Internet Grammars ?

[E.Maslova, C6-217]

Dear ALT-colleagues,

here is an idea to discuss (roughly, 'ALT Internet Grammar Series'). This idea has been briefly discussed by EC-members and Leon Stassen, and some fragements of this discussion are cited below. Bernard Comrie's letter is attached at the end.
In fact, the idea is rather trivial: it seems to be easily predictable that the future of scientific communication belongs to Internet. In particular, this concerns such a special 'genre' as descriptive grammars for linguists, with its obvious for all of us functional deviations from the prototypical 'book'. It seems absolutely obvious for me that one day such grammars will exist in a computer form only and will be stored at some place within the computer network in a way which would facilitate getting information on a language (or languages) one is interested at a particular moment. Moreover, this situation seems to me highly desirable (see Bernard Comrie's letter below for argumentation). Now, I am asking myself whether ALT site is not the most appropriate place for this, and whether it should not be a goal of ALT to bring this 'one day' closer.
	As I see it (although here I am obviously far from being competent), there are some non-technical issues which might block this development. Roughly, at the moment, to publish a descriptive grammar as a book and to put it on the WWW in a form directly available for anybody are two rather different things (two big differences, as sounds one Russian joke). I am thinking about the copyright issues, reviewing and references, let alone implications for one's academic career, etc. (I would refer again to Bernard Comrie's letter below for support). And it seems to me that it is at this point (these points) where ALT and 'Linguistic Typology' could play a major role. I mean, just putting something on the WWW, and submitting a grammar to, say, 'ALT Internet Grammar Series' might be different things as well (provided obligatory reviewing and all related issues).
	The same seems to be true for another, probably more significant issue, namely, quality and reliability of Internet Grammars. As Leon Stassen, puts it,

'A crucial point is, I think, the sort (and the degree) of academic status that goes with an electronically published book. Therefore, I think it is vital that a Cybergrammar series should be moderated as strictly as any prestigious grammar series currently on the market (e.g., the Mouton Grammar Series); as some sort of side-line, it might of course be possible to have collections of data or grammar fragments which do not (yet) meet such standards.'

It seems clear that ALT is able to provide this sort of moderation, if it would like to. I would even ask, If not ALT then who?

Now, Paolo Ramat and Frans Plank have proposed that, at least at the moment, both 'book'- and 'Internet'-versions should be available. That is, to have 'Internet-grammars' available would be good, but it would be better to have a book as well. I think this is true, but I am not sure that publishers will be happy about this situation (see also Bernard Comrie's letter below).
	Finally, there are also some technical (= software) problems involved by this idea. Yet I want to stress that, at least at the moment, I am not speaking about any 'data base'-like computer-implemented descriptive frameworks (although this could be a part of the future development). In my view, the whole enterprise will make sense even if  'Internet Grammars' are just something like Word documents, although it goes without saying that each Hypertext feature would contribute to accessibility of necessary information, not to speak of possible links to text data bases. If this is assumed, the initial technical problems seem solvable without any long-term software development projects. Just to see how it might work, visit WWW.BUCKNELL.EDU/~RBEARD/GRAMMARS.HTML. It is not exactly what we need, but it will show that what we need is technically possible. Furthermore, once 'Internet Grammars' exist as an established type of publication, such software projects might get a new impulse a!
nd motivation, which, in its turn, will contribute to quality, search facilities (what about, say, a common Subject Index for the whole grammar series), richness of data, etc. of these grammars.
	In my view, the technical issues could be discussed later, if ALT members are willing to accept this idea and make it work. And this is what I would like to discuss. What do you think about this?

Elena Maslova
University of Bielefeld

===================================================================

Bernard Comrie's letter:

I think both Lena and Paolo have good points to make concerning putting
grammars, etc., on the Internet. Herewith my own thoughts on the matter,
although I don't have a concrete proposal to make.

1. We may soon have to face the reality that publishers will be reluctant
to publish grammars, etc., of "less widely studied languages". Even now,
the few publishers that do publish such grammars do so at very high prices
and/or request substantial publishing subsidies. While some grammars are
still published at more reasonable prices by more locally based publishers,
their marketing usually leaves much to be desired--often the internet is
the only way of finding out about what is available! My impression is that
it is already virtually impossible to publish dictionaries of such
languages, and text collections.

2. At present it may be that books are more widely accessible than internet
materials in the world as a whole, but the situation is rapidly changing.
The expense of grammars means that it is impossible for libraries in most
parts of the world to keep up to date, indeed such libraries are often
unable to afford grammars of their own local languages! Given that an
internet hook-up is likely to be largely financed elsewhere (e.g.
businesses want reliable telephone lines anyway), the expense of
establishing an internet link may well soon turn out to be more modest than
that of maintaining a good library, if it isn't already. I would note that
even USC, hardly a third-world university, has decided to put more emphasis
on its electronic library than on its traditional store of books. Let's not
be misled by the situation in Western Europe and North America, with a
dense network of academic institutions including several with first-rate
libraries and easy access to inter-library loan--getting a copy of a
specific book is a very different matter in Delhi or Yaounde.

3. For an established scholar, it probably makes little difference
career-wise whether a grammar is published in book form or electronically.
But I have to admit that I would not advise a less established scholar,
e.g. not-yet-tenured faculty member in North America, to rely on internet
publishing. Those who control the system still give far more brownie points
for a book with an established academic publisher. (Some such publishers
are starting to publish things electronically, including on the net, e.g.
some journals, but such publishers that I have spoken with either already
charge hefty user fees or say that they will soon introduce them, so the
price differential between such electronic and book publishing may soon
evaporate.)

4. My feeling is that, given the amount of descriptive linguistic work that
is being done and that is unlikely to be published in book form, the
possibility of putting such work on the internet should be considered
seriously. I have myself been able to access important information by
first-rate scholars in this way, e.g. Peter Austin et al's dictionary of
Gamilaraay (an Australian language), available at
http://aa.tufs.ac.jp/~austin/GAMDICT.HTML. But of course it's very much a
case of "caveat emptor"--and since it's free you don't even have the
protection afforded must buyers--since there's no control over who posts
what to the internet.

5. We should also be aware that the physical format of a book, though handy
for some purposes--consulting an internet grammar on a trans-Atlantic
flight would be inconvenient and expensive on telephone charges--also has
some disadvantages that are readily overcome by electronic formats, such as
search facilities and possibilities for multiple cross-referencing. If a
grammar of a language were, for instance, to appear in both book and
electronic format, then there's no reason for the two versions to be
identical. The electronic version might, for instance, serve as the
database for the book.

6. I'd rather wait to hear from the rest of the EC before commenting on
whether ALT should get into the business of establishing an electronic
grammars, etc., refereed series.

Best wishes--Bernard.