Date: Mon, 12 Dec 1994 11:43:12 -0500 From: Ronald Butters Subject: ADS Meeting Change I thought that I should add my comments concerning the issue of where ADS should meet. My own view is that a separate meeting is a very bad idea. THERE ARE TOO MANY CONFERENCES TO GO TO ALREADY. Adding one more will merely dilute the numbers at each meeting.For example, consider the fact that we have had much difficulty getting people to go to LSA when we have even a single sessions with LSA (as we do this year). OF COURSE we don`t have very many people who will attend the Society`s annual meting in San Diego in late December and THEN A WEEK later attend the LSA in New Orleans! Most people don`t have the time or money to attend both. However, there are going to be quite a few SOCIOlinguists at the New Orleans meeting, I`m sure. They would be more likely to join ADS if we had a full-scale meeting at LSA. Those of us who are hard-core ADS members would be more likely to attend the LSA if our main meeting were with the LSA (in which case I--and many others, I believe--would skip MLA, in which case we would have the same sort of trouble getting an MLA ADS session of even four papers; or so I predict). There have been some arguments to the effect that LAVIS was such a success, we ought to model the annual meeting on that. Nice thought, but not very much in touch with reality. LAVIS meets every TEN years, and has been able to do so only with massive outside funding. ADS has to met every year, and we aren`t going to get large-scale outside funding. We have to meet every year because we have to have an Executive Committee meeting every year and we have to have a Business meeting every year. If that isn`t in our by-laws, it certainly should be. Annual business meetings and annual Executive Committee meetings need to be scheduled to make it easiest for the members to attend. Members can most easily get institutional funds to attend meetings where their Departments are well represented--i.e., LSA or MLA. My own preference would be to go to LSA with our major annual meeting--which is where the linguistic action, by and large, is at, and which is a smaller meeting, and one which meets at a more convenient time for many. My second choice would be to stay with MLA--at least people can get funded to go there. My third choice would be to meet with NWAVE (actually, this would be my first choice if I thought that members would find it easy to get funding)--NWAVE is already the equivalent of an Independent meeting, and it at least has the virtue of having a large number of highly interesting social and regional dialect papers--the young faculty members and graduate students who in my opinion are the future of dialect study in the USA attend NWAVE on a regular basis. One final note: Somebody suggested along the way that LSA was considering Cincinnati as a possible meeting location. How could this be? Several years ago, LSA overwhelmingly passed a resolution disallowing meetings in locales which have sodomy laws. This year, the Society is stretching it by meeting in New Orleans; although New Orleans is in a state which has a sodomy law, according to Maggie Reynolds of LSA the City of New Orleans has officially declared itself on record as opposing discrimination against sexual-preference minorities. I guess that that is in the spirit of the resolution. However, since Cincinnati has recently overturned its antidiscrimination law, I don`t see how LSA could ask its gay and lesbian members to attend a meeting in a city which officially allows discrimination against them.