From: mkelkar2003
Message: 47992
Date: 2007-03-20
>I don't. That is a cut and paste from Koerner. Sorry for the missing
>
> > http://www.tulane.edu/~howard/LangIdeo/Koerner/Koerner.html
> >
> > This general non-recognition of ideological consideratins playing a
> > role in linguistics and its methodology is deplorable not simply
> > because of the lack of social consciousness and sense of
> > intellectual responsibility which this attitude among scholars
> > reveals, but also because linguists can be shown to have been
> > particularly prone to cater, consciously or not, to ideas and
> > interests outside their discipline and, as history shows, allowed at
> > times their findings to be used for purposes they were not
> > originally intended or simply joined up with certain trends."
> >
> >
> > "Although it is obvious from his own account that a considerable
> > number of authors had ideological, including at times religious and
> > maybe even political, agenda, Mallory does not raise the issue of
> > ideology, quite in line with traditional scholarly discourse in
> > which this aspect of scientific endeavour has been regularly
> > ignored."
>
>
> Why do you say that?
> recognize the deplorable fact that ideological considerations play a
> role in everything you say on this linguistics list snd also that you
> are prone to cater, consciously or not, to ideas and interests outside
> that discipline. Maybe someone should raise that issue?
>
>
> Torsten
>