[Lingtyp] A terminological quandary: 'library studies'
Miestamo, Matti M P
matti.miestamo at helsinki.fi
Tue Nov 24 09:28:04 UTC 2020
Dear All,
of all the alternatives suggested so far, I would vote for "grammar survey(s)" as argued for by Johanna. The term "survey" has similar uses in other fields of science as well.
As for "grammar sampling", I would interpret it as building a collection of grammars (following certain principles perhaps), but not yet opening those grammars to extract data from them.
Best wishes,
Matti
--
Matti Miestamo
https://www.mv.helsinki.fi/home/matmies/
> Johanna Nichols <johanna at berkeley.edu> kirjoitti 24.11.2020 kello 7.02:
>
> What I usually use is "grammar survey(s)". I describe my main
> sources of information in cross-linguistic work as grammar surveys,
> dictionary surveys (or dictionary work), elicitation, corpus work (or
> corpus searches), and consultation with experts.
>
> Johanna
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 8:47 PM Hartmut Haberland <hartmut at ruc.dk> wrote:
>>
>> Has nobody ever considered this here?
>> “Library science (often termed library studies, bibliothecography, library economy, and informatics) is an interdisciplinary or multidisciplinary field that applies the practices, perspectives, and tools of management, information technology, education, and other areas to libraries.” (English Wikipedia)
>>
>> In my view, this means that the term ‘library studies’ is already taken and cannot be redefined.
>>
>> Hartmut Haberland
>> emeritus, Roskilde University, Denmark
>>
>> Den 24. nov. 2020 kl. 05.27 skrev Bill Palmer <bill.palmer at newcastle.edu.au>:
>>
>>
>>
>> I very much like ‘grammar sampling’. The published grammars form the sample from which we take our data.
>>
>>
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>>
>> Associate Professor Bill Palmer
>>
>> University of Newcastle
>>
>> Lead Investigator, OzSpace project
>>
>> Landscape, language and culture in Indigenous Australia.
>>
>> Vice-President, Australian Linguistics Society
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> On Behalf Of Bohnemeyer, Juergen
>> Sent: Tuesday, 24 November 2020 3:22 PM
>> To: <LINGTYP at listserv.linguistlist.org> <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] A terminological quandary: 'library studies'
>>
>>
>>
>> How about ‘grammar sampling’ instead of ‘grammar mining’?
>>
>> Also, there is always the option of using a more descriptive phrase. For example:
>>
>> ‘A study based on a compilation of existing (language) descriptions’, or shorter (if less precise) ‘a grammar compilation study’.
>> ‘A study based on a sample of existing (language) descriptions’, or shorter (if less precise) ‘a grammar sampling study’.
>>
>> Best — Juergen
>>
>>> On Nov 23, 2020, at 7:39 PM, Maia Ponsonnet <maia.ponsonnet at uwa.edu.au> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello, I follow Bill and other about armchairs, but I don't mind the mining metaphor: one mines what is precious, think gold, diamonds... Perhaps my native French is an influence here: "une mine d'information".
>>> Cheers to all, Maïa
>>>
>>> Dr Maïa Ponsonnet
>>> Senior Lecturer and Chair, Discipline of Linguistics
>>> Social Sciences Building, Room 2.36
>>> Faculty of Arts, Business, Law and Education
>>> The University of Western Australia
>>> 35 Stirling Hwy, Perth, WA (6009), Australia
>>> P. +61 (0) 8 6488 2870 - M. +61 (0) 468 571 030
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> on behalf of Bill Palmer <bill.palmer at newcastle.edu.au>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, 24 November 2020 6:58 AM
>>> To: chao.li at aya.yale.edu <chao.li at aya.yale.edu>; Bohnemeyer, Juergen <jb77 at buffalo.edu>
>>> Cc: <LINGTYP at listserv.linguistlist.org> <LINGTYP at listserv.linguistlist.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] A terminological quandary: 'library studies'
>>>
>>> Hi all
>>>
>>> For me armchair anything denotes amateurism, dilettantism, and claims extrapolated beyond what is empirically supported. An armchair expert is someone who makes pronouncements about something without any direct experience of it.
>>>
>>> I don’t love the mining metaphor because to me it suggests using data without the level of consideration and understanding of the empirical facts that careful comparative work based on grammars or whatever entails, as might be done by a machine algorithm. It suggests to me a degree of blunt force. Grammar mining is a really useful and important component, but the term doesn’t do justice to the full nature of what typological and comparative research involves.
>>>
>>> Having said all that, no really ideal term springs to mind instead. Library study also doesn’t entirely do justice to the work, but seems a bit better to me.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Bill
>>>
>>> Associate Professor Bill Palmer
>>> University of Newcastle
>>> Lead Investigator, OzSpace project
>>> Landscape, language and culture in Indigenous Australia.
>>> Vice-President, Australian Linguistics Society
>>>
>>> From: Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> On Behalf Of Chao Li
>>> Sent: Tuesday, 24 November 2020 3:35 AM
>>> To: Bohnemeyer, Juergen <jb77 at buffalo.edu>
>>> Cc: <LINGTYP at listserv.linguistlist.org> <LINGTYP at listserv.linguistlist.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] A terminological quandary: 'library studies'
>>>
>>> What about "grammar perusing" (or "grammar perusal")?
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Chao
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 1:54 AM Bohnemeyer, Juergen <jb77 at buffalo.edu> wrote:
>>> ‘Armchair linguistics’ to me denotes the kind of study that is heavy on the theorizing, light on the data. I find it difficult to see how that would intersect with anything I would want to consider typology. (Perhaps the kind of study in the defunct GB/P&P framework that would look at two or three — likely related — languages and postulate a parameter would qualify.)
>>>
>>> I get the negative vibe attached to mining (though miners may beg to differ), but to me (speaking as someone who’s married to a computer scientist), ‘data mining’ doesn’t have a negative connotation beyond the vague aura of scariness attached to all things IT/AI these days.
>>>
>>> Which adds to the vague aura of scariness and depression (no pun intended) attached to mines.
>>>
>>> Hm.
>>>
>>> Juergen
>>>
>>>> On Nov 23, 2020, at 1:16 AM, Nicholas Evans <nicholas.evans at anu.edu.au> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I agree with Martin about grammars being inexhaustible and priceless goldmines, but with Johanna about 'grammar-mining' sounding derogatory. I think that 'data-mining' still has connotations of 'strip-mining' and exploitative practices – though happy to be overruled if I am being oversensitive about that. On the other hand for me 'library' remains very positive (and also allows the possibility of thoughtful reading and reflection of the contents of each grammar, rather than just sticking them all in some python script)
>>>> Best Nick
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nicholas (Nick) Evans
>>>>
>>>> Director, CoEDL (ARC Centre of Excellence for the Dynamics of Language)
>>>> Distinguished Professor of Linguistics
>>>> Coombs Building, Fellows Road
>>>> CHL, CAP, Australian National University
>>>>
>>>> nicholas.evans at anu.edu.au
>>>>
>>>> I acknowledge the Ngunnawal people as custodians of the land on which I work, and pay my respects to their elders, past, present and emerging. Their custodianship that has never been ceded.
>>>>
>>>> From: Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> on behalf of Martin Haspelmath <haspelmath at shh.mpg.de>
>>>> Sent: Monday, November 23, 2020 5:00 PM
>>>> To: Johanna Nichols <johanna at berkeley.edu>
>>>> Cc: <LINGTYP at listserv.linguistlist.org> <LINGTYP at listserv.linguistlist.org>
>>>> Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] A terminological quandary: 'library studies'
>>>>
>>>> Every grammar is an inexhaustible goldmine that deserves to be exploited.
>>>>
>>>> „Armchair linguistics“ sounds derogatory to me, but what‘s the problem with „grammar mining“?
>>>>
>>>> In the 20th century, grammar mining studies had to be carried out in libraries. But nowadays all you need is access to the internet and some useful websites.
>>>>
>>>> Is there an alternative that‘s still better?
>>>>
>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>>> Am 23.11.2020 um 06:42 schrieb Johanna Nichols <johanna at berkeley.edu>:
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't know -- to me both "grammar mining" and "armchair linguistics"
>>>>> sound derogatory. We all want grammar writing to be taken seriously
>>>>> in the linguistics reward system, so use of those grammars is an
>>>>> honorable undertaking and deserves an honorable label.
>>>>>
>>>>> Johanna Nichols
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 9:17 PM Ian Maddieson <ianm at berkeley.edu> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Perhaps the term ‘armchair linguistics’ would have won the poll.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Nov 22, 2020, at 20:15, Bohnemeyer, Juergen <jb77 at buffalo.edu> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear all — Many thanks to everyone who participated in my poll!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There were 39 responses. Exactly one third, 13, recognized ‘library study’ as an established term. However, nearly half of those who did proposed what they considered better alternatives. Meanwhile, two thirds of respondents did not recognize ‘library study’ as a technical term.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of the suggested alternatives, the one that stood out for me is ‘grammar mining’. Setting aside my lack of enthusiasm for ‘grammar’ as a term for language descriptions, ‘grammar mining’ seems to invoke just the right concept and has the edge of pizzaz/sexiness.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best — Juergen
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Oct 21, 2020, at 7:40 PM, Bohnemeyer, Juergen <jb77 at buffalo.edu> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear colleagues — The purpose of this message is not to start another debate on terminology. Rather, I’d simply like to gather data on how this community views a particular terminological choice. I created a survey that people can take anonymously, which should take them all of 60 seconds. I’ll be happy to report the results on this board. Here is the link to the survey:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/G953WP7
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The issue concerns the term ‘library study’, when used to designate any typological research design that draws primarily on existing language descriptions. I have long considered ‘library study’ to be a well-established technical term for this concept, and I’m unaware of equally well-established terminological alternatives.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Within typology, ‘library studies’ in this sense would contrast with studies based on
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * typological databases such as WALS and AutoTyp;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * primary data (prevalent in semantic typology; occurs more marginally elsewhere);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * expert questionnaires (as opposed to questionnaires administered to speakers and designed for primary data collection; e.g. Comrie & Smith 1977, as opposed to Dahl 1985);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * anything else?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I’m just trying to find out whether I’m an outlier.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Note, this is not about whether one finds the label fitting or unfortunate. All I’m trying to determine is whether to an audience of typologists it gets the intended meaning across.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks! — Juergen
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Juergen Bohnemeyer (He/Him)
>>>>>> Professor, Department of Linguistics
>>>>>> University at Buffalo
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Office: 642 Baldy Hall, UB North Campus
>>>>>> Mailing address: 609 Baldy Hall, Buffalo, NY 14260
>>>>>> Phone: (716) 645 0127
>>>>>> Fax: (716) 645 3825
>>>>>> Email: jb77 at buffalo.edu
>>>>>> Web: http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jb77/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Office hours will be held by Zoom. Email me to schedule a call at any time. I will in addition hold Tu/Th 4-5pm open specifically for remote office hours.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There’s A Crack In Everything - That’s How The Light Gets In
>>>>>> (Leonard Cohen)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Juergen Bohnemeyer (He/Him)
>>>>>> Professor, Department of Linguistics
>>>>>> University at Buffalo
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Office: 642 Baldy Hall, UB North Campus
>>>>>> Mailing address: 609 Baldy Hall, Buffalo, NY 14260
>>>>>> Phone: (716) 645 0127
>>>>>> Fax: (716) 645 3825
>>>>>> Email: jb77 at buffalo.edu
>>>>>> Web: http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jb77/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Office hours will be held by Zoom. Email me to schedule a call at any time. I will in addition hold Tu/Th 4-5pm open specifically for remote office hours.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There’s A Crack In Everything - That’s How The Light Gets In
>>>>>> (Leonard Cohen)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Lingtyp mailing list
>>>>>> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
>>>>>> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ian Maddieson
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Department of Linguistics
>>>>>> University of New Mexico
>>>>>> MSC03-2130
>>>>>> Albuquerque NM 87131-0001
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Lingtyp mailing list
>>>>>> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
>>>>>> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Lingtyp mailing list
>>>>> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
>>>>> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Lingtyp mailing list
>>>> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
>>>> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Lingtyp mailing list
>>>> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
>>>> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Juergen Bohnemeyer (He/Him)
>>> Professor, Department of Linguistics
>>> University at Buffalo
>>>
>>> Office: 642 Baldy Hall, UB North Campus
>>> Mailing address: 609 Baldy Hall, Buffalo, NY 14260
>>> Phone: (716) 645 0127
>>> Fax: (716) 645 3825
>>> Email: jb77 at buffalo.edu
>>> Web: http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jb77/
>>>
>>> Office hours will be held by Zoom. Email me to schedule a call at any time. I will in addition hold Tu/Th 4-5pm open specifically for remote office hours.
>>>
>>> There’s A Crack In Everything - That’s How The Light Gets In
>>> (Leonard Cohen)
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lingtyp mailing list
>>> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
>>> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>>
>>
>> --
>> Juergen Bohnemeyer (He/Him)
>> Professor, Department of Linguistics
>> University at Buffalo
>>
>> Office: 642 Baldy Hall, UB North Campus
>> Mailing address: 609 Baldy Hall, Buffalo, NY 14260
>> Phone: (716) 645 0127
>> Fax: (716) 645 3825
>> Email: jb77 at buffalo.edu
>> Web: http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jb77/
>>
>> Office hours will be held by Zoom. Email me to schedule a call at any time. I will in addition hold Tu/Th 4-5pm open specifically for remote office hours.
>>
>> There’s A Crack In Everything - That’s How The Light Gets In
>> (Leonard Cohen)
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lingtyp mailing list
>> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
>> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lingtyp mailing list
>> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
>> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lingtyp mailing list
>> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
>> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
More information about the Lingtyp
mailing list