DOCSLIB.ORG

A Framework for Analysis of Authorial Identity: Heterogeneity Among the Undergraduate Dissertation Chapters

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

A framework for analysis of authorial identity: Heterogeneity among the undergraduate dissertation chapters Bárbara-Pamela Olmos-López Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Linguistics and English Language Lancaster University August 2015 Declaration I hereby declare that this thesis has been written by myself, and the work in here is entirely on my own. The research in here has not been previously submitted for a degree in this or any other form. 01.08.2015 Pamela Olmos-López Abstract Thesis writing is an enterprise which integrates knowledge of different domains, i.e. the subject’s content, rhetoric, academic discourse, the genre they are writing, and research skills (Bartholomae, 1985; Read, et al. 2001; Johns, et al. 2006). The integration of these elements makes thesis writing a challenging endeavour, especially when facing it for first time, as is the case for undergraduates. Thesis writing at undergraduate level becomes more challenging when the writing is in a foreign language. In Mexico, undergraduate students are often required to write a thesis in English. However, researching writing at undergraduate level has sometimes been undervalued as undergraduates are considered to lack an authorial voice (Helms-Park & Stapleton, 2003; Stapleton, 2002). Based on the premise that every piece of writing contains voice (Ivanič, 1998), an element of authorial identity, I focus my research on exploring authorial identity.In my study I analyse how undergraduates, novice writers, express authorial identity across their dissertation chapters. I propose a framework for the analysis of authorial identity (Ivanič, 1998, Hyland, 2010, 2012) and communicative functions, and apply it to a corpus of undergraduate dissertations. The corpus consists of 30 dissertations that are written in English as Foreign Language in the area of Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages and Applied Linguistics (TESOL/AL) and translation. The framework includes analysis of first person pronouns, passives, impersonal constructions, reporting verbs and evaluative adjectives, which were found to be keywords in these dissertations compared to a reference corpus (the British English 2006 or BE06 corpus). The framework I propose will facilitate the analysis of the writer’s identity and communicative functions as they occur in each chapter of their dissertations. I also include a case study focussing on one participant with the aim of integrating the suggested framework with awareness and understanding of the participant’s self-presentation as a writer. I include some pedagogical implications for L2 writing research, suggesting that students could be made aware of the full range of choices available in academic writing and how they project different authorial identities. I close my thesis by exemplifying the framework within my own case of authorial identity and with a reflection on the authorial identity of speakers of other languages in dissertation writing. Keywords: Authorial Identity, EFL Academic Writing, Rhetorical Function, Undergraduate Dissertation Acknowledgements The writing of a PhD thesis is a long journey, a journey of life, learning, and experiences in which many people are involved. I would like to acknowledge the team of people whose support made this thesis possible, and hence helped me to achieve my goal. Each of these people contributed in a way and at different moments during the journey; thus, I am taking a chronological approach to mentioning them, although I recognise that some of these people have walked with me the whole way. I will, however, at the end mention three very special people. I am particularly indebted to Paul Baker, who introduced me to studies in corpus linguistics; the first course I took in my PhD studies. I would like to thank him for taking the time to follow my research as my examiner, for so carefully reading my thesis and for his valuable comments that have enriched my project. I cannot fully express my gratitude for his understanding of the needs of my research and for the role he played in it. In the process of data collection I want to acknowledge my great friend Claudia Diaz. She was very helpful in the gathering of the dissertations as she was my agent in Mexico; in this aspect, thanks also go to Naty, the secretary of the department. Her work on providing information about the participants and their background was crucial. Many thanks go to the research participants. They shared their dissertations and gave consent for me to analyse their writer’s authorial identity. I also want to acknowledge CONACyT, my PhD sponsorship for the four years of full-time study. A very special person I am deeply grateful to is Richard Xiao. Richard was my supervisor for a year, a very short time, but enough time to learn not only about the methodological process of using corpus, but also about life. I was honoured to be one of his last supervisees. My memories of his patience, dedication and integrity will always accompany me in my professional life. I also want to acknowledge Vaclav Brezina, for his work in the later stages of the thesis. His comments and feedback improved the quality of my research. I am grateful to many colleagues and friends. To Karin Tusting, whose feedback on my MRes was helpful to evaluate and assess my PhD research. I am also thankful to Karin for the informal chats we share over coffee about some exciting aspects of writing and identity. Teaching the Postgraduate Academic Study Skills course with her was also a great opportunity to learn from her experience and to put into practice what I was actually researching. In the same vein, I thank Judit Kormos for her advice and for lending me her ear to talk about my research as well as other personal concerns. Our conversations during our morning jogging certainly provided me with many life lessons. I am also grateful to Roz Ivanič, whose study on writer’s discoursal identity brought me all the way to Lancaster. Although she was retired by the time I arrived in Lancaster, I was honoured to have the opportunity to meet with her for coffee every now and then while updating her on my research. Her ideas and advice to develop my thesis made my position stronger. She showed interest in it, and she still follows what I am doing. I thank each and all of the friends I met during the programme. I include my friends from both programmes, Research Only and Thesis and Coursework, two ways of pursuing a PhD, but a diversity and richness in experiences and friendship. I feel grateful to them for the way in which we shared the challenges of PhD life and the enriching experience of writing a thesis. I am also thanking my very good friend Daniel Van Olmen for the great fun, happiness, advice, dinners that made the work and challenges easier and much more enjoyable. I am very grateful for the joy and company of my friends from my walking groups, Lancashire Walking Group and Scottish Hill walking and Activities Group. Spending my weekends with them on top of a hill, scrambling, finding a new summit, swimming in a loch or tarn, camping or hostelling filled my days with joy and gave me the energy and inspiration to keep on with my writing. I am deeply thankful to Margaret and Brian Cowling, for they were the best landlady and landlord I could ever have had. They always made sure that everything was right with the house and my working space, which was crucial to the smooth development of my work. I also thank them as it is because of them that I ended up in Mull, which was the first of my many writing retreats as my preface reveals. I am grateful to them as they not only opened the doors of a place to live, but also their own house and home, making me feel part of their family. I also want to acknowledge Hilda Hidalgo for proofreading my chapters and Sarah Horrod for providing feedback on the final pieces of my thesis. As I narrate in my preface, writing and walking cannot be separated for me. In this journey, I have walked with many people, but three of them deserve very special mention for their support was crucial to me in achieving my goal of obtaining my PhD degree and in many personal achievements. Greg Myers, my supervisor, for his wisdom, patience, advice, and willingness in giving me feedback when questioning everything that I wrote. Greg has been with me since the early stages of my PhD. His knowledge and depth of thought made me a more critical person. I am thankful for his enormous patience when working with me and listening to my many tales of hikes, hills, travels, and adventures, which he graciously every now and then related to my study, making the supervision process much more interesting. I express my eternal gratitude to him as his approach to working with me evolved according to my own personal development. Our meetings started with academic topics but ended as fascinating discussions about life and there was always learning therein. I am also thankful to him for his help in the later stages, reading the many versions of my chapters and my final thesis. Straight from the heart, thank you, Greg. Jane Sunderland, my former first supervisor, my co-author, my dear good friend. Words cannot express my gratitude for all that she has meant to me. As my supervisor, I thank her for her steady support and for always providing constructive critiques, and supporting the expression of my ideas, my own voice. Her enthusiasm and passion for life always showed me the light at the end of the tunnel.
Recommended publications
  • The Language Learning Processes of Students with Specific Learning

    The Language Learning Processes of Students with Specific Learning

    The multilingual aspects of dyslexia and the learning of additional languages in classroom contexts Prof. Judit Kormos Lancaster University Department of Linguistics and English Language Overview of the talk The landscape: Divide, iceberg and pyramid The relationship between first and second language learning difficulties How can we identify SpLDs in the multilingual classroom? Recent research findings on promoting the second language learning success of dyslexic students Multilingualism and diversity 2011 Census: • 726,000 people in the UK could speak English but not well • 138,000 people could not speak English at all 2017: • 20 % in primary education and 16% in secondary children are EAL speakers (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system /uploads/attachment_data/file/650547/SFR28_2017_Main_Text.pdf) • 360 different languages spoken in UK classrooms (https://www.naldic.org.uk/research-and- information/eal-statistics/eal-pupils/) Division and diversity Proportion of children learning other languages in the UK Early literacy skills Number of children’s books at home GDP per capita Number of books at home Socio-economic Reading skills status R Parents’ attitude to reading e a d i n g School-mates’ early s literacy skills k i l l s Home-school School resources involvement School climate Reading attitude Reading self-concept Gender Chiu, McBride-Chang Lin (2012). Geva, E., & Wiener, J. (2014). Psychological assessment of culturally and linguistically diverse children and adolescents: A practitioner's guide. Springer Publishing Company. First language predictors of L2 reading performance of Slovenian learners of English (Kormos et al., in press) Predictors of L2 reading 6.8 15.8 1.3 76.2 Phonological awareness in L1 Timed word and non-word reading L1 Dictation in L1 Other Kormos, J.
  • Downloaded for Free

    Downloaded for Free

    Salem State University From the SelectedWorks of Sovicheth Boun March 24, 2014 A Critical Examination Of Language Ideologies And Identities Of Cambodian Foreign-Trained University Lecturers Of English Sovicheth Boun Available at: https://works.bepress.com/sovicheth-boun/2/ Table of Contents General Conference Information ....................................................................................................................................................................... 3-­‐13 Welcome Messages from the President and the Conference Chair ........................................................................................................................ 3 Conference Program Committee .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Registration Information, Exhibit Hall Coffee Hours, Breaks, Internet Access, Conference Evaluation ................................................ 4 Strand Coordinators and Abstract Readers .................................................................................................................................................................. 5-­‐6 Student Volunteers, Individual Sessions and Roundtable Sessions Instructions ............................................................................................ 7 Conference Sponsors .............................................................................................................................................................................................................
  • The Critical Period Hypothesis for L2 Acquisition: an Unfalsifiable Embarrassment?

    The Critical Period Hypothesis for L2 Acquisition: an Unfalsifiable Embarrassment?

    languages Review The Critical Period Hypothesis for L2 Acquisition: An Unfalsifiable Embarrassment? David Singleton 1 and Justyna Le´sniewska 2,* 1 Trinity College, University of Dublin, Dublin 2, Ireland; [email protected] 2 Institute of English Studies, Jagiellonian University, 31-120 Kraków, Poland * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: This article focuses on the uncertainty surrounding the issue of the Critical Period Hy- pothesis. It puts forward the case that, with regard to naturalistic situations, the hypothesis has the status of both “not proven” and unfalsified. The article analyzes a number of reasons for this situation, including the effects of multi-competence, which remove any possibility that competence in more than one language can ever be identical to monolingual competence. With regard to the formal instructional setting, it points to many decades of research showing that, as critical period advocates acknowledge, in a normal schooling situation, adolescent beginners in the long run do as well as younger beginners. The article laments the profusion of definitions of what the critical period for language actually is and the generally piecemeal nature of research into this important area. In particular, it calls for a fuller integration of recent neurolinguistic perspectives into discussion of the age factor in second language acquisition research. Keywords: second-language acquisition; critical period hypothesis; age factor; ultimate attainment; age of acquisition; scrutinized nativelikeness; multi-competence; puberty Citation: Singleton, David, and Justyna Le´sniewska.2021. The Critical Period Hypothesis for L2 Acquisition: An Unfalsifiable 1. Introduction Embarrassment? Languages 6: 149. In SLA research, the age at which L2 acquisition begins has all but lost its status https://doi.org/10.3390/ as a simple quasi-biological attribute and is now widely recognized to be a ‘macrovari- languages6030149 able’ (Flege et al.
  • Marketing Fragment 6 X 10.T65

    Marketing Fragment 6 X 10.T65

    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-53430-7 - Second Language Writing Ken Hyland Frontmatter More information Second Language Writing © Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-53430-7 - Second Language Writing Ken Hyland Frontmatter More information CAMBRIDGE LANGUAGE EDUCATION Series Editor: Jack C. Richards This series draws on the best available research, theory, and educational practice to help clarify issues and resolve problems in language teaching, language teacher education, and related areas. Books in the series focus on a wide range of issues and are written in a style that is accessible to classroom teachers, teachers-in-training, and teacher educators. In this series: Agendas for Second Language Literacy by Sandra Lee McKay Reflective Teaching in Second Language Classrooms by Jack C. Richards and Charles Lockhart Educating Second Language Children: The Whole Child, the Whole Curriculum, the Whole Community edited by Fred Genesee Understanding Communication in Second Language Classrooms by Karen E. Johnson The Self-Directed Teacher: Managing the Learning Process by David Nunan and Clarice Lamb Functional English Grammar: An Introduction for Second Language Teachers by Graham Lock Teachers as Course Developers edited by Kathleen Graves Classroom-Based Evaluation in Second Language Education by Fred Genesee and John A. Upshur From Reader to Reading Teacher: Issues and Strategies for Second Language Classrooms by Jo Ann Aebersold and Mary Lee Field Extensive Reading in the Second Language Classroom by Richard R. Day and Julian Bamford Language Teaching Awareness: A Guide to Exploring Beliefs and Practices by Jerry G. Gebhard and Robert Oprandy Vocabulary in Second Language Teaching by Norbert Schmitt Curriculum Development in Language Teaching by Jack C.
  • Challenging Learners in Their Individual Zone of Proximal Development Using Pedagogic Developmental Benchmarks of Syntactic Complexity

    Challenging Learners in Their Individual Zone of Proximal Development Using Pedagogic Developmental Benchmarks of Syntactic Complexity

    Challenging Learners in Their Individual Zone of Proximal Development Using Pedagogic Developmental Benchmarks of Syntactic Complexity Xiaobin Chen and Detmar Meurers LEAD Graduate School and Research Network Department of Linguistics Eberhard Karls Universitat¨ Tubingen,¨ Germany {xiaobin.chen,detmar.meurers}@uni-tuebingen.de Abstract and identify reading material individually chal- lenging learners, essentially instantiating the next This paper introduces an Intelligent Com- stage of acquisition as captured by Krashen’s con- puter Assisted Language Learning system cept of i+1 (Krashen, 1981) or relatedly, but em- designed to provide reading input for lan- phasizing the social perspective, Vygotsky’s Zone guage learners based on the syntactic com- of Proximal Development (ZPD; Vygotsky, 1976). plexity of their language production. The In terms of structure of the paper, we first locate system analyzes the linguistic complexity our approach in terms of the Complexity, Accu- of texts produced by the user and of texts racy, and Fluency (CAF) framework in SLA re- in a pedagogic target language corpus to search. Then we review approaches adopted by identify texts that are well-suited to foster earlier studies in developmental complexity re- acquisition. These texts provide develop- search, including problems they pose for a peda- mental benchmarks offering an individu- gogical approach aimed at offering developmental ally tailored language challenge, making benchmarks. We propose and justify a solution, ideas such as Krashen’s i+1 or Vygotsky’s before presenting the architecture and functional- Zone of Proximal Development concrete ity of the SyB system. and empirically explorable in terms of a broad range of complexity measures in all 2 Development of Syntactic Complexity dimensions of linguistic modeling.
  • The Effects of Specific Learning Difficulties on Processes of Multilingual Language Development

    The Effects of Specific Learning Difficulties on Processes of Multilingual Language Development

    The effects of specific learning difficulties on processes of multilingual language development Judit Kormos, Lancaster University This paper reviews current research findings on how specific learning difficulties (SLDs) impact on the processes of multilingual language development. The review includes studies of young language learners in instructed classroom settings as well as of multilingual children in second language contexts. The paper starts with a definition of the concepts of disability and SLDs. Next, it discusses the interaction of cognitive factors with L1 and L2 literacy development and L2 learning. The paper also outlines possible ways in which SLDs can be identified in different L2 learning contexts. A detailed analysis of how cognitive factors influence the development of second language skills of young learners with learning difficulties is given in the last part of the paper. Introduction In many contexts, communication skills in an additional language are just as essential as literacy and numeracy skills. Individual differences that impact on second language (L2) development have been widely researched within the field of second language acquisition, but, until recently, the language learning processes of students with additional needs have received little attention (see e.g. Kormos & Kontra, 2008; Kormos & Smith, 2012; Kormos, 2017). SLDs not only influence the development of oral and literacy skills in children’s first language (L1), but also have a great impact on the processes of L2 learning. Therefore, in order to ensure fair and equal opportunities in education for these learners, there is a growing need for research on how children with SLDs develop their L2 skills. Without an appropriate understanding of how children with SLDs acquire an additional language, it is impossible to design effective instructional programs.
  • The Effects of Specific Learning Difficulties on Processes Of

    The Effects of Specific Learning Difficulties on Processes Of

    Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 37 (2017), pp. 30–44. © Cambridge University Press, 2017. This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. doi: 10.1017/S026719051700006X The Effects of Specific Learning Difficulties on Processes of Multilingual Language Development Judit Kormos Lancaster University abstract This article reviews current research findings on how specific learning difficulties (SLDs) impact on the processes of multilingual language development. The review includes studies of young language learners in instructed classroom settings, as well as of multilingual children in second language (L2) contexts. Starting with a definition of the concepts of disability and SLDs, it next discusses the interaction of cognitive factors with first language (L1) and L2 literacy development and L2 learning. Also outlined are possible ways in which SLDs can be identified in different L2 learning contexts. A detailed analysis of how cognitive factors influence the development of L2 skills of young learners with learning difficulties is given in the last part of the article. introduction In many contexts, communication skills in an additional language are just as essen- tial as literacy and numeracy skills. Individual differences that impact on second language (L2) development have been widely researched within the field of sec- ond language acquisition, but until recently, the language learning processes of students with additional needs have received little attention (see, e.g., Kormos, 2017; Kormos & Kontra, 2008; Kormos & Smith, 2012).
  • Gender and Sexuality in English Language Education

    Gender and Sexuality in English Language Education

    ELT Research Papers 15.03 Gender and Sexuality in English Language Education: Focus on Poland Authors: Łukasz Pakuła, Joanna Pawelczyk and Jane Sunderland Gender and Sexuality in English Language Education: Focus on Poland Authors: Łukasz Pakuła, Joanna Pawelczyk and Jane Sunderland ISBN 978-0-86355-776-7 © British Council 2015 Design /F119 10 Spring Gardens London SW1A 2BN, UK www.britishcouncil.org Contents The writers ............................................................................................................................................................................. 3 Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................................................. 5 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................................... 7 1 What are the issues? .................................................................................................................................................... 9 1.1 What is gender? ............................................................................................................................................................................. 9 1.2 Gender and sexuality ................................................................................................................................................................10 1.3 Sexuality and heteronormativity .........................................................................................................................................10
  • Lourdes Ortega Curriculum Vitae

    Lourdes Ortega Curriculum Vitae

    Lourdes Ortega Curriculum Vitae Updated: August 2019 Department of Linguistics 1437 37th Street NW Box 571051 Poulton Hall 250 Georgetown University Washington, DC 20057-1051 Department of Linguistics Fax (202) 687-6174 E-mail: [email protected] Webpage: https://sites.google.com/a/georgetown.edu/lourdes-ortega/ EDUCATION 2000 Ph.D. in Second Language Acquisition. University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, Department of Second Language Studies, USA. 1995 M.A. in English as a Second Language. University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, Department of Second Language Studies, USA. 1993 R.S.A. Dip., Diploma for Overseas Teachers of English. Cambridge University/UCLES, UK. 1987 Licenciatura in Spanish Philology. University of Cádiz, Spain. EMPLOYMENT since 2012 Professor, Georgetown University, Department of Linguistics. 2004-2012 Professor (2010-2012), Associate Professor (2006-2010), Assistant Professor (2004-2006), University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, Department of Second Language Studies. 2002-2004 Assistant Professor (tenure-track), Northern Arizona University, Department of English. 2000-2002 Assistant Professor (tenure-track). Georgia State University, Department of Applied Linguistics and ESL. 1999-2000 Visiting Instructor of Applied Linguistics, Georgetown University, Department of Linguistics. 1994-1998 Research and Teaching Graduate Assistant, University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, College of Languages, Linguistics, and Literature. 1987-1993 Instructor of Spanish, Instituto Cervantes of Athens, Greece. FELLOWSHIPS 2018: Distinguished Visiting Fellow at the Graduate Center, City University of New York, Advanced Research Collaborative (ARC). August through December, 2018. 2010: External Senior Research Fellow at the Freiburg Institute of Advanced Studies (FRIAS), University of Freiburg. One-semester residential fellowship at FRIAS to carry out project titled Pathways to multicompetence: Applying usage-based and constructionist theories to the study of interlanguage development.
  • The Role of Individual Differences in L2 Writing Judit Kormos, Lancaster

    The Role of Individual Differences in L2 Writing Judit Kormos, Lancaster

    The role of individual differences in L2 writing Judit Kormos, Lancaster University, UK Published in the Journal of Second Language Writing in 2012 Abstract Although the role of individual differences in second language (L2) speech has been extensively studied, the impact of individual differences on the process of second language writing and the written product has been a neglected area of research. In this paper, I review the most important individual difference factors that might explain variations in L2 writing processes and discuss the influence of these factors on how L2 learners exploit the language learning potential of writing tasks. First, the role of cognitive factors will be explored, and recent research investigating the relationship between writing performance and aptitude and working, and phonological short memory, will be presented. Next, the potential role of motivational factors, such as language learning goals, self-efficacy beliefs and self-regulatory capacities that influence the psycholinguistic mechanisms of L2 writing and the way students learn about the target language through writing, will be explored. The paper concludes by suggesting new directions for researching the interactions between individual learner variables, writing processes and second language acquisition. Introduction One of the basic questions in second language acquisition research is what accounts for students’ differential success in language learning. The role of individual differences in the ultimate attainment of language competence has been
  • Ken Hyland Frontmatter More Information

    Ken Hyland Frontmatter More Information

    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-82705-8 - Second Language Writing Ken Hyland Frontmatter More information Second Language Writing © Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-82705-8 - Second Language Writing Ken Hyland Frontmatter More information CAMBRIDGE LANGUAGE EDUCATION Series Editor: Jack C. Richards This series draws on the best available research, theory, and educational practice to help clarify issues and resolve problems in language teaching, language teacher education, and related areas. Books in the series focus on a wide range of issues and are written in a style that is accessible to classroom teachers, teachers-in-training, and teacher educators. In this series: Agendas for Second Language Literacy by Sandra Lee McKay Reflective Teaching in Second Language Classrooms by Jack C. Richards and Charles Lockhart Educating Second Language Children: The Whole Child, the Whole Curriculum, the Whole Community edited by Fred Genesee Understanding Communication in Second Language Classrooms by Karen E. Johnson The Self-Directed Teacher: Managing the Learning Process by David Nunan and Clarice Lamb Functional English Grammar: An Introduction for Second Language Teachers by Graham Lock Teachers as Course Developers edited by Kathleen Graves Classroom-Based Evaluation in Second Language Education by Fred Genesee and John A. Upshur From Reader to Reading Teacher: Issues and Strategies for Second Language Classrooms by Jo Ann Aebersold and Mary Lee Field Extensive Reading in the Second Language Classroom by Richard R. Day and Julian Bamford Language Teaching Awareness: A Guide to Exploring Beliefs and Practices by Jerry G. Gebhard and Robert Oprandy Vocabulary in Second Language Teaching by Norbert Schmitt Curriculum Development in Language Teaching by Jack C.
  • Download Download

    Download Download

    G&L (PRINT) ISSN 1747–6321 Gender G&L (ONLINE) ISSN 1747–633X and Language Editorial In this editorial we reflect on and celebrate the first five years of the journal, provide our annual profile of contributors, announce important changes to the editorial structure, and describe some up-coming changes to the journal to respond to its continuing expansion and development. Five years of Gender and Language Although the journal Gender and Language has been publishing now for five years, the earliest discussions of the journal occurred over a decade ago. When a number of us first discussed the proposal for the journal at the International Gender and Language Association (IGALA) conference in Lancaster in 2002, there was a debate there that echoes a long-standing one in women and gender studies – the debate about whether a separate journal would constitute a significant forum for work otherwise not fully represented, or a ghetto. Ultimately most of us decided the former. It is worth continuing to think about which kinds of articles on language and gender are submitted to or published in this journal, and which are submitted and published elsewhere. However, one of the significant accomplishments of the journal is creating space, in the kind of peer-reviewed format that counts most heavily in hiring, promotion, and tenure, for scholarship on language and gender. Our journal alone now publishes about ten articles a year, and that number is about to increase (see up-coming changes, below). In our early discussions about the journal, some scholars noted that if we were to start such a journal, we needed to use it to raise the bar on language and gender scholarship.