Editor for this issue: <>
John Coleman suggests (seriously) renaming Linguistics Departments Grammar Departments. He has had the good fortune not to have discovered what a dirty word _grammar_ has become in American society. Not to mention _grammarian_. I have told this story many times in many contexts, but not yet on an e-list. To those of you in particular who work in English departments, this will sound all too familiar. I've just met someone at a party or on a plane or, as was most recently the case, in a dentist's chair (I was in the chair), and the conversation turns to "What do you do?" And I say "I'm an English teacher." And my new acquaintance replies, "Oh, well, er, I guess I better watch my grammar." As the poet Donald Hall so aptly put it, "I leave them in airports, watching their grammar." Look at all the common negative associations of grammar: grammar monger, grammar grinding, even grammaticotaster. Once I was talking to a colleague who teaches in a real live Linguistics Department and she said, out of the blue, "Oh, you probably would have liked to hear that lecture, you're a grammarian, aren't you?" She, of course, was not a grammarian but a syntactician. And what about "The New Grammarian's Funeral"? Grammarian is something you call someone else, like purist, not something you claim as your own profession. Of course, no dictionary records the negative senses of grammar and grammarian. Harmless drudges have enough of their own problems! If you want more info on the negative sense of grammar, I can send you a reference. I'm surprised, by the way, that no one in considering the meaning of _linguistics_ has recapitulated the competition between linguist and linguistician as replacement words for the discredited philologist in the early part of this century. See OED, svv. Dennis Baron debaronMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueuiuc.edu Dept. of English office: 217-244-0568 University of Illinois messages: 217-333-2392 608 S. Wright St fax: 217-333-4321 Urbana IL 61801
There is understandable concern about the place of linguistics departments in the administrative priorities of higher education. I do hope that the excellent suggestion made by John Coleman in 3,463 will nevertheless not be overlooked. There would be much more public opposition to the closure of a department of grammar. I have often thought that the name "linguistics" is not too helpful for our discipline, suggesting as it does the mere polyglot. The Guardian must have been aware of this ambiguity when it profiled dear Peter Strevens, on his appointment to the Chair at Essex, as "linguistician". The term would be no better, I think, than "linguist". John Coleman was right to anticipate misguided objections from off-centre specialists. But this is surely not a risk if we understand "grammar" in its proper width, and perhaps at last broaden our mutual comprehension. And there are still places where phonetics claims to be divorced from "linguistics". The main interest in the linguistic postings on the BB of late have been truly grammatical. Bill Bennett.Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue