LINGUIST List 2.861

Sat 14 Dec 1991

Disc: Quoting From LINGUIST

Editor for this issue: <>


Directory

  1. Jacques Guy, Quoting from Linguist
  2. AVERY D ANDREWS, RE: 2.847 Quoting from LINGUIST
  3. William J. Rapaport, Re: 2.847 Quoting from LINGUIST
  4. Allan C. Wechsler, 2.847 Quoting from LINGUIST
  5. , Re: 2.847 Quoting from LINGUIST

Message 1: Quoting from Linguist

Date: Sat, 7 Dec 91 11:04:12 EST
From: Jacques Guy <j.guytrl.oz.au>
Subject: Quoting from Linguist
I heartily agree with your answer to Shimizu Makoto on quoting from "Linguist".
However, I would not think it should NOT be necessary to obtain the author's
permission. At least, from as when the question has been clarified. My reason
 for
thinking so is this: if you know you are likely to be quoted, then you will
necessarily think twice before submitting your thoughts and comments to
Linguist, lest you make a fool of yourself. Makes the moderators' task lighter,
keeps the undesirable out.
(Anyone may quote me on that!)
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 2: RE: 2.847 Quoting from LINGUIST

Date: Sat, 7 Dec 1991 12:39:28 GMT
From: AVERY D ANDREWS <ADA612csc1.anu.edu.au>
Subject: RE: 2.847 Quoting from LINGUIST
My feeling is that people ought to get permission from authors
before print-quoting from linguist, on the basis that part of the
utility of this medium is that people are somewhat less inhibited
in saying what they actually think about various issues. If not-
completely-well-considered views were likely to be immortalized in
print, posting in Linguist would be little different from publishing
a squib in LI.
 Avery Andrews (ada612csc.anu.edu.au)
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 3: Re: 2.847 Quoting from LINGUIST

Date: Mon, 9 Dec 91 12:10:37 EST
From: William J. Rapaport <rapaportcs.Buffalo.EDU>
Subject: Re: 2.847 Quoting from LINGUIST
The way I've seen citations from b-boards in philosophy journals is
by citing the author, list, and date. Seems to me, though, that since
most b-boards are not refereed archival sources, such references have
the same status as "personal communication". This, of course, does not
mean that they should not be cited!
			William J. Rapaport
			Associate Professor of Computer Science
			Center for Cognitive Science
Dept. of Computer Science||internet: rapaportcs.buffalo.edu
SUNY Buffalo		 ||bitnet: rapaportsunybcs.bitnet
Buffalo, NY 14260	 ||uucp: {rutgers,uunet}!cs.buffalo.edu!rapaport
(716) 636-3193, 3180 ||fax: (716) 636-3464
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 4: 2.847 Quoting from LINGUIST

Date: Tue, 10 Dec 1991 11:05-0500
From: Allan C. Wechsler <ACWYUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: 2.847 Quoting from LINGUIST
In response to Mr. Makoto Shimizu's query about quoting from Linguist:
I would be personally distressed if any of my postings to the Linguist
list were used in other publications without my permission. I view the
list as the ethical equivalent of an informal discussion group, and not
the equivalent of a journal.
At this level of informality, I feel comfortable making jokes, proposing
wild theories for the purpose of stimulating discussion, arguing a point
enthusiastically, and so on. I would certainly think thrice about such
things if I had ceded copyright to the list (as one does, by entering a
contract, when submitting to a journal, and as I have not done with the
Linguist list).
I have, as yet, no professional publications in linguistics. I would
like to maintain control of my bibliography, and not break into print
involuntarily with half-baked ideas quoted from the Linguist list.
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 5: Re: 2.847 Quoting from LINGUIST

Date: Wed, 11 Dec 91 11:58:39 -0800
From: <zbarlevsciences.sdsu.edu>
Subject: Re: 2.847 Quoting from LINGUIST
It is my understanding that current copyright law (since about 1979)
automatically confers copyright upon authorship: Registration of copyright
is a separate issue, needed for court, but based on the original right
derived from authorship. (So no longer is one in danger of losing copyright
privileges by not publishing in a specific form or way.)
 The relevant point, in any case, is that author's permission must indeed
be obtained -- unless perhaps some blanket waiver automatically included.
(However, small quotes of material for research or review purposes do not
require permission.)
 NB: This info is all amateur.
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue