[Lingtyp] ALT Newsletter 61

Mon Aug 15 14:42:45 UTC 2022

Dear all,

As the chair of the ad hoc committee that is looking at Open Access issues for ALT, I wanted to respond to some of the questions raised on this thread (as well as some that have come to me privately) as best as I can. We can also raise some of these issues with De Gruyter when we next have the opportunity to meet with their representatives.

Here is some additional information:

1. About Subscribe to Open (S2O): This was a new model for me (and, as far as I know, the ALT Executive Committee as well) when De Gruyter proposed it. My apologies for not making it clear in the newsletter that the subscriptions that De Gruyter proposes to consider when adopting this model are individual subscriptions. Institutional subscriptions are not considered part of the relevant subscriber count, at least in their initial proposal. We can, of course, raise this issue with them. (ALT does not have access to any details on De Gruyter revenue from Linguistic Typology, by the way.) De Gruyter’s general page on S2O is here: https://www.degruyter.com/publishing/publications/openaccess/open-access-articles/subscribe-open.

2. The implementation of the model: The initial proposal from De Gruyter is to use the S2O model to tie a specific number of individual subscriptions to each new Open Access article. So, the more individual subscribers Linguistic Typology has, the more articles could become Open Access. One reason for this model is a number of articles in Linguistic Typology have already been Open Access in recent years in connection with the author’s ability to pay or various existing institutional agreements (or some combination of the two). The idea would be to use S2O to help the journal transition to full Open Access.

3. Why shift to OA? An ALT member asked in private correspondence why ALT wants to shift Linguistic Typology to an Open Access model. They were not questioning the value of this, but, rather, whether the reasons for this had been articulated. I do not recall that this has been specifically articulated for Linguistic Typology. Rather, the idea of shifting to OA is part of the general trend of making as much scholarship open as possible, as envisioned by, for example, Plan S (https://www.coalition-s.org/). It seems reasonable to consider whether ALT may want to articulate a specific justification for Open Access in the context of the study of typology, though this is not within the current purview of the ad hoc committee on Open Access. This committee has focused more on how to transition to Open Access rather than why to do this.

4. Is S2O in effect a kind of “donation-based” model? The same ALT member asked whether S2O can be seen as a kind of donation-based model. In particular, whether scholars with greater financial resources (e.g., tenured faculty) would be purchasing subscriptions to Linguistic Typology to help support Open Access for all papers in the journal. This does seem like a reasonable interpretation of the model to me. What is a bit unusual about it is working out who would benefit from these donations. Clearly, scholars from countries with fewer financial resources would benefit, and I imagine the membership would be broadly in support of this. At the same time, from a global perspective, different university systems are at very different places with respect to devising general Open Access agreements with publishers, and different national funding bodies also have different expectations in this regard. So, this model could end up benefiting scholars in relatively wealthy countries where institutions are not yet doing much to support Open Access fees. (This would include my own institution, for example.) This is one of many complications during this transitional period for Open Access.

5. Will a shift to S2O affect the editorial process at Linguistic Typology? The above ALT member also asked whether a transition to Open Access could impact the editorial and reviewing process at Linguistic Typology. This is a concern, in part, because some Open Access journals where authors pay do seem to have a greater bias towards fast acceptance than other journals. While I cannot speak for the Editor or Editorial Board of Linguistic Typology, I can say that I have seen absolutely no indication that a transition to Open Access will impact the editorial process at Linguistic Typology. Moreover, if anything, an S2O model should make the journal less susceptible to a need to accept papers in order to be sustainable since its funding will come from stable subscriptions rather than from authors.

Finally, one area where I think feedback would be especially helpful at this stage would be to know whether the membership is generally interested in pursuing the S2O model in some form. If so, then ALT could work out a detailed proposal with De Gruyter for consideration by the membership. If not, then the Association can see if it can devise other models to shift Linguistic Typology to full Open Access.

I hope this information is helpful, and please let me know if you have any questions.

Best,
Jeff

> On Aug 8, 2022, at 14:13, William Croft <wcroft at UNM.EDU> wrote:
> 
> I had not heard of S2O either until I received the ALT newsletter. The explanation is on the Annual Reviews website, as Sebastian indicates. But apparently Annual Review of Linguistics has not received enough subscriptions to become open access: I went to the current issue, picked an article, and was not able to access it. 
> 
> However, I interpreted the ALT newsletter as saying if de Gruyter received enough subscriptions of any kind, including individual subscriptions, then it would shift to open access. I had subscribed for 2023 after subscriptions were split from ALT membership, because I wanted the hardcopy journal, at least for the time being.
> 
> Speaking of which, when I subscribed to LT through de Gruyter, I looked for a way to pay my membership dues on the ALT website since they are now split. But I could not find where to do it. Please let me know how membership dues will work now that the journal subscription is split.
> 
> Thanks,
> Bill
> From: Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> on behalf of Sebastian Nordhoff <sebastian.nordhoff at glottotopia.de>
> Sent: Monday, August 8, 2022 12:03 PM
> To: lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] ALT Newsletter 61
>  
>   [EXTERNAL]
> 
> Dear all,
> Maïa took the words right off my keyboard. My initial reaction was the
> same, but I postponed my reply as I wanted to look into it in more detail.
> Do we happen to  know how many institutional subscriptions there are for
> LT? De Gruyter have presumably made some calculations for the
> transition, which would be interesting to see. Without numbers, it will
> be hard to evaluate the proposition.
> 
> This model was developed by Annual Reviews. You can find good
> explanation here:
> https://www.annualreviews.org/page/subscriptions/subscribe-to-open
> Best wishes
> Sebastian
> 
> 
> On 8/8/22 19:43, Maia Ponsonnet wrote:
> > Dear Keren, Ljuba, Jeff, and all,
> >
> > Thank you very much for the newsletter, and for all the work obviously.
> > (Full disclosure: I am not sure how up-to-date I am with my membership, but I plan to look into this soon.)
> >
> > I have a question regarding the S2O model.
> >
> > It had been my understanding that the spirit of this model is to maintain INSTITUTIONAL subscriptions after a journal shifts to Open Access.
> >
> > I understand this relative to the logic where, on our way to the "diamond model" (where researchers are paid to produce, and no one pays any further), there is a stage at which only institutions pay (i.e. neither authors nor reader have to contribute financially).
> >
> > I may very well have misunderstood.
> > I find these questions interesting generally, and since S2O is on the table for LT, I thought I would raise the point?
> >
> > With kindest regards, many thanks for your clarification, and any discussion that may ensue,
> > Maïa
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Dr Maïa Ponsonnet
> >
> > Chargée de Recherche, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Laboratoire Dynamique Du Language
> >
> > Adjunct Researcher, Discipline of Linguistics, The University of Western Australia
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> on behalf of Luba Nikolova Vesselinova <ljuba at ling.su.se>
> > Sent: Saturday, 30 July 2022 11:16 AM
> > To: lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> > Subject: [Lingtyp] ALT Newsletter 61
> >
> >
> > Dear All,
> >
> > Please find attached the summer newsletter of our organization. Should you have any comments or questions, please do not hesitate to get in touch.
> >
> > Best wishes,
> > Keren and Ljuba
> >
> >
> >
> > ============================================================
> > Ljuba Veselinova, Professor
> > Dept of Linguistics, Stockholm University, S-10691 Stockholm, Sweden
> > Phone: +46-8-16-2332 Fax: +46-8-15 5389
> > URL  : https://www.ling.su.se/ljuba.veselinova<http://www.ling.su.se/ljuba.veselinova>
> >
> > "We learn by going where we want to go."
> >                                            Julia Cameron
> > ============================================================
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Lingtyp mailing list
> > Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> > https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp