGALA conference--to
> provide feedback to scholars so they can bring their work to publication.
> An advantage of a journal is that the peer-review process allows for much
> more in-depth feedback than a conference exchange allows (and I know that
> many of us have been working on ways to increase and improve such
> feedback). If we want more work of publishable quality, then a strong
> journal review process is the way to achieve that goal.
>
> As for the options Bonnie outlined, I'd be perfectly happy with an online
> journal published by Cambridge, since academic publishing is headed in
> that
> direction anyway and since it would make the journal available to a wider
> and more international readership. I understand, though, that not all
> departments consider such journals to be quite as legitimate as print
> journals when it comes to hiring, tenure, and promotion, and so I'd also
> support approaching another publisher, such as Sage, which has a wide
> distribution, publishes in print and electronic versions simultaneously,
> has affordable rates, and has a demonstrated commitment to politically
> oriented linguistic research.
>
> I don't see conference proceedings, working papers (online or otherwise),
> or edited volumes  as a replacement for a journal. The first two raise
> issues of limited circulation and availability, potentially lower quality
> due to lack of peer review, less institutional legitimacy, and a need to
> create and fund an infrastructure to ensure continuity. As for edited
> volumes, they're increasingly difficult to publish due to academic
> publishers' concerns that they aren't as marketable as single-authored
> books. All of these are fine supplements to a journal, but none can do the
> job of a journal in making available a wide range of current high-quality
> work on a regular basis.
>
> In short, I feel strongly that at its current stage of development our
> field needs a journal in order to continue to grow. I appreciate the
> concerns of those who feel otherwise, but I think the advantages far
> outweigh any potential difficulties. Several years ago, the field didn't
> have a professional organization either, and now, three conferences later,
> I think it's clear that language and gender scholarship has benefited
> greatly from the formation of IGALA--the field has become more
> international, more interdisciplinary, and more dynamic. In order to
> continue the momentum that the creation of IGALA has set in motion, a
> journal of language and gender is the next logical step. I look forward to
> hearing others' perspectives on this issue.
>
> Best,
>
> Mary
>
> **************************************************
> Mary Bucholtz, Associate Professor
> Department of Linguistics
> 3607 South Hall
> University of California
> Santa Barbara, CA 93106-3100
> phone: (805) 893-5415
> fax: (805) 893-7769
> http://www.linguistics.ucsb.edu/faculty/bucholtz/
> **************************************************
>