« ZurückWeiter »
7. The Committee voted to hold a special summer meeting at Madison during the 1943 session of the Linguistic Institute if the national emergency permits of such a meeting. 8. The Secretary was empowered to maintain on the list of Active Members those members who because of foreign residence are unable to transmit their dues and who because of war conditions would otherwise against their will be dropped from membership for nonpayment. The Secretary reported to the Committee the difficulties which H. P. Jacobs and Fang-Kuei Li had had in attempting to get their dues to him. By extension this principle is also to be applied to members entering the armed forces who are unable to maintain regular contact with the office of the Secretary. The Secretary will consider each case on its individual merits and report his action to the Society at the next annual meeting.
Here follow the reports of committees and delegates of the Society which were received by the Executive Committee or which have come in to the Secretary since the Executive Committee's meeting.
Report of the Editor, Bernard Bloch:
During the year 1942 the Society issued the following publications:
LANGUAGE, Vol. 18; 309 pages.
Supplements to LANGUAGE:
Language Dissertation No. 35: JESSE L. ROSE, The Durative and Aoristic Tenses in
Language Dissertation No. 36: ALDEN GIBSON VAUGHAN, Latin Adjectives with Parti-
Bulletin No. 15: Proceedings of the Chapel Hill Meeting 1941, Proceedings of the Indi-
Special Publications in the William Dwight Whitney Linguistic Series:
Other Special Publications:
LEONARD BLOOMFIELD, Outline Guide for the Practical Study of Foreign Languages;
BERNARD BLOCH and GEORGE L. TRAGER, Outline of Linguistic Analysis; 82 pages.
A rough classification of articles and reviews in the 1942 volume of the journal reveals the following distribution. (The number of pages assigned to each topic is approximate only.) American Indian languages..... 14 pp.
Indo-Hittite and IE.
Germanic (excl. of English)... 17 pp.
Once again the Editor must emphasize the need for reviews. The 25 reviews in Vol. 18 of the journal, though more than the average, fall considerably below the number in Vol. 17; and new contributions to appear in Vol. 19 are even fewer. The writing of reviews is looked upon by some scholars as a disagreeable and thankless job, a trivial interruption of their own research: a view, no doubt, that is often justified. And yet research can hardly be fruitful unless it is accompanied by critical evaluation and discussion of others' work in the same or in a related field. Our journal, the only well-established medium in this country (and one of the few left anywhere) devoted entirely to the scientific study of language, cannot be said to fulfill its purpose if it neglects to keep the members of our Society informed of new linguistic studies outside its own pages.
For this reason, and because reviews often serve to lighten the necessarily somewhat heavy tone of a technical journal, the Editor would welcome an ever-growing number of
reviews, from an ever-growing number of contributors. For books which come to him from the publishers, he usually tries to find a suitable reviewer; but the number of scholars whom he personally knows is limited, and it is not only possible but quite certain that he has not always made the best choice. (Now and then he has been taken in by scholars who promise to review a book and then, when they have received it, apparently regard it as a gift and forget their obligations.) For books not sent by the publishers, the Editor cannot of course invite reviews; for these he must rely on the scholarly conscience of our members. If our journal is to reflect the development of linguistic science both here and abroad, every active worker in the field must accept the responsibility which he owes to his colleagues. He must recognize the writing of reviews for what it is: a part of his professional duty.
Several contributors have objected to the 'style rules' of our publications, codified in BULLETIN 14.3-9 (1941). Apart from the blanket objection that uniformity of styling is not worth the trouble it involves, three arguments are especially common: that a scholar at work on a new article cannot always know in advance to which of several possible journals-all with different style rules-he will send it; that consistency of styling is less important in the miscellaneous articles of one journal than in the productions of one scholar, wherever they may appear; and that if an editor is finical about styling, he had better see to it himself instead of imposing his whims on productive scholars, who have more important things to worry about.
To these arguments the Editor can only reply that the style rules of LANGUAGE are not his own invention (glad as he would be to claim the credit for them), and that if he nevertheless abides by them, and asks others to do the same, it is because a moderately close observance of these rules goes far toward lightening the printer's work and his own. When he drew up his Instructions to Contributors for BULLETIN NO. 14, he was rather formulating established practice than evolving new laws. It was not his intention to irritate scholars by insisting on his favorite eccentricities of styling, nor indeed to insist on anything, but only to recommend the practice which had already shown itself to be ideally suited to the requirements of a linguistic journal, and to save himself the drudgery of handling typescripts in too many different styles. The sentence in BULL. 14.3 which may have most annoyed contributors-Typescripts which deviate in important respects from the practice here recommended must be returned to their authors for retyping'-should be read with contrastive intonation on the adjective.
Exacting as our instructions look-and it was perhaps a mistake to formulate them in such detail they contain few significant departures from the usage of most other journals. These are, in the main, our prescription of roman type for the titles of books and articles, of single quotation marks, and of a simplified form of bibliographical reference. Other deviations from common practice, such as our treatment of abbreviations and the omission or use of commas, are neither important nor troublesome. Note also that many of our instructions (thus §§1, 3c-d, 5e−f, 6, 10a,h-j, 11a, c, 12b) concern only the mechanics of typing, not the appearance of the printed article.
The adoption of our style rules, with only minor changes, by the Journal of the American Oriental Society (see JAOS 61.306-10) has alleviated somewhat the multiplicity of stylings that scholars not unreasonably complain of; but further alleviation in this way is hardly to be expected. Each journal has its own tradition of styling, the result of its own special needs. Even among journals in related fields, no compromise can easily be effected. LANGUAGE has intimate relations with journals devoted to philology, to anthropology, to sociology; philology (to choose only one facet of this many-sided relation) leads to literary history, and thence to the history of ideas, to philosophy, to symbolic logic, to mathematics, to physics, and beyond. Where shall we draw the line?
After all, the most important feature of a typescript is legibility. If a paper is clearly and cleanly typed, with proper spacing and wide margins all around, the violation of minor style rules is a venial matter. In the past, the Editor has often retyped whole articles to make them legible to the printer; but hereafter he will have no time for this. If all contributors will type their papers, or have them typed, with our major style rules in mind
and with a reasonable regard for the looks and legibility of the page, the Editor will cheerfully see to the more finical details of the styling himself.
The Editor's thanks are due to the other members of the Committee on Publications for their aid in deciding questions of general policy; to the Secretary, J. M. Cowan, for help and guidance in the complicated business of publication; to the many scholars who have advised him on particular problems; and to the staff of the Waverly Press for continued efficient service in a time of unusual strain.
Report of the Standing Committee on Research, by Franklin Edgerton, chair
The Committee considered the manuscript of a book by E. H. Sturtevant of Yale University on The Indo-Hittite Laryngeals. It recommended to the Advisory Board of the American Council of Learned Societies that this be subsidized for publication; this recommendation was granted, and the work has been published.
The Committee considered several other manuscripts submitted to it, but did not recommend any.
Report of the Committee on the Dues Fund, by Albrecht Goetze, chairman: Your Committee was charged with the task of selecting beneficiaries of the Dues Fund. It is the purpose of this fund to provide the dues of distinguished scholars who are at the time not in a position to pay the dues themselves.
The Committee investigated a number of persons who were suggested as eligible. It had to reject them because the fact was established that they had secured positions which rendered their situation, insecure as it might be, certainly not worse than that of many younger members of the Society who despite low salaries manage to maintain their membership.
A note was inserted in LANGUAGE asking the members of the Society for nominations. The result was entirely negative.
The Committee thus has to report that it failed to locate any persons to whom the terms of the fund are applicable.
Report of the Committee on Endowment for the Linguistic Institute, by Franklin Edgerton, chairman:
Since the last report, $88.50 has been received in partial payment of pledges to this fund. Most of the outstanding pledges have now been paid in full. The total sum actually received from the pledges during the current campaign is $2,174.95. About $400 in pledges is still outstanding, but it is doubtful how much of this can be collected.
Report of the Committee on the Investment of Linguistic Institute Endowment Funds, by E. H. Sturtevant, chairman:
The Committee has recommended the investments enumerated in the Treasurer's report as having been made during 1942.
Report of the Committee on the Place of the Linguistic Institute in 1941 and 1942, by E. H. Sturtevant, chairman:
Although the term of this Committee appears to have expired, and although it has not conducted any negotiations during the year, the Secretary has requested its advice. It has accordingly advised the Executive Committee to accept an invitation from the University of Wisconsin to hold a session of the Linguistic Institute on the campus of that university during the summer of 1943.
Report of the Director of the Linguistic Institute for 1942, Urban T. Holmes
The Linguistic Institute was held in Chapel Hill, N. C., June 12 to July 21, under the joint auspices of the Linguistic Society and of the University of North Carolina. The shadow of war was never far away during the course of the summer, but those who were present were grateful for the opportunity that was afforded them. Unfortunately Mr. J. M. Cowan could not be present and no substitute was provided for him. Mr. G. L. Trager also was detained by other duties; his place was taken by Mr. Alfred Senn. Twenty-six courses were actually taught. The visiting instructors were Messrs. Edgerton, Kurath, Kent, Goetze, Dillon, Kennedy, Senn, and Hoijer. Members of the faculty of the University of North Carolina who gave instruction were Messrs. Holmes, Lane, Ericson, Jente, and Linker. Twenty students were enrolled for the full fee, and twelve others, holding the doctor's degree, paid the ten-dollar fee. The Thursday luncheons were well attended. Speakers on these occasions were Miss Hahn, Messrs. Edgerton, Kent, Hoijer, and Sebeok. On Sunday evenings was given the regular series of public lectures; the speakers were Messrs. Senn, Edgerton, Kennedy, and Goetze and Dillon. In this final lecture, Messrs. Goetze and Dillon united to show the resemblances within the IE framework between Hittite and Old Irish. The course known as Introduction to Linguistics was conducted this year by Mr. Kurath; again this course was well attended by instructors and students alike, and served as a meeting place for stimulating ideas.
Along with the Institute there was held an intensive course for the study of modern Portuguese, directed by Mr. Holmes. This was not under the auspices of the Linguistic Society but was supported by the American Council of Learned Societies. On occasion students from the Institute attended the Portuguese classes and vice versa.
Report of the Delegates to the American Council of Learned Societies, E. H. Sturtevant and George S. Lane:
At the annual meeting of the American Council of Learned Societies in Philadelphia on January 30 and 31, 1942, two new constituent societies were elected to membership: The College Art Association of America and The Population Association of America. There are now 23 constituent societies in the Council.
The Council has continued its generous support of the Linguistic Atlas of the United States and Canada. The third volume of the New England Atlas is now in the hands of the printer. Editorial work on the Atlas of the South Atlantic States has gone forward and plans for its publication have been actively discussed. There is good reason to hope that the needed financial support will soon be found.
The Council has agreed to provide a subvention for a session of the Linguistic Institute in the summer of 1943.
The foreign language project of the Council, supported by two subventions of the Rockefeller Foundation, was last spring placed under the direction of Professor J. M. Cowan, the Secretary of the Linguistic Society, who was given the title of Director of the Intensive Language Program. During the year studies have been assisted in Japanese, Thai, Ilocano, Malay, Burmese, Hindustani, Persian, Turkish, Moroccan Arabic, Fanti, Hausa, Swahili, Russian, Hungarian, and Finnish. Actual intensive courses have been established at various universities in a number of these languages, and unexpectedly good results have been obtained. In September a conference of a number of the scholars at work on the project was held in Philadelphia. Later in the year two pamphlets describing certain fundamental procedures of linguistic analysis were published by the Linguistic Society with the support of the Council. These are: Leonard Bloomfield, Outline Guide for the Practical Study of Foreign Languages; Bernard Bloch and George L. Trager, Outline of Linguistic Analysis.
It seems likely that a far-reaching improvement in the teaching of modern foreign languages may grow out of this project of the Council.
Report of the Delegate to the American Documentation Institute, Edward H. Sehrt:
As representative of the Society on the Board of the American Documentation Institute, I beg to report that no linguistic work was published in microfilm in 1942.
Report of the Delegate to the Inauguration of Harry Noble Wright, E. Adelaide Hahn:
Your Delegate attended the Inauguration of Harry Noble Wright as sixth President of the City College of the College of the City of New York, in the Great Hall of the College on the morning of September 30th. Dr. Ordway Tead of the Board of Higher Education presided. The principal address was delivered by Associate Justice Felix Frankfurter of the Supreme Court, an alumnus of the College; and other speakers included Mayor Fiorello H. LaGuardia. Numerous public officials of the nation, the state, and the city were in attendance, as were also representatives of 138 institutions of higher learning, of the Board of Education and the Board of Superintendents of the City of New York, and of 74 learned societies.
An informal luncheon followed the exercises, and the College Buildings were open for inspection throughout the afternoon.
The conduct of the Society's business has been considerably complicated since the outbreak of the war. A comparison of the membership list for 1942 with that of 1941 shows a marked increase in the number of members for whom no address is known to the Secretary, as well as a large number of changes in address and status. Most of the latter result from response to calls to service in the war effort. Members are urgently requested to make all such changes known to the Secretary.
The Secretary-Treasurer wishes to express his gratitude to all the officers and members of the Society, who have assisted most generously in carrying the increased burden of operating the Society in war time. They share with him the knowledge that the Society as a whole is making a significant contribution to the national war effort, a knowledge which is more than adequate compensation for their increased labors.
J. M. COWAN