Endangered languages, endangered thought

[Jeremy Graves]

Dr. Gupta makes an excellent point. Language change is inevitable, and only ultra-conservative purists lament the fact that we aren't all still using Shakespeare's language. And that, in a way, is the problem with the "deterministic idea" Dr. Gupta refers to. There are both humanistic and scientific reasons for wanting to preserve languages, but the two can seem contradictory.
   The humanistic reasons include the preservation of cultures which provide a moral and spiritual center to members of a community, while the scientific reasons involve preserving the language solely for the sake of hard data to supplement our knowledge of how language works. The contradiction arises in that the one is a more compassionate stance, while the other is coldly intellectual.
   Perhaps a better approach to studying endangered languages and the cultures that go with them is to seek a mature, wise manner of integrating changes in language and culture. Perhaps the measure of wisdom would be how well such an approach allows cultural centering while also providing opportunity for a better quality of life.

Jeremy Graves
Adjunct instructor of English
Florida Community College at Jacksonville

--- On Wed, 3/4/09, Multiple recipients of list <lgpolicy-list at ccat.sas.upenn.edu> wrote:
From: Multiple recipients of list <lgpolicy-list at ccat.sas.upenn.edu>
Subject: LGPOLICY-LIST digest 1151
To: "Multiple recipients of list" <lgpolicy-list at ccat.sas.upenn.edu>
Date: Wednesday, March 4, 2009, 6:04 PM

			    LGPOLICY-LIST Digest 1151

Topics covered in this issue include:

  1) RE: Endangered languages, endangered thought
	by Anthea Fraser Gupta <A.F.Gupta at leeds.ac.uk>
  2) TOC: International Journal of Speech Language and the Law Vol 15, No 
	2 (2008)
	by Harold Schiffman <hfsclpp at gmail.com>
  3) Houston: Latinos have opportunity to transform U.S. society
	by Harold Schiffman <hfsclpp at gmail.com>
  4) Malaysia: Scaling the language barrier
	by Harold Schiffman <hfsclpp at gmail.com>
  5) France: La musique ist der language internazionale
	by Harold Schiffman <hfsclpp at gmail.com>
  6) Colorado: Unhappy parents boycott CSAPs in Commerce City
	by Harold Schiffman <hfsclpp at gmail.com>
  7) New York: Columbia Journalism Review Launches Chinese-Language 
	Edition in China
	by Harold Schiffman <hfsclpp at gmail.com>
I continue to worry that this deterministic idea has become a matter of
faith....

Languages are not things out there but are human constructs. Speakers
make them, speakers change them, speakers change, languages change.

Obviously it's appropriate to encourage communities who feel that
aspects of their cultural life is being destroyed by outside forces. But
on the other hand, the idea that language change, language shift and
language contact are not natural processes of change that have always
happened and always will happen is inimical to some of the most deeply
held tenets of linguistics. 

Languages shouldn't be put in reservations any more than people should.
Even if you speak the same 'language' as your all your
great-great-grandparents did (which I happen to) you do not know the
same bits of it as they do, because you are engaged in different
activities and because the world has changed. New diversities arise as
old ones go. New 'languages' develop from processes of separation and
contact.

When each person dies we lose "ways of seeing and describing reality; we
lose valuable knowledge and worlds of thought." Each individual is a
unique repository of knowledge, thought, and personality. 

Anthea


*     *     *     *     *
Anthea Fraser Gupta (Dr)
School of English, University of Leeds, LS2 9JT
<www.leeds.ac.uk/english/staff/afg>
NB: Reply to a.f.gupta at leeds.ac.uk
*     *     *     *     *
  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-lgpolicy-list at ccat.sas.upenn.edu 
> [mailto:owner-lgpolicy-list at ccat.sas.upenn.edu] On Behalf Of 
> Harold Schiffman
> Sent: 03 March 2009 20:33
> To: lp
> Subject: Endangered languages, endangered thought
> 
> 
>  Forwarded From: Edling at lists.sis.utsa.edu
> 
> The UNESCO Courier
> 
> 
> 
> Endangered languages, endangered thought
> 
> 
> 
> Some 200 languages have become extinct in the last three 
> generations, according to the new "UNESCO Atlas of the 
> World's Languages in Danger". When languages die out, not 
> only words disappear, but ways of seeing and describing 
> reality; we lose valuable knowledge and worlds of thought.
> 
> 
> 
> http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=44549&URL_DO=DO_TOPI
> C&URL_SECTION=201.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
> 
>  Harold F. Schiffman
> 
> Professor Emeritus of
>  Dravidian Linguistics and Culture
> Dept. of South Asia Studies
> University of Pennsylvania
> Philadelphia, PA 19104-6305
> 
> Phone:  (215) 898-7475
> Fax:  (215) 573-2138
> 
> Email:  haroldfs at gmail.com
> http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~haroldfs/
> 
> -------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
International Journal of Speech Language and the Law Vol 15, No 2 (2008)


Publisher: Equinox Publishing Ltd
http://www.equinoxpub.com/

Journal Title: The International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law
Volume Number: 15
Issue Number: 2
Issue Date: 2008



Articles:

Voice Disguise Using a Foreign Accent: Phonetic and Linguistic Variation
Sara Neuhauser

Acoustic and Perceptual Effects of Telephone Transmission on Vowel Quality
Sophie Lawrence, Francis Nolan, Kirsty McDougall

Impact of the Mobile Phone Network on the Speech Signal – Some Preliminary
Findings
Bernard John Guillemin, Catherine Watson

Authorship Attribution under the Rules of Evidence: Empirical Approaches in a
Layperson's Legal System
Blake Stephen Howald

Forensic Speaker Recognition Using Likelihood Ratios Based on Polynomial Curves
Fitted to the Formant Trajectories of Australian English /aI/
Geoffrey Stewart Morrison



Thesis Abstracts:
Forensic Linguistics, First Contact Police Interviews, and Basic
Officer Training
Kerry Linfoot

UK Police Interviews: A Linguistic Analysis of Afro-Caribbean and White British
Suspect Interviews
Claire Jones



Book Reviews:

An Introduction to Forensic Linguistics: Language in Evidence by Malcolm
Coulthard and Alison Johnson (2007). Routledge. 237pp. ISBN 0-415-32023-2
Susan Berk-Seligson

Communicating Rights: The Language of Arrest and Detention by Frances Rock
(2007). Palgrave Macmillan. 359pp. ISBN 978-0-230-01331-5
Ikuko Nakane

The Language of Sexual Crime edited by Janet Cotterill (2007). Palgrave
Macmillan. 264pp. ISBN 0-230-00170-X
Shonna L. Trinch

http://linguistlist.org/issues/20/20-661.html

-- 
**************************************
N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to
its members
and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner
or sponsor of
the list as to the veracity of a message's contents. Members who
disagree with a
message are encouraged to post a rebuttal. (H. Schiffman, Moderator)
*******************************************
Latinos have opportunity to transform U.S. society

By NICOLAS KANELLOS
Copyright 2009 Houston Chronicle
March 3, 2009, 8:22PM

San Antonio mayor and HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros recently surprised
the Washington audience at the launch for a new book he edited,
Latinos and the Nation’s Future, by declaring that the country’s first
Hispanic president “has already been born.” Of course, surprise is
unjustified. The inauguration of the first black President was a
tangible reminder for the entire country, and the rest of the world,
of what demographers have long known: The face of America is changing.
And the majority of that change comes from Latinos.

Just look at U.S. Census projections based on Latinos already in this
country and it becomes clear that it’s time to accept the premise of
inevitable and monumental Latino population growth. What exactly this
means for the future of the country is still uncertain. But here’s one
guarantee: The United States’ ballooning Latino growth will have
significant implications for practically all segments of social and
economic life in the United States.

Mainstream dialogue about Latino population growth has been dominated
for years by debates over immigration, much of it very nasty, and
completely focused on negative potential. But consider this — given
the falling birth rate and rising population of retired workers in the
United States, continued immigration is actually what fuels the
country’s economic engine and allows it to grow and expand. And let’s
not forget that it’s young Latinos entering the workforce as the
economy heals who will pay the Social Security benefits of our aging
population as they head into retirement.

It’s time to engage in a productive national dialogue about what this
Latino growth means for the country, and how it will inevitably shape
the American Dream of the future.

Here are my predictions:

While English will remain the “official” language of the United
States, Spanish will become the “unofficial” second national language.
After all, at universities, Spanish departments are already separating
themselves from foreign language divisions in recognition that Spanish
has always been an important language in this country, and has an
expanded role in the future.

As for the media — and this holds true for other corporate sectors as
well — economic growth will require accessing Hispanic markets. Just
look at Univision if you need proof of the economic potential of
marketing to the Latino population: The current programming
originating in Mexico, Brazil, Venezuela, and the Spanish-speaking
United States, and distributed from Los Angeles and Miami, is
unrivaled by any of the English-language networks. If you are not a
native Spanish speaker you may never have heard of Univision’s show
Sábado Gigante, but it actually dwarfs shows like David Letterman in
audience size.

Latinos will also forge new paths in the work force. As long as U.S.
Hispanics remain disproportionately working class, they will ascend to
the leadership of movements for worker’s rights and unions, as well as
reform of immigration policy. Despite the high number of uneducated
Hispanic immigrants and natives, their children already make up the
fastest growing segment of college enrollments, in spite of unusually
high dropout rates. Their children are already on the first rungs of
the ladder to leadership in industry, entertainment, communications
and education. Soon, they will also become part of a rupture of the
glass ceilings in these fields.

The growing economic integration of the Americas will lead to cultural
integration as well: The history, culture and civilization of
Hispanics will increasingly be seen as part of the national American
culture, one shared by all. Of course, the rise of Hispanics into the
middle class will not be accomplished through the traditional path of
leaving the “old country” culture behind in order to become
“Americans,” purified through a melting-pot process. In fact, the
opposite will be true; a bilingual-bicultural citizenry capable of
navigating cultural differences at many levels will emerge. Dual
citizenship will be more common and university systems will expand
across borders to prepare graduates capable of operating in this new
culture.

Over time, American racism will no longer limit the access of
Hispanics to American opportunities, for their sheer numbers will
transform politics and policy, once the population reaches voting age.
But more important than demographics and voting power, Hispanic
culture has always fostered a dynamic of racial and cultural blending.
The Latino influence will further accelerate interracial and
interethnic marriage, and along with it the tendency to identify with
the rest of the countries and cultures of the Americas rather than
solely with Europe

Latinos have the potential to create a new society in the Western
Hemisphere that goes beyond national boundaries or cultures. This
society will be the inspiration for a New American Dream.

Kanellos is the director of Arte Público Press of the University of
Houston, and contributor to the new book Latinos and the Nation’s
Future.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/outlook/6292392.html
**************************************
N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to
its members
and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner
or sponsor of
the list as to the veracity of a message's contents. Members who
disagree with a
message are encouraged to post a rebuttal. (H. Schiffman, Moderator)
*******************************************
Web version available at:
http://www.thenutgraph.com/scaling-the-language-barrier

Scaling the language barrier
4 Mar 09 : 11.00AM
By Wong Chin Huat
editor at thenutgraph.com

THE English language is now promoting interethnic unity in Malaysia,
albeit unintentionally. Malay, Chinese and Tamil educationists who
were once natural enemies have now joined forces to oppose the English
for Teaching Mathematics and Science (ETeMS) policy.

Politically, leaders in the Barisan Nasional (BN) are divided on
whether to continue the policy, while the Pakatan Rakyat (PR) is
solidly behind the call to scrap it. However, it can't be ruled out
that a new consensus may emerge after the Umno party elections.


The standard of English has deteriorated in Malaysia, over the past
decade, while the English language is enjoying increasing importance
in a globalising world. Taking both these factors into consideration,
isn't the call to abolish ETeMS and reinstate the old status quo
irrational and irresponsible? I don't think so.

A flawed policy

While the policy's opponents have not been able to offer superior
alternatives to convince a divided public, ETeMS is essentially flawed
and must go.

The main argument justifying ETeMS is that since the bulk of knowledge
in science and mathematics is produced in English, learning these
subjects in English would allow students to acquire knowledge directly
without depending on translations.

Why is this argument flawed? Well, not every student intends to become
a mathematician or scientist, so not everyone needs to comprehend
mathematics and science publications in English.

The policy would be fine if it did not entail any costs, e.g. if
switching the teaching of these subjects to English did not affect the
ability of weaker or non-English-speaking students in mastering these
subjects.

This, however, is clearly not true. It is self-evident that one's
ability to learn depends on one's ability to understand what is being
taught. This is the argument for mother-tongue education, in a
nutshell.

But teaching science and mathematics in English to all students of
varying abilities has inevitably entailed a sacrifice of the general
standard of these two subjects. Does this benefit the country in the
long run? Criticisms that the standard of these two subjects has been
artificially lowered speak volumes of the magnitude of this problem.
So, why don't we have different policies catered for students of
different aptitudes and endowments?

There is another argument, even more flawed, that justifies ETeMS: the
more students are exposed to the English language, the more their
mastery of the language will improve.


Let's take this argument to its logical conclusion. Let's look at arts
and commerce students — these kids do not need to study science and
mathematics beyond a certain level. Science-stream students, however,
are normally required to take some humanities subjects even at
university level.

So, if students need to be "exposed" more to the English language,
ETeMS should really be redirected to focus on history, geography and
religious or moral education subjects. Why force the right medicine
down the throat of the wrong patient?

A dishonest policy

An honest analysis will show that the policy prescription should never
have been about teaching mathematics and science in English for all
education streams. The arguments supporting ETeMS have not developed
into logical, systematic implementation. In fact, the two arguments
used to justify ETeMS are mutually contradictory.

For example, following the argument that science and mathematics
literature is mostly in English, science-stream education should have
logically been fully converted to English with the status quo retained
for all other streams.

But following the argument that students should be more "exposed" to
ideas in English, it is the medium of instruction of the humanities
subjects that should have been switched to English.

These policy options are actually quite logical. But they have been
taken out of the public debate because they are not politically
viable. This in turn suggests the two arguments are actually spurious.

For example, if we had converted science-stream education to English
in toto, we would eventually be creating a linguistically defined
class division in society.

Not unlike colonial times, command of English would determine one's
opportunity to be a doctor, an engineer, an architect, a computer
programmer, or an IT tycoon. Eventually, it would determine one's
acceptance into the economic and sociopolitical elite. Clearly, this
position is political suicide for politicians, especially the Malay
nationalists from Umno.

On the other hand, if we had instead switched the language of
instruction of the humanities subjects to English, we would have had
to face two difficult scenarios. Firstly, would improvement of
students' command of English have been achieved at the expense of a
general deterioration of academic standards in the humanities? If yes,
would the policy have been worth it?

Secondly, and more importantly, no matter how important English has
become globally, would we need the entire nation to be conversant in
English, even at the price of academic regression?


Why this dishonesty?

The policy question before us is actually very simple. There are three
factors to take into account.

Firstly, we need to improve the general standard of English for all
students, and produce some students with an excellent command of
English.

Secondly, any policy should not cause academic standards to decline,
especially among students who are socioeconomically disadvantaged; for
instance, those from poorer backgrounds and rural schools.

Thirdly, any policy should not marginalise the national language and
other mother-tongue languages such that Malaysia loses its national
character and multilingual advantage.

What's the solution? Revive English-medium schools, alongside the
existing Malay, Chinese and Tamil-language streams. Parents who want
their children to learn all non-language subjects in English can then
have a choice, instead of turning to the mushrooming private and
international schools.

Why then has this simple and straightforward solution not been pursued?

First, it would mean that the decision to convert English-medium
schools into Malay-medium schools beginning in 1975 was wrong.
Incidentally, it was Tun Dr Mahathir Mohammad who was education
minister when this language-switch policy sentenced English-medium
education to death. Nearly three decades later, it was Mahathir again
who wanted to switch back to English-language education for science
and mathematics.


Secondly, and more importantly, if English schools are revived, they
would likely attract students from stronger socioeconomic backgrounds.
Malay-, Tamil- and to a lesser extent, Chinese-medium schools might
eventually be reduced to inferior education providers, inviting the
wrath of ethno-nationalists from every community.

By sacrificing academic standards across the board, ETeMS avoids such
political embarrassment and covers up the real need to beef up
English-language education for the weaker students in all streams.

In a nutshell, this policy is political expediency at its worst.

The main casualties are now weaker students from poorer families and
rural schools. Most of them will learn little in mathematics and
sciences with minimal, if any, improvement in their command of
English. These underperforming students are likely to fill up the
lowest paid jobs in future, hence frustrating upward social mobility.

However, students from more advantaged backgrounds suffer, too. They
learn less mathematics and science than they otherwise would because
the current standard for the two subjects needs to be lowered to
produce evidence of success. They also cannot learn other non-language
subjects in English if they want to.

The win-win solution

The ETeMS debate, now framed as a "yes" or "no" dichotomy,
is
effectively a tug of war between the pro-English elites and other
Malaysians.

The policy must go if we do not want continued injustice towards more
students from disadvantaged backgrounds.

Reverting to the old status quo is however not tenable. It would deny
both the nation's developmental needs and the preference of
pro-English parents and students.

But we need not be caught between two false choices.

Reviving English schools will not only meet the need of improving the
standard of English in a purely utilitarian sense. It also fits the
argument for upholding mother-tongue education — English is, after
all, increasingly the mother tongue of Malaysians of all ethnic
backgrounds, whether Malay, Chinese, Indian, Dayak, Kadazandusun, or
Eurasian.

What about national unity? This is a question that may be asked by
supporters of ETeMS as a gradualist method to eliminate multi-stream
education.

The answer is again straightforward. Firstly, a single-stream
education system could not possibly maximise the use of the English
language for every single student anyway. One must thus choose between
better, albeit varying, standards of English for everyone or the
homogenisation of the education system.

Secondly, blaming communal division mainly on the education system is
intellectually lazy and unreflective. Intercommunal solidarity is
built not through homogenisation, but through cleavages that cut
across communal lines. How the ill-thought promotion of English has
unintentionally unified the Malay, Chinese and Tamil educationists is
a case in point.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- 
**************************************
N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to
its members
and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner
or sponsor of
the list as to the veracity of a message's contents. Members who
disagree with a
message are encouraged to post a rebuttal. (H. Schiffman, Moderator)
*******************************************
Soundcheck Blog
La musique ist der language internazionale
By John Schaefer
March 4, 2009

Making fun of the French has become almost a national pastime.
(Saturday Night Live in 1989: this week the Berlin Wall fell and East
and West Germany were reunited. In a related story, France offered to
surrender.) It’s really not fair, but let’s face it, sometimes the
French just make it so easy. Like the current contretemps about French
singers daring to sing in English. The French government and many
(especially older) French folk believe that to maintain their special
and unique identity as Frenchmen, they must protect their language
from the global onslaught of English.

Don’t these people understand that rock and rap came from
English-speaking countries and that all over the world, young people
grow up hearing, and learning, English as the native language of pop?
Would they outlaw Gregorian Chant because it’s in Latin, or the operas
of Verdi and Puccini because they’re in Italian? (Come to think of it,
I guess this isn’t a new problem, since more than one famous Italian
composer found himself obliged to have operas translated into French
in order to have them performed there.)

Of course, I readily admit that I don’t understand the French
obsession with the purity of their language because, as an English
speaker, I don’t have to. But if the situation were reversed, how
would we Americans feel? It’s a purely hypothetical question, but we
do have some hints as to the answer. Just look at our pop charts -
Americans are among the most resistant people in the world when it
comes to listening to songs in another language.

If the French want an example to follow, they don’t have to look much
further than their German-speaking neighbors. Germany too tried to
nurture its own rock/pop scene in the late 60s/early 70s, with the
result that a whole early generation of German rockers, singing in
German, reached an audience that consisted exclusively of other German
speakers. In the 70s, they got around the language barrier by doing
electronic instrumental work - the so-called krautrock of Tangerine
Dream, harmonia, Cluster, and of course Kraftwerk, whose use of simple
German phrases in “Autobahn” was simply part of the texture and didn’t
scare off English speakers or anyone else.

Kraftwerk would eventually record in English (”Pocket Calculator”),
and Austrian rock/rapper Falco would hit the American charts in the
1980s with songs written in a youthful slang that reflected what young
German-speakers heard when they listened to pop music: namely, a
Spanglish-style mix of English and their native tongue. This was
global music, and if there are now French artists trying to do the
same thing, why would the government and other critics want to stop
them? One ugly answer is racism - France has large immigrant
populations from West Africa and the Arab world, and the right wing in
France claims this poses a threat to the future of French culture.
(Sound familiar?) But the whole point of culture is that it evolves;
if you try to preserve it, you end up with a culture that is stuck in
time -like a dinosaur preserved in a tar pit. And how to do you force
the language issue on a generation that now gets much of its media and
entertainment from a global, digital network? France, it’s time to
surrender.

Tell us: what do you think of France’s “protectionism” of its native
language? Are we any different here in the States?

http://blogs.wnyc.org/soundcheck/2009/03/04/musique-ist-der-language-internazionale/

-- 
**************************************
N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to
its members
and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner
or sponsor of
the list as to the veracity of a message's contents. Members who
disagree with a
message are encouraged to post a rebuttal. (H. Schiffman, Moderator)
*******************************************
Unhappy parents boycott CSAPs in Commerce City

They keep their students out of a Adams 14 school in protest of school changes.
By Jeremy P. Meyer
The Denver Post



Jesus Chacon-Pacheco, 10, and his mother, Consuelo Pacheco, protest
outside the Adams 14 administration building in Commerce City on
Tuesday. "No Judy, no CSAP," one student said in reference to
principal Judy Jaramillo's being placed on leave. ( Hyoung Chang, The
Denver Post )


Rankings of school districts by CSAP improvementCSAP scores reflect
gains for Denver schoolsCOMMERCE CITY — Parents pulled their children
from state assessment tests Tuesday to protest recent moves in Adams
14 School District.

Parents of 67 students at Hanson preschool through eighth grade opted
out of the Colorado Student Assessment Program tests because they are
upset about the removal of the school's principal, changes to the
district's bilingual-education program and a new calendar that
eliminates the year-round schedule.

"It's like they said, 'No Judy, No CSAP,' " said
9-year-old Manny
Gonzales, referring to principal Judy Jaramillo, who on Feb. 11 was
placed on paid administrative leave for undisclosed personnel reasons.

Manny's father, Mark Gonzales, is leading the protest that removed a
quarter of the



Opting out of CSAP as a way to protest district decisions not related
to the tests is uncommon.

"They are using their resources, and we are using ours," said Claudia
Infante, a parent who also chose to opt out her children.

Tuesday, Gonzales held a news conference in front of the district's
administration building and said he hopes the number of students
opting out will get the state's attention and open a dialogue between
the district and parents over some of the changes.

Mark Stevens, spokesman for the Colorado Department of Education, said
missing-student scores will negatively affect the school's ratings on
the state's accountability system and data that track student academic
growth.

District spokesman John Albright said the district could not discuss
why Jaramillo was removed but that it has nothing to do with changes
in the school's bilingual-education program.

Albright also said parents have had their say at board meetings, and
two community meetings have been scheduled for later this month to
discuss changes to the district's language plan.

Fifty-four percent of Adams 14's 6,500 students are English-language
learners, and recent studies have shown they are not becoming fluent
in English as they move through the district.

"The majority of students who have been in the district for six years
still remain limited in proficiency of English," said Superintendent
Sue Chandler in a letter to parents. "There is little indication of
progress in literacy and language."

Chandler said the district is ditching its bilingual policy that was
"overly proscriptive" and moving to a flexible policy that will
"allow
the district to develop a program to best meet the needs of all
students who are acquiring English."

"The fact is we haven't changed it yet," Albright said about the
new
language policy. "But we know we need to do something better."

http://www.denverpost.com/previous2/home/ci_11830285

-- 
**************************************
N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to
its members
and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner
or sponsor of
the list as to the veracity of a message's contents. Members who
disagree with a
message are encouraged to post a rebuttal. (H. Schiffman, Moderator)
*******************************************
Columbia Journalism Review Launches Chinese-Language Edition in China
New publication brings CJR’s analysis of U.S. media to critical foreign
audience

By The Editors

Single Page Print Email Comments Digg Facebook Reddit StumbleUpon
Delicious New York, NY (March 3, 2009) — The Columbia Journalism
Review (CJR) has launched a Chinese-language edition published and
distributed in China. This is the first time the Columbia Journalism
Review will regularly publish a foreign-language edition since its
founding in 1961. The inaugural issue was released in December 2008.

CJR has partnered with the World Executive Group (WEG), a China-based
private company specializing in strategic consulting and information
research, to publish each of its bimonthly issues. The new
publication, called Columbia Journalism Review Chinese (or
CJRChinese), also includes up to 20 percent of original content
created by WEG and branded separately from CJR.

Based at Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism, the
Columbia Journalism Review examines the media industry and its
coverage of current issues in politics, the environment, business, and
other areas. The Review’s reporting, analysis, criticism, and
commentary are widely read by members of the press as well as
educators, media executives, and others who desire in-depth analysis
of the media and current affairs.

The advent of a Chinese edition of the Columbia Journalism Review
reflects the growing need for open dialogue about the media and its
coverage of significant issues, not only in the United States and
China, but also in countries around the world.

“I hope that CJRChinese helps push forward the development of a free
press in China,” said Dean Nicholas Lemann of Columbia’s Graduate
School of Journalism.

Original CJR articles in the first issue of CJRChinese include: “Love
Thy Neighbor: The Religion Beat in an Age of Intolerance,” by Tim
Townsend (May/June 2008); “May I Speak Freely: Anthony Lewis on the
First Amendment’s March to Victory,” a review by Aryeh Neier
(January/February 2008); and “Red Ink Rising: How the Press Missed a
Sea Change in the Credit-Card Industry” (March/April 2008), by Dean
Starkman. The section of the magazine created by WEG includes material
on “The World’s 500 Most Influential Brands of 2008.”

“Given the vastly different press traditions in our respective
countries,” said Victor Navasky, chairman of CJR, “we consider the
advent of CJRChinese a major cultural breakthrough. We expect that the
information and analysis that is the hallmark of the Columbia
Journalism Review will provide unfamiliar perspectives to our new
Chinese readers, and that the relationship will also improve our own
understanding of journalism in China, a country whose influence in
world affairs continues to grow daily.”

Issues of the Columbia Journalism Review are translated into Mandarin
by the World Executive Group and vetted by CJR-hired bilingual
speakers and readers of Chinese and English, who work closely with CJR
staff, before publication in CJRChinese. The company will initially
distribute copies to key members of the Chinese media and also sell
single copies; they estimate an initial print run of around 12,000.

“We at the World Executive Group are pleased to be partners with the
Columbia Journalism Review, a respected publication and peerless
resource for the press,” said Ding Hai Sen, founder and CEO of World
Executive Group. “There are more than 10 million members of the media
in China, and for every eight employees there is a manager. We are
confident they hold great expectations for our partnership with CJR.”

The World Executive Group, which has offices in Beijing, Shanghai,
Shenzhen, and Hong Kong, where CJRChinese will be published, is
chaired by Nobel laureate Robert A. Mundell, Columbia University
professor of economics. CEO and founder Ding Hai Sen is an alumnus of
Columbia’s School of International and Public Affairs as is the World
Executive Group’s Vice President and CFO, Yuan Hao Dong.


About the Columbia Journalism Review

Columbia Journalism Review’s mission is to encourage and stimulate
excellence in journalism in the service of a free society. It is both
a watchdog and a friend of the press in all its forms, from newspapers
to magazines to radio, television, and the Web. Founded in 1961 under
the auspices of Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism,
CJR examines day-to-day press performance as well as the forces that
affect that performance. The magazine is published six times a year,
and offers a deliberative mix of reporting, analysis, criticism, and
commentary. CJR.org delivers real-time criticism and reporting, giving
CJR a vital presence in the ongoing conversation about the media.

http://www.cjr.org/events/columbia_journalism_review_lau.php

-- 
**************************************
N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to
its members
and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner
or sponsor of
the list as to the veracity of a message's contents. Members who
disagree with a
message are encouraged to post a rebuttal. (H. Schiffman, Moderator)
*******************************************



      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lgpolicy-list/attachments/20090304/6a0b0779/attachment.htm>