Response and Rejoinder to Perley's ‘Zombie Linguistics’

It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than a linguist to pass through the ‘Perley Gates’: A response to Perley's ‘Zombie Linguistics’

Dados Bibliográficos

ID11610832
AutoresJ Nash (0000-0001-8312-5711, autor correspondente)
Ano2013
Volume23
Fascículo1
Páginas107-113
Data de publicação2013-03-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessNão
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoAnthropological Forum (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0066-4677 • E-ISSN: 1469-2902
EditoraTaylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/00664677.2012.752717
OpenAlexW1966564608
IdiomaEN
Referências citadas13

While many of the issues put forward by Perley (2012) regarding Zombie Linguistics,endangered languages, and processes of language documentation are perennial and his concerns accurate, there are several points in his argument which require deeper consideration. It is possible that Perley has argued these stances because professionally he is an anthropologist who has taken a linguistic approach to documenting a single language (Maliseet) and then holds that these methods are applicable to all, or at least most, language documentation and revival situations

Art · Linguistics · Sociology · World Wide Web · Zombie · Computer Science · History · Linguistic Variation and Morphology · Linguistics, Language Diversity, and Identity · Multilingual Education and Policy · Philosophy