Dear Cybalist members,
I feel embarrassed about my involvement in the recent exchange
of insulting remarks on the list. I think we'd better draw some constructive
conclusions from this embarrassing situation to make sure that in the
future the list should be used only as a forum for discussing linguistics,
not as anyone's soapbox.
I know from my experience as a teacher of phonology and
historical linguistics that lay people are perfectly capable of grasping the
gist of fairly complex problems if you present those problems clearly and
do not try to keep your audience at a distance by ridiculing their questions and
getting annoyed at their ignorance (to emphasise your own dearly-bought
superiority).
Discussion lists are not reserved for experts. Experts have
their own exclusive forums, such as postgraduate seminars, scholarly meetings,
conferences and journals. If I meet fellow linguists on the Net, it's great
fun to exchange opinions with them. But I also meet many amateurs who have
something interesting to say and who make me look at familiar problems in a new
light. Indeed, some of those "amateurs" have keener minds and wider interests
than many an expert. I'm always open to questions and enjoy contact with people
who are honestly curious about language and linguistics. If I were to snub them
because they haven't got enough formal training to publish in peer-reviewed
journals, I'd have to hate my students as well.
Discussion-list postings are not substitute publications.
There's no obligation to blaze new trails or provide detailed evidence for your
ideas. They are like ordinary conversation between people who like to think and
share their ideas. I can relax and say things I wouldn't publish, indulge in
speculation and thought experiments. There are more suitable places for lofty
scholarship. But one part of any scholar's bounden duty is to popularise his or
her discipline outside the academia. You can only do that by inviting other
people to play a game which they can join as active participants. For the
reasons laid out above I'm for a democratic list on which no member is treated
as the oracle.
This list would be a better place if it were properly
moderated. I understand that Cyril Babaev has little time to spare (a glance at
his website will tell you why) and can hardly afford to preside all the time
over the list he created. I don't expect any volunteers to queue for the job; I
wouldn't be able to do it myself. We'll probably have to rely on self-imposed
discipline. The recent postings by Brent and Sabine contain some excellent
ideas.
I agree with Brent that those of the members who can offer
some didactic help, suggest books to read, websites to visit, etc., should by
all means show more initiative in doing so. I agree with Sabine that filling in
one's personal profile on the Cybalist main page is a friendly gesture we owe
each other. Anonymity on the Net may be convenient, but I, for one, prefer to
talk to people who have names and identities. I also believe it makes for
civility if you can't hide behind an enigmatic e-mail address.
Finally, I think any members who are not really
interested in topics related to Indo-European linguistics but who use the list
as an opportunity to shout out their personal manifestos should be given
fair warning and struck off the list if they ignore it.
Would anyone like to comment on this?
With best wishes to everyone,
Piotr