16.909, Disc: Re: 16.894, Abolishing Fund Drive

[LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-16-909. Fri Mar 25 2005. ISSN: 1068 - 4875.

Subject: 16.909, Disc: Re: 16.894, Abolishing Fund Drive

Moderators: Anthony Aristar, Wayne State U <aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Aristar-Dry, Eastern Michigan U <hdry at linguistlist.org>
 
Reviews (reviews at linguistlist.org) 
        Sheila Collberg, U of Arizona  
        Terry Langendoen, U of Arizona  

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org/

The LINGUIST List is funded by Eastern Michigan University, Wayne
State University, and donations from subscribers and publishers.

Editor for this issue: Naomi Fox <fox at linguistlist.org>
================================================================  

To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form at
http://linguistlist.org/LL/posttolinguist.html.


===========================Directory==============================  

1)
Date: 25-Mar-2005
From: Aubrey Nunes < aubrey at pigeonpostbox.co.uk >
Subject: Re:16.894, Abolishing Fund Drive Once and For All 

2)
Date: 25-Mar-2005
From: Jeffrey Kaplan < jkaplan at mail.sdsu.edu >
Subject: Re: 16.894, Abolishing Fund Drive Once and For All 

	
-------------------------Message 1 ---------------------------------- 
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 10:31:36
From: Aubrey Nunes < aubrey at pigeonpostbox.co.uk >
Subject: Re:16.894, Abolishing Fund Drive Once and For All 
 

Dear Editor and fellow subscribers,

An important part of this wonderful institution is precisely that it is free at
point of use to those who need it and mostly can't afford to pay for it.

Publishers are not so badly represented among the contributors, though there are
gaps. But from the employing institutions there are only 21 names. In  relation
to job advertisements, there is an obvious scale - as a percentage of first
annual salary. I can hear moans. But the institutional solution is surely to
trim the display advertisements in the largely privately-owned, paper-based
academic media ­ none with the focus and penetration of LL.

There is a marketing question to be asked: of those with a job in 
linguistics,how many first heard about it on LL? On a suitably adjusted  figure
it would be possible to base a fee structure which would be excellent  value for
institutions, and hopefully solve at least most of the crisis.

The list of contributors contains the names of five centres of linguistic
excellence in Britain. But there are gaps - including one which recently
advertised a job on LL. And the rest of linguistic academe looks more  stingy,
especially in North America. Seeing in the honorable list the name of the LL
editor who helped me join, I have to chip in myself. But I think those in a
position to determine institutional allocations of advertising  expenditure
should play their part too.

This is a kind of obvious idea. And you've considered it, of course. I have no
idea what you see as the down side, But it seems to me that whatever the
downside is, it is nowhere near as bad as any of the other options.

Aubrey Nunes,
PhD, RMRCSLT, FRSA 


Linguistic Field(s): General Linguistics



	
-------------------------Message 2 ---------------------------------- 
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 10:31:38
From: Jeffrey Kaplan < jkaplan at mail.sdsu.edu >
Subject: Re: 16.894, Abolishing Fund Drive Once and For All 

	

--How about a merger between LinguistList and the Linguistic Society  of 
America, with a portion of (slightly increased) LSA dues going to fund 
Linguist List?  LinguistList already carries out some functions typical of 
leading organizations of fields of study, and its core  function of 
information sharing is an appropriate such function. If there is concern 
about LinguistList's independence, I would hope that  a suitable 
arrangement be negotiated.  Maybe?

--Alternatively, under a less U.S.-centric model, negotiate funding, via 
slightly raised dues, from various national or even focused linguistic 
organizations:  the Linguistic Association of Great Britain, the American 
Association for Applied Linguistics, the Association for Computational 
Linguistics, etc.

--An approach of this sort would be like a tax (albeit a flat one):  everybody 
pays, and LinguistList would not have to depend on  idiosyncratic 
generosity.  It would free Linguist List, and us, from  NPR-like fund drives, 
which are, as you say, a mild irritation even when efforts are made to make 
them fun.  (I must say the LinguistList  fundraisers are the best of the class.)  
The trick would be to hammer  out the relationships with the other 
organizations. Could it be done?

Jeff Kaplan


For previous messages in this discussion, see: 
http://linguistlist.org/issues/16/16-894.html 


Linguistic Field(s): General Linguistics


 



-----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-16-909