Talk:Linguistic Society of America

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

November 2007[edit]

Riverdrop, you added to the LSA article the sentence "A few prominent past presidents are Joseph Greenberg, Calvert Watkins, and Ken Hale." Are you sure you want to go that route? All LSA presidents are chosen because they are considered prominent by some substantial group of linguists. Is past president Morris Halle not equally (or more) prominent? Barbara Partee? I recommend deleting your addition since there is no good reason to single out your group of three over almost any other randomly chosen group. There's already a link on the page to the LSA's own list of past presidents. I could imagine importing that into the Wikipedia article, adding links for those who have articles. Note that I haven't taken any action on this. I'd rather hear your point of view first.

Hi, I'm a member of the LSA executive committee, I'm going to make a few changes to the page, just adding a little more background and deleting some of the less-relevant links. Mcfrank 21:04, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Did some rewriting and editing, tried to differentiate much of the text from the LSA website (some of it was copied from there earlier). Also added back in some past presidents; I think it's very interesting to know some of the famous linguists who have headed the LSA in past. The ones I put in are early linguists like Sapir and Boaz; I think they are uncontroversially known outside of the field (perhaps as opposed to some of those named above) I don't feel strongly about this, but I think it makes the entry more informative and interesting. Mcfrank (talk) 03:02, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Wasn't the first president of the LSA Leonard Bloomfield, its principal founder? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Taketheatrain (talkcontribs) 19:32, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Edit request[edit]

I wish to request four edits:

1) Change the lead section to:

The Linguistic Society of America (LSA) is a learned society for the field of linguistics. The LSA publishes the scholarly journal Language, presents peer-reviewed research at its Annual Meeting, and offers advanced training through courses held at its biennial Summer Linguistic Institutes. The LSA also raises awareness of linguistic issues with the public and contributes to policy debates on issues including bilingual education and the preservation of endangered languages.

The LSA has approximately 4,000 members around the world, both inside and outside of academia.

(This more accurately describes the range of activities the LSA supports, the policy issues it engages in, and its membership count. See: http://www.linguisticsociety.org/about, http://www.linguisticsociety.org/public-policy, etc.)

2) Remove the following text from the History section:

as well as communicate linguistic research to a wider audience through its website, annual meetings, biennial summer institutes, and its peer-reviewed, scholarly journals, including Language

(This avoids redundancy with the new lead section. In addition, the section as written implies that the LSA has had a website and summer institutes since its founding in 1924.)

3) Add "the open-access" before the first mention of Semantics & Pragmatics (in Publications)

(Source: http://www.linguisticsociety.org/content/semantics-and-pragmatics)

4) Change "LSA Journalism Award" to "Linguistics Journalism Award" in the Awards section

(Source: http://www.linguisticsociety.org/about/who-we-are/lsa-awards#lja)

Thank you! RBRLingSocAm (talk) 15:55, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Done. LaMona (talk) 18:07, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

This change was well intentioned but it deleted changes I made after RBRLingSocAm's request. I am going to restore my version, making sure that everything RBRLingSocAm wanted is taken care of. jjbvawv 01:34, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

User:Jimbauman, I reverted those edits because they don't meet the style guide for a lead. The lead should not contain statements like "According to Bloom...." Any explanation of that nature should be in the body of the article. The lead is a very brief summary of what is in the article and is used in places like Google as a snippet. So please leave the lead as it is today. Also, on talk pages you must sign your posts with four tilde's. LaMona (talk) 14:55, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks LaMona for your help. I moved my edit into the History section and left the lead alone. jjbvawv 20:58, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Linguistic Society of America/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Maunus (talk · contribs) 02:19, 1 February 2016 (UTC)


Review[edit]

I will be reviewing this article over the next week.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 02:19, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

I think the article is in good shape overall, but a little weak on content. The history section could be more extensive, and might integrate the history of the Linguistic Institutes - and more about the theoretical-political development of the institution. Below I suggest some sources that could be used to expand the history section. In the advocacy section I think the wider implications of the 1996 statement on linguistic rights might be mentioned - since the statement has relevance far outside the "ebonics debate".·maunus · snunɐɯ· 02:40, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

  • Suggested additional sources for the history of the society:
    • Sylvain Auroux. 2006. History of the Language Sciences / Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaften / Histoire des sciences du langage. 3. Teilband Walter de Gruyter. [1]
    • Falk, J. S. (1994). The women foundation members of the Linguistic Society of America. Language, 455-490. (Comments on the founding and the roles of some little known women linguists in the foundation)
    • Falk, J. S., & Joseph, J. E. (1994). The Saleski family and the founding of the LSA Linguistic Institutes. Historiographia linguistica, 21(1-2), 137-156. (Describes how the summer institutes became an important part of the LSA)
    • Hill, Archibald A. "The Linguistic Society of America and North American Linguistics, 1950-1968." Historiographia linguistica 18, no. 1 (1991): 49-152. (describes the period of the transition of LSA from Bloomfieldian structuralismn to Chomskyan generativism)
    • Julie Tetel Andresen. 2006. Linguistics in America 1769 - 1924: A Critical History Routledge. (describes the state of linguistics professional politics that led to the foundation of LSA - several other linguistic societies already existed)
    • Werner Sollors. 1998 Multilingual America: Transnationalism, Ethnicity, and the Languages of American Literature. NYU Press (discusses the 1996 LSA statement on linguistic rights)
    • E. F. K. Koerner. 1999. Linguistic Historiography: Projects & Prospects. John Benjamins Publishing. (provides extensive commentary on the Chomskyan revolution in American linguistics and how it took place within the LSA)
@Maunus: Thanks for taking this on. It's been a little over a week without a decision to pass, fail, or hold, and just wanted to know what you're thinking and any more recommendations you have (if any). Thanks! Wugapodes (talk) 00:02, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
@Wugapodes:, thanks for commenting, I guess I was just letting it simmer while I was waiting for you to respond. I will get on with the work on reviewing this later tonight.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 00:06, 10 February 2016 (UTC)


  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    Seems fine.
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists: I think the Lead is fine, but could do with a little expansion to better summarize the entire article.
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    I think some additional high quality sources would be good. Suggestions given above.
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    Yep. History section could be expanded I think.
    B. Focused:
    Yep.
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
    #Overall:
    Pass or Fail: I think I can pretty much pass it as is, but some expansions of the lead and the history section would be a fine improvement before doing so. Would you be willing to do this over the next week or so @Wugapodes:?·maunus · snunɐɯ· 18:21, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
I can expand the history section a bit more. I checked out a few of the books you mentioned above from the library and will begin reading them to see what can be gleaned. You have a question mark next to 6A about copyright, is there a problem with the images that you found? Thanks for the recommendations and review! Wugapodes (talk) 20:52, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
OK, that is great. Nah, I just havent checked the photos yet.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 21:48, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
@Maunus: I've added some information from some of the sources. I actually am having a hard time getting my hands on the Linguistic Institute article, though I will keep trying to get it. Feel free to leave other suggestions for improvement as well! Wugapodes (talk) 21:06, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
@Wugapodes:, tried my best to find a reason to fail this nomination, but I failed. ;) So now, I will proceed to pass it. ·maunus · snunɐɯ· 21:24, 18 February 2016 (UTC)