Editor for this issue: <>
[This mesage was sent earlier on LINGUIST, but arrived in a truncated form. We are thus resending the posting.] Dick Hudson asked about the ratio of men to women who normally participate on LINGUIST, claiming to have found a 5:1 ratio in the messages he received in response to a query on 'rude negators'. First of all, I would like to point out that from the names listed in Dick's summary, the ratio would be 3.25:1 (counting Benji Wald as male!), unless a number of the men (but not the women) wrote more than once. This is of course possible, and consistent with the general trend for men to contribute more on the topic. Second, having done a quick count of the contributions on the topic of 'rude negators' myself, I note that the ratio is in fact much higher if only messages that were publically posted to LINGUIST are considered; thus, as of the time of Dick's summary (April 15), 16 men had posted to LINGUIST, as compared to *zero* women. To date, the count for public postings is 36 men (92%) and 3 women (8%), for a ratio of 12:1. For the sake of comparison, I include the following statistics: M F 1991 LSA members 54% 46% (from names from which sex could reliably be inferred) 1991 LINGUIST subscribers 64% 36% (ditto on methodology) Participation on LINGUIST (1991-92) participants 79% 21% messages 80% 20% words 88% 12% (averages based on 2 extended discussions -- "cognitive linguistics" (Feb-March 1991) and "professeurE" (Sept.-Oct. 1991) -- and a count of all messages posted during a random two-week period (May 30-June 12, 1992)) To this we may now add Participation in 'rude negators' discussion: participants 92% 8% In short, fewer women have contributed on the topic of 'rude negators' than usual, if we assume that what was 'usual' a year ago still holds now. Why might this be? *SURVEY* I would appreciate it if everyone reading this message could take a minute to answer the following questions: ------------------------------------------------------------ 1. To date, 39 messages have been posted to LINGUIST on the topic 'rude negators'. Approximately what percentage of these messages did you read? 2. Did you contribute to the discussion on LINGUIST? 3. Did you exchange messages privately with another subscriber on this topic? 4. If you did not contribute on this topic, why not? 5. How would you characterize the discussion on 'rude negators' as compared with other discussions on LINGUIST? 6. Your sex: M F 7. Your academic position: Student, Assist. Prof, Assoc. Prof, Prof, Lecturer [non tenure-track], not affiliated with academia ------------------------------------------------------------- E-mail your response to susanMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueutafll.uta.edu, or mail a hard copy to: Susan Herring, Program in Linguistics, University of Texas, Arlington, TX 76019. (The identity of individual respondents will be kept strictly confidential.) If enough people respond, I will summarize the responses and post them to the list. Then we may have an answer to this most interesting question. Susan Herring