Talk:Linguistics and sustainability: Difference between revisions
From Sustainable linguistics
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Sustainability & linguistic typology: | Sustainability & linguistic typology: | ||
* working with second-hand sources, which have been created for academic purposes and do not in the majority of cases contribute the speaker communities - many of them are also produced by SIL in the context of missionary work --> typologists then use these sources which may have not been produced sustainably in the first place | * working with second-hand sources, which have been created for academic purposes and do not in the majority of cases contribute the speaker communities - many of them are also produced by SIL in the context of missionary work --> typologists then use these sources which may have not been produced sustainably in the first place | ||
* typological works include endangered languages in their samples, and as such typological research treats these languages as research objects - which raises the question on how sustainable is it include these languages, for which often only a very minimal description exists, in the studies? Would be more important to first document these languages properly? | * typological works include endangered languages in their samples, and as such typological research treats these languages as research objects - which raises the question on how sustainable is it include these languages, for which often only a very minimal description exists, in the studies? Would it be more important to first document these languages properly? | ||
Latest revision as of 22:24, 15 December 2022
Sustainability of the different subfields of linguistics Sustainability & linguistic typology:
- working with second-hand sources, which have been created for academic purposes and do not in the majority of cases contribute the speaker communities - many of them are also produced by SIL in the context of missionary work --> typologists then use these sources which may have not been produced sustainably in the first place
- typological works include endangered languages in their samples, and as such typological research treats these languages as research objects - which raises the question on how sustainable is it include these languages, for which often only a very minimal description exists, in the studies? Would it be more important to first document these languages properly?
