JOURNAL OF POPULAR LINGUISTICS. : languagehat.com (2023)

I'm also happy to see this. There is currently something strange in the design, so it is difficult to find the content. I don't think there is anywhere the full contents of the current issue, but that can be fixed.

A bit off topic but when I started reading this it almost sounded like you were making fun of his description of his major because of the huge list. It seems almost counter-intuitive to list a wide range of interests as specialties, although maybe that's just me.
However, I will check that. Thanks for the hint.

"Subjects of phonetics/phonology, sociolinguistics, language change, emergence theory in linguistics, language perception and linguistic public relations,
That's quite a long list of "specialties" but it doesn't cover all of linguistics: they're not interested (at least not professionally) in morphology, semantics, syntax, discourse analysis, pragmatics, historical/comparative linguistics, language acquisition. and learning, sign language, forensic linguistics, neurolinguistics (language and brain), psycholinguistics and other specialties.
I too find the white-on-black font hard to read (age effect) and the layout confusing, but overall it's a good start: nothing is perfect and most things can be fixed.

"apart from peace, love and understanding": no. That should read "aside from peace, love and understanding and nut bread".

OMG, I'm someone who can't handle white on black either.

Neither can I, unless I'm unusually eager and I'm younger than you two combined.
But I congratulate the initiative and will be a regular reader.

What about unpopular linguistics that don't interest you?

There's a "guest book" link if you have feedback on the layout (which I also found a little...sparse) or the color scheme (less than ideal, and I'm supposedly relatively young). Since it's new, it might respond to constructive feedback.
I think it's a great idea as many people can't understand the technical details in LL or LH. Many ESL teachers will benefit from this as well. The number of language courses in MATESOL programs is usually minimal, and content varies in quality and usefulness. At the same time, there are aspects of ESL teaching and research that require some linguistic knowledge. (I know there are holes in my education).
Anyway, I hope you're doing well. (And, uh, gets a light makeover.)

"What about unpopular linguistics, don't you care?"
All other linguists are interested in it. That's why it took so long to develop something called "folk linguistics".

Re: Subjects, "Phonetics/Phonology, Sociolinguistics, Language Change..."
Depending on what you mean by "sociolinguistics", these can have a high intersection point. And "linguistic perception" (depending on whether you mean "how linguistics is perceived" or "how language is perceived") is consistent with both sociology and phonetics/phonology.
In any case, I will definitely be checking the site regularly. Design-wise, I'm not averse to white on black (red on black is another story), although it's not a color scheme I associate with (current) sites of this nature.

I took a quick look at the site and am planning to return. Can you select and copy text?
For websites that are difficult to read and have the information I want, I always resort to copying and formatting the text in Word for easier management.

People with middle-aged eyes can walkpage readability, where you can make a few choices and then drag the blue "Readability" button to your browser's bookmarks bar. If you click on the bookmark, the displayed page will be "read". I use it a lot now.

Thanks for the mention and the good comments! I'll admit my list of "specialties" seems a bit ridiculous, but they're all crossed, so, you know...
And on the subject of white on black… the research I did on screen vs. print readability when creating the website showed that white on black is more visually appealing on on-screen text. But most people seem to hate it, so that will change when the February issue rolls around. I promise.
-ds

The "Emergence Theory in Linguistics" seems very interesting, although I'm not quite sure what it is...
I am particularly interested in whether emergence theory covers the role of simple rules and their interaction in the production of literary style.

..the research I did on screen vs. print readability when creating the website showed that white on black is more visually appealing on on-screen text.
WordPerfect for Dos had a white-on-mid-blue option that was found easier on the eyes than a (possibly) bright white screen, but easier to read than white-on-black.

As the feedback page on Mr. Bigham's website is currently closed, may I ask you a question about LH?
...or even a general lack of answers from linguists on public policy issues such as Arizona's immigration law...
Given the large number of purely linguistic topics proposed, is the proposed content too broad? And open the floodgates to controversy?

I trust you are willing to risk controversy to ensure that a sane and scholarly point of view is brought to the debate to counter the impassioned but misinformed statements that currently constitute the debate. Linguists know the language; their voices should be heard in a public debate on language policy.

"I'm younger than you two combined": That's awfully good.

LH: Sorry, I didn't realize that along with a fundamental immigration issue, Arizona law is also a language issue.

Paul and LH: I also didn't realize that Arizona immigration law was a linguistic issue unless you take a very broad view of "linguistics".
My point is that it's very possible to bring your area of ​​expertise into almost any public policy debate, but it dilutes effectiveness in many people's eyes when it happens.
If anyone can enlighten me on a valid language issue that's more substantive than "some cops don't speak Spanish" or "many people don't know what they're talking about," I'd appreciate it.

My own observation has been that academic linguists tend not to give much value to debates about language-related political issues, at least when they are contentious and tend to evoke strong opinions from non-linguists. My working hypothesis is that a partial explanation might be that linguists tend to be language enthusiasts/hobbyists too, and when they venture into political territory, the latter tendency takes over (and/or reflects the common flaws of intellectuals who are so scholarly knowledge can be translated smoothly into effective public policy, without considering the historical and social context and without having to make decisions about conflicting priorities or values). For example, they might think that living in a polyglot society would be so cool that they tend to overlook the fact that more than 99% of their peers don't share their own enthusiasm as amateurs, and that existing polyglot societies tend to do so practically boiling with cross-community hate and/or being stably governed only through the use of highly liberal means (and/or calling themselves Switzerland, but no one has figured out how to scale this example). Developing a guideline for bilingual teaching, such as assuming that everyone else is as excited about the language as you are, or at least should be as excited (or would be if you were just explaining scientific truth properly to those ignorant Rubies) is a recipe . . . by disaster

They existed shortly after the Arizona law was passedreportsthat Arizona fired public school teachers with “heavy accents.” Inany commentsThe two stories went hand in hand. See language register coverageHere.

To review and expand on the comments in my last comment, see the long block quote to this post by LL from 3 years ago, which criticizes the general political stance of academic linguists as being unproductive:http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/005319.html. Notice Professor Bakovic's tone of astonishment (whom I certainly don't mean to offend; I think it was just, I think, typical of his particular training and background), suggesting that I've never been confronted with this contradictory point before have been . Perspective throughout his career within the academic subculture.

WordPerfect for Two had a white on medium blue option
This is what my email looked like at work for a few years before the place switched to another system or provider that had very nondescript black font on a dull, depressing white. The blue was beautiful, I miss it.

I thought the reports said that teachers with "heavy accents" were excluded from English classes. It didn't sound like a very nice deal. But does anyone know if that happened, and if so, in what numbers?

Remove "heavy accented" English teachers
If so, such a policy is likely to be short-lived. Regardless of what Arizona may think is in your best interest, discrimination in the workplace based on national origin is still a violation of federal law. Just because someone is perceived by a self-proclaimed assessor to have a "heavy accent" doesn't mean they that the person is not a native speaker, even if we argumentatively assume that being a native speaker is a professional qualification of good faith for the job.

I'm willing to say that being a native speaker of X to teach language X is a BFOQ (with obvious exceptions for classical languages), but since English doesn't have a standard accent, a "heavy accent" can't be a disqualification . Would Arizona dare remove English-born English teachers? I don't think so.

What about Scottish born English teachers? In India? in Australia?
I live in an English speaking area of ​​Canada. I recently received a call from a woman who works for an international charity. I could barely make out what she was saying but it sounded vaguely Australian to my ears so I asked if she was calling from Australia but no she was English and calling from England! However, he seemed to understand me without any problems.

Like many linguists, I tend to eavesdrop on conversations (in public in unfamiliar languages).
Anyway, a few years ago there was a real mix of people on the Bulgarian Black Sea coast and I was playing "how fast before you can tell what language they speak". Usually he could do it in a few seconds, but sometimes he was completely at a loss. When that happened, the language inevitably turned out to be English, one or more dialects that don't appear in the media and of which, even after identifying them, I could only understand about 60%.
In southern Spain, in a hotel with many British tourists, I could usually only understand about 80% of the conversations I heard.
Off the radar, I'd say the UK and US standards are going in different directions pretty quickly.

@michael farris: "In southern Spain, in a hotel with many British tourists, I could usually only understand about 80% of the conversations I heard."
I'm British (from London) and have heard people on the Tube a couple of times who I assumed were Dutch or Scandinavian only to find out on closer listening that they spoke English, with Scouse (on one occasion ) and Geordie were marked (in another) accents.
So misunderstandings overheard conversations can also happen to Britons in Great Britain!