LINGUIST List 3.482

Thu 11 Jun 1992

FYI: Funding, Thanks, IT Upgrade

Editor for this issue: <>


Directory

  1. "Bruce E. Nevin", politicization of research funding
  2. Ron Smyth, What language?
  3. Evan Antworth, Interlinear Text program for DOS upgrade

Message 1: politicization of research funding

Date: Mon, 8 Jun 92 13:18:11 EDTpoliticization of research funding
From: "Bruce E. Nevin" <bnevinccb.bbn.com>
Subject: politicization of research funding

Although this does not directly bear on linguistic research, the concern
is relevant for all US government funding. I apologize to those who have
seen this already on another email distribution, and to list members not
in the US.

-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-

 Date: Tue, 5 May 1992 15:16:27 EDT
 [from] Cheri Fullerton <APASDCFGWUVM.BITNET>
 Subject: ACTION ALERT - Psychology Funding Cuts!

 PUBLIC POLICY OFFICE
 ACTION ALERT

 [to] APA Funding Bulletin Recipients

[from] Barbara J. Calkins
 Associate Director, Public Policy Office


 RE: Threatened Cuts to Funded Research Programs &
 Attack on Peer/Merit Review

 Last week the Senate Appropriations Committee passed a bill taking
back, or "rescinding" in Washington jargon, $8.3 billion in
already-approved Fiscal Year 1992 funding. The rescissions included
specific grants, identified by title, that had already been peer-reviewed
and, in some cases, awarded by federal agencies including the National
Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
Related legislation developed by the House of Representatives
Appropriations Committee sets broad rescission targets, allowing federal
agencies the latitude to take cuts from new and as yet unfunded programs
rather than reneging on commitments to ongoing research. The Senate bill
poses serious problems, and WE NEED YOUR HELP NOW.

BACKGROUND

 The most frightening aspect of the Senate bill is its direct
assault to American science's peer/merit review system. Heretofore it
has been the business of scientists, not Congress, to decide the merits
of individual grant applications. Such decisions have traditionally had
a scientific basis, and have been made by other researchers who carefully
consider each proposal. The Senate, on the other hand, has apparently
combed through lists of grant titles and culled out the ones with
trivial-sounding titles, targeting them for termination. This is an
alarming precedent.

 Another alarming precedent set by the Senate's action is the
rescission of funds that have already been committed or awarded.
Scientists use these commitments to make agreements with their supporting
academic institutions, with colleagues, and with graduate students, in
order to ensure a stable and productive research enterprise. While these
particular Senate-proposed rescissions may affect a relatively small
number of scientific investigations, the fact that Congress can
arbitrarily reverse scientifically- based research funding decisions
threatens the stability of the scientific research process in a manner
that could cripple many research programs.

 An additional concern is the apparent focus of the Senate
rescissions on behavioral and social science. Many of the grants
targeted by the Senate for rescission are from the new Social, Behavioral
and Economic Sciences Directorate of the National Science Foundation.
Other proposed cuts come at the expense of behavioral and social research
being supported by the National Institutes of Health-- specifically, the
dental pain and fear work of the National Institute of Dental Research.
Clearly, we must protect psychological research by better educating
Members of Congress about its nature and significance. We need your help
in doing so.

HOW YOU CAN HELP

 As a constituent, yours is an important voice in the development of
federal science policy and funding decisions. Your contacts to Congress
MAKE A DIFFERENCE. We need you to: 1) Contact your Senators and Member
of Congress and ask them to: Oppose the Senate budget rescissions bill
(S.2403), and the politicization of science. Tell them that if these
rescissions must occur, then the House approach is more appropriate; and
2) Contact Senate and House Appropriations Committee members with the
same message. These individuals are in key positions to influence the
final outcome on this critical issue:

 Senate House of
 Representatives
 Robert Byrd (D-WV) William Natcher(D-KY)

 Tom Harkin (D-IA) Carl Pursell (R-MI) Barbara
 Mikulski (D-MD) Bob Traxler (D-MI) Brock Adams
 (D-WA) Bill Green (D-NY) Slade Gorton (R-WA)

 In such contacts you should identify yourself as a scientist and,
if appropriate, as a constituent. You can raise the issues outlined
above to make your point, and you can develop them further with details
of your own experiences. You can make your contact by telephoning, or by
Western Union "Public Opinion Message".

 Telephone - You can reach any Congressional office in Washington by
dialing 202/224-3121 and asking to be connected with your legislator's
office. Ask to speak with the staff member who handles research
appropriations. Give your name, affiliation, and the purpose of your
call. At the conclusion of the conversation, offer yourself as a contact
in the future and give your telephone number.

 Western Union - Call Western Union at 1-800-325-6000 and ask to
send a "Public Opinion Message." The cost is $9.95 for 20 words or less
and $3.50 for each additional 20 words. Address your message: The
Honorable (Member's Name), U.S. (Senate or House of Representatives),
Washington, D.C. (20510/House or 20515/Senate).

 If you need additional information, or help in identifying your
Senators or Members of Congress, then send a BITNET message to:
APASDGWUVM. Thanks for your help and support.
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 2: What language?

Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1992 15:03:47 What language?
From: Ron Smyth <smythlake.scar.utoronto.ca>
Subject: What language?

Thank you to all who wrote in my response to my query about the language
on the label on the ball of wool found in the purse of the woman who was
arrested for shoplifting in Toronto. The language was Rumanian, and a native
speaker was located to call the police station and speak with the woman.
The interpreter was able to convince her that all the police wanted to do was
to chastise her and send her home to her family.
Ron Smyth
smythlake.scar.utoronto.ca
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 3: Interlinear Text program for DOS upgrade

Date: Thu, 11 Jun 92 9:05:47 CDTInterlinear Text program for DOS upgrade
From: Evan Antworth <evansil.org>
Subject: Interlinear Text program for DOS upgrade

Version 1.2 of _IT_, SIL's Interlinear Text program for MS-DOS, is now
available. This new version fixes all known bugs and offers several
enhancements. Registered users of _IT_ are entitled to receive a free
upgrade package and have already been notified by mail. If you own _IT_
(i.e. you bought the printed manual) but have not heard from us about
the upgrade, contact us at this address:

 Academic Computing Department | phone: 214/709-2418
 Summer Institute of Linguistics | fax: 214/709-3387
 7500 W. Camp Wisdom Road | Internet: evansil.org (Evan Antworth)
 Dallas, TX 75236 U.S.A. |

Those who wish to obtain the new _IT_ 1.2 manual and software (full
release, not the upgrade) should contact:

 International Academic Bookstore
 Summer Institute of Linguistics
 7500 W. Camp Wisdom Road
 Dallas, TX 75236 U.S.A.

 phone: 214/709-2404
 fax: 214/709-2433
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue