Editor for this issue: Karen Milligan <karen
linguistlist.org>
"Clarification of LSA procedures" I have recently had my attention drawn to a thread on LinguistList discussing various motions and resolutions the Linguistic Society ofAmerica has approved. Since some contributors appear to be unfamiliar with the general procedures through which such matters are handled, Margaret W. Reynolds, Executive Director of the LSA, has prepared the following clarificatory statement for distribution on the list. I just want to emphasize that all members of the LSA, whether or not they serve on the Executive Committee, are able to introduce motions or resolutions as outlined below. And of course members are welcome to contact me or other officers and members of the Executive Committee about their special concerns. Since 1973 when the rules for motions ( calls for action) and resolutions (expressions of opinion) prepared by William Gedney and Ilse Lehiste were adopted by the Executive Committee, members of the Society have had a procedure for bringing matters of concern to the attention of the community. The motions and resolutions passed at the Annual Business Meeting over the years cover a variety of issues. They have addressed such topics as equal employment opportunity, deployment of nuclear systems, human rights in Iran, natural language research, the importance of scientific peer review, support for linguists in Central America and against US policies in Nicaragua, congratulating the Esperanto movement on the occasion of its 100th birthday, professional standards for doctoral dissertations on Native American languages, changing the dates of the Annual Meeting and opposing the English-only amendments. Although there have been some exceptions, Society statements have generally been limited to subjects for which our special expertise as linguists is relevant. The Society's rules for motions and resolutions are published twice annually (in the October LSA Bulletin and in the Annual Meeting Handbook). Given the recent discussions on LinguistList, it may be helpful to highlight the procedures: Motions are only in order at the annual business meeting and may be initiated by the Executive Committee or from the floor. Motions initiated by the Executive Committee require for passage a majority vote of the members voting at the meeting. Motions initiated from the floor, if they receive affirmative vote of a majority of the members voting at the meeting, are then submitted to a mail ballot of the membership in the next issue of the LSA Bulletin. Passage requires that a majority of those voting and also that the total casting votes must be at least 2.5% of the personal membership. Resolutions may be introduced at the annual business meeting or at any special meeting of the Society. To pass, a resolution expressing the sense of the majority of the meeting requires the affirmative vote of the majority of the members voting at the meeting. If at least ten members present at the meeting so desire, a resolution may be broadened to express the sense of the majority of the membership by forwarding it to the Executive Committee for submission to the membership by mail ballot. Passage requires the affirmative vote (more than 50%) of the membership responding. Since the mid-1980's the Committee on Social and Political Concerns has frequently drafted statements for the Executive Committee's consideration which have then been affirmed by a majority of the members voting. These have included a statement on human subjects in linguistic research, the Statement on Language Rights, the LSA resolution on the Oakland "ebonics" issue and the resolution in opposition to the Unz/Tuchman California Ballot Initiative "English Language Education for Immigrant Children." Regarding the actions limiting the possible sites for the Society's Annual Meeting, at its December 1977 meeting, the Executive Committee determined that the LSA would not meet in states that had not ratified the Equal Rights Amendment. Then in 1988 the members attending the Annual Business Meeting at the Fairmont Hotel in New Orleans approved the resolution limiting host cities for the Annual Meeting to those in states without sodomy laws. That policy was revised in 1992 to permit the Society to consider cities where municipal authorities have taken positive action yet the state itself continues to ban sodomy. Sally McConnell-Ginet Secretary-TreasurerMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue