Editor for this issue: <>
H. Stephen Straight's queries re the use of the term "language disorders" in a recent York University job ad show, as he suggests, an ignorance with the Canadian context in general and of that of York University's Linguistics Programme in particular. Graduate programmes in speech in Canada do not, as a rule, require an under- graduate degree in speech, nor, might I add, do a numer of US programmes into which our graduates have gained admission. Furthermore, students who enrol in our fourth-year course entitled Language Disorders need a minumum of four full- year course equivalents in linguistics. Since our programme is relatively small, we know our students well and,along with a very active student-run lingu istics club, provide extensive advising concerning the prerequisites (including physiology, various psychology courses and in some cases math and physics) required by the Canadian graduate programmes in speech. Furthermore, the course description clearly indicates that the course is not clinically oriented. There is, therefore, no ethical impropriety in our use of the term. While the term may imply a clinical orientation, it needn't do so. The Language Disorders course had been previously entitled neurolinguistics, but it was felt for marketing reasons that Language Disorders was less "scary" to the students and in addition better reflected the course content. Language and the Brain was another possible title for the course, but a course on language and the brain would draw on material from normal as well as pathological language states. Since the course in question uses only non-normal language data to shed light on the representation of languge in the brain (normal states being dealt with in another course) it was felt the the title Language Disorders was best. The answer to Straight's query about how to deal with "pre-speech pathology" students is to have well-informed faculty members who are willing to take the time to advise students on their undergraduate programmes. Rob Fink Department of Languages, Literatures and Linguistics York UniversiMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
Here's another query, after Stephen Straight's, about the terms of job advertisements. Although I'm unfortunately not able to apply for it, I noticed Edinburgh recently advertised a post promising to consider applicants `without regard to sex, marital status, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, or citizenship'. Now there is at least one other factor widely thought to befog committees' ability to see talent, namely age. Since Edinburgh's exclusions are so explicit, should readers conclude that age *will* come into their equation? If so how, and why? (E.g. maybe scholars over forty have too many old ideas in their heads to leave room for the exciting new ones?)Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue