This leads to the second point I once made: that students no longer need to actually read the material to get impressive grades, which contributes to both student and administrator scorn for the affected disciplines. This point caused some push-back, since professors and fellow students noted that if I wasn’t reading the material, it was my own fault for not getting the full benefit of the course. I agreed, but countered that if the difference between my reading very little of the material instead of it all was a 10 to 15 percent bump in my final grade, what did that imply about the value of said material to the course? Srigley argues that less than 20 percent of his students even access the weekly readings for his courses, largely because they know they don’t have to ­– “they can get an 80 without ever opening a book.”

Srigley explores a couple of points that I touched on in my article, but didn’t fully understand. This first is what I’ve referred to as the “bullshit factor,” or the ability that my English major friends and I believed we possessed to “bamboozle” our professors with our sparkling prose and strikingly original analysis. It took me into my fourth year to realize that, in my arrogance, I hadn’t realized who was playing who. The professors saw right through our bullshit, but for various reasons were unwilling to call us on it. Instead they coddled us, encouraged us, praised us – and awarded us grades we didn’t deserve.

Um Brennu-Njрls sШgu (1991, VII).

For instance, in history and the humanities at most universities in the United States, there is a vertically integrated industry of monographs, beginning with the dissertation in graduate school—a proto-monograph—followed by the revisions to that work and the publication of it as a book to get tenure, followed by a second book to reach full professor status. Although we are beginning to see a slight liberalization of rules surrounding dissertations—in some places dissertations could be a series of essays or have digital components—graduate students infer that they would best be served on the job market by a traditional, analog monograph.

Almost by definition, academics have gotten to where they are by playing a highly scripted game extremely well.

What we did not anticipate was another kind of resistance to the web, based not on an unfamiliarity with the digital realm or on Luddism but on the remarkable inertia of traditional academic methods and genres—the more subtle and widespread biases that hinder the academy’s adoption of new media. These prejudices are less comical, and more deep-seated, than newspapers’ penchant for tales of internet addiction. This resistance has less to do with the tools of the web and more to do with the web’s culture. It was not enough for us to conclude Digital History by saying how wonderful the openness of the web was; for many academics, this openness was part of the problem, a sign that it might be like “playing tennis with the net down,” as my graduate school mentor worriedly wrote to me. ((http://www.dancohen.org/2010/11/11/frank-turner-on-the-future-of-peer-review/))

The story of Nate Silver and FiveThirtyEight has many important lessons for academia, all stemming from the affordances of the open web. His efforts show the do-it-yourself nature of much of the most innovative work on the web, and how one can iterate toward perfection rather than publishing works in fully polished states. His tale underlines the principle that good is good, and that the web is extraordinarily proficient at finding and disseminating the best work, often through continual, post-publication, recursive review. FiveThirtyEight also shows the power of openness to foster that dissemination and the dialogue between author and audience. Finally, the open web enables and rewards unexpected uses and genres.

Together, these twin pressures—the need to enhance the ties between scholars and their organizations while simultaneously doing more with less —begin to suggest that the traditional value proposition of the scholarly society, in which one becomes a member in order to receive the various communications of the society, is no longer as viable as it once was. But there isn’t a clear sense, as yet, of where the society’s value for its members today, not to mention its sources of revenue that allow it to fulfill its mission, might lie. In order to find a way forward, today’s scholarly societies must begin to think differently about their functions, their structures, and their overall goals.

The letters that were exchanged among the membership of the Royal Society in the mid-17th century, and that were later gathered into journals, gradually accrued formalized processes of review, editing, production, and distribution. In creating this new product —the scholarly journal—learned societies found one part of the financial model that would allow them to serve their larger goals. Scholars were encouraged to join and maintain their memberships in order to receive the journal. In addition to memberships made available to individuals, journal subscriptions were created for libraries, allowing academic institutions to help support the organizations that facilitated, validated, and circulated the work of their faculty members.

he web was, like scholarly societies, invented for the express purpose of supporting communication amongst researchers by allowing them to create pages on which they could share their work with one another and with the world. The difference, of course, is that the web permits any individual scholar with server access and a little bit of technical knowledge to share their work directly and immediately further diminishing their apparent need for those collectives that scholarly societies have historically provided.

Since the Royal Society of London, learned and professional societies have been created precisely in order to help facilitate communication amongst members, scholars, and between those members and the broader intellectual world. Now, early on that communication took place via meetings and letters that were sent among the membership between meetings. Over time, the meetings developed into regularly scheduled conferences, and the letters were gathered into systematically produced and distributed journals. Those journals accrued a series of formal publishing processes including, of course, editing and peer review that came to mark them as authoritative resources for developing knowledge in their fields, and those resources came not only to be valued by their original audience, the members of the society, but also by a broader range of scholars, researchers, and students. As a result, research libraries collected those journals and made them available to their patrons

It could if we had more gold, but I am here to tell you that we do not. The boom Brandon just mentioned in the sciences has passed us by. ACLS funds a lot of scholarship, and we award $15 million in fellowship and grants, but if recipients of our fellowships use stipends to pay author fees that would be trading publication costs for research time. The National Endowment for Humanities, its funding is now 29% of its peak appropriation, and an additional 49% cut has been proposed, and the House Budget Committee is considering complete elimination of all funding. If the author pays model were widely adopted in the humanities, it would increase the already problematical level of inequality in academia. Wealthy universities could pay for their faculty but scholars at public universities and smaller colleges could not expect such largesse.

They were created to name and claim an area of knowledge and to establish and monitor standards for cultivating that area. Establishing a peer-review journal was the most obvious way of doing that but there are many other ways. Prizes for books and articles, even the elections of officers themselves. Most humanities journals have two types of peer review: prepublication review of research articles and postpublication review of books and other published materials.

William Rainey Harper, the first president of the nascent University of Chicago, was aggressive in recruiting star faculty to his new campus. He would offer blandishments including one relevant to our topic this morning. If Harper really wanted someone, the president would promise the wavering scholar that he, and it was almost always a “he” in those days, would be the editor of not one but two new journals that the university press would publish: one, a journal for academic specialists, and the second, for the general public.

It is a quasi-sacred object for me, an object with which I have a long personal association. I have carried it from place to place as part of my library. My relation to this object is an example of the way so many readers of my generation and of many generations before mine have participated in a festishism of the book

C.'.',, ., ., | *l | . -_ I W ., * - I E F * -l l l l g | |! i ; i _zwF:rz_*z:0E E. _-_^s__ ___ _ _ - - . - _ | - _ _ _ ffi _ _ _l __ _ _ _ - - r I r _ _ : F_w__ _E 111 _ 1 : | 8 | __ s __ _l _ - __ _ I _ __=- _ _ I ____g - I I ._ q w , I _g g I | 11111 i I _-ist siF_ F __ - , - __ s_; _ _ E:___ X, X E E , w _ _ L w w s _ :_ : _L .. .: __ _ : -_ _ _- __ - === W. - _ _ __- _ __, ___ - _ _; __--_: __ _W - - i--W i - Wih - - - ffi m _.. _ e _ _ Wiii,i' _i --,.,q,q.,-.. _ _Iq]E - - - i F == F -| ' Ri - WqiE S - '! _i _ _ R _ _ !,,,; _i 1E.: _ :| | f _E i,,-E ___r'..; _ ; .; _,,q,i.: } =ii; ; q-d __gIIii"." iiA =_es, _w_ i _

i--W i - Wih - - - ffi m _.. _ e _ _ Wiii,i' _i --,.,q,q.,-.. _ _Iq]E - - - i F == F -| '

if 'a' is preceded by 'o': sound ? O yoare (yOr) if 'a' is preceded by 'e' and followed by 'u': sound ? O jeauntis (jOntiz)

sound ? A

dgement 379 14 Phonetic transcription software § 9 In order to pick out alliterati

d’s t

Vndir the ryallest roye of rente and renowne Now am I regent of rewle this region in reste, Obeye vnto bidding bud busshoppis me bowne And bolde men that in batayll makis brestis to breste. To me betaught is the tent this towre-begon towne, For traytoures tyte will I taynte the trewthe for to triste. The dubbyng of my dingnité may noyot be done downe, Nowdir with duke nor dugeperes, my dedis are so dreste.

Works cited Lewis, Charlton, and Charles Short. 1989. A Latin dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press.? Nara, Katariina. 2014. Word of the month: Locusts and lobsters. The Anglo-Norman words blog. Accessed March 13. http://anglonormandictionary.blogspot.co.uk/?

al Ťcathedralť li

e Ť DEAF électronique ť – un

rench – for

?

869–89

tuhl – Leib

Clustering of medieval scripts through computer image analysis: Towards an evaluation protocol

? edges = [ ? // W1, W2, W3, W4 ? [ 0, 1, 1, 0], // edges for segment 1 ? [ 1, 1, 1, 1], // " for segment 2 ? [ 0, 0, 0, 0], // " for segment 3 ? [ 0, 1, 1, -1], // " for segment 4 ? [ 1, 1, 0.3, 1] // " for segment 5 ? ]

including a CSS rule like the following in the website stylesheet: .segment:target { outline: medium solid red; } § 9 The CATview widget doe

‘

———

.?

–

AcknowledgementsThe authors thank Gene Lyman for his help in discovering the location of the XML files discussed in this article.The authors are listed in alphabetical order. The corresponding author is O'Donnell. Author contributions, described using the CASRAI CRedIT typology ("CRediT - CASRAI" 2016), are as follows (authors identifed by initials):Conceptualization: cc, sc, gd, vg, dpod;Methodology: cc, sc, gd, vg, dpod;Investigation: cc, sc, gd, vg, dpod;Resources: dpod;Writing – Original Draft Preparation: dpod on the basis of notes from cc, sc, gd, vg, dpod;Writing – Review & Editing: dpod;gdSupervision: dpod;Project Administration: vg, dpod.Works cited Bauman, Syd, and Lou Burnard. 2008. TEI P5: Guidelines for electronic text encoding and interchange. Oxford; Providence: [Text Encoding Initiative].? Berners-Lee, Tim. 1990. "The original proposal of the WWW, HTMLized." http://www.w3.org/History/1989/proposal.html? Brindley, Lynne J. 2002. "The future of libraries and Humanities research: New strategic directions for the British Library." Libraries & Culture 37.1: 26–36.? Connolly, David W. 1994. "Toward a formalism for communication on the Web." W3C. February 15.https://www.w3.org/MarkUp/html-spec/html-essay.html.? "CRediT - CASRAI." 2016. Accessed May 18. http://ref.casrai.org/CRediT.? Currall, James E. P., and Michael S. Moss. 2010. "Digital asset management." In Encyclopedia of library and information sciences, 1528–38. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=5017873.? Dahlström, Mats. 2006. "Under Utgivning: Den Vetenskapliga Utgivningens Bibliografiska Funktion." Borĺs: Valfrid. http://bada.hb.se/bitstream/2320/1738/2/MatsDahlstromSpikblad.pdf.? Earhart, Amy E. 2012. "The digital edition and the digital humanities." Textual cultures 7.1: 18–28.? "[electronic editing,digital editing]." 2016. Google Books Ngram Viewer. Accessed June 30. http://bit.ly/electronicDigitalEditingNgram.? Fulk, R. D., Robert E. Bjork, and John D. Niles, eds. 2008. Klaeber's Beowulf, fourth edition. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.? Hickes. 1705. Linguarum Vetrum Septentrionalium Thesaurus Grammatico-Criticus et Archaeologicus Auctore GEORGIO HICKESIO. Oxford.? Internet Archive. 2016. "Frequently asked questions." Internet Archive. Accessed July 4. https://archive.org/about/faqs.php.? Ker, Neil Ripley. 1990. Catalogue of manuscripts containing Anglo-Saxon. Oxford: Clarendon Press.? Kiernan, Kevin S. (1981) 1996. Beowulf and the Beowulf manuscript. New Brunswick, New Jersey:

Their editions in this respect were meant to conserve the manuscript record. Digital imaging makes it possible for editors to examine the validity of their decisions. Figure 19. Lost Text in Manuscript A case in point is the obliterated text between syđđan and ţ on fol. 179r10. Any attempt at restoration is com

t—th

repeatedly for earlier releases, including the eighteen month-old version 3.1: The third edition of Electronic Beowulf was an html application on DVD that used a Java applet and JavaScript. When first published, major internet browsers could run the html application on PCs and Macs. However, security problems with Java in Summer 2013 forced all major browsers to disable unsigned Java applets compiled with earlier versions of Java. As it was compiled in 2011, Electronic Beowulf 3.0 was then disabled. To fix the problem in 2013 we compiled a new signed applet with Mac and PC installers that moved Electronic Beowulf 3.1 from the read-only DVD to the owner's hard disk. By 2014, however, this solution was beginning to have problems, because Java kept changing its security protocols. To solve the problem, we decided to stop using Java altogether and to re-engineer Electronic Beowulf using only JavaScript. At the 49th International Congress on Medieval Studies in May 2014, Emil Iacob explained the technological issues and Andrew Prescott announced in a plenary lecture celebrating the twenty-first anniversary of Electronic Beowulf that the fourth edition would be going online in 20

http://ebeowulf.uky.edu/ebeo4.0/CD/main.html

Hélčne

sičcle

zcárate Aguilar-Amat, Pilar, Julio Escalona, Cristina Jular, and Miguel Larrańaga. 2006. Volver a nacer: historia e identidad en los monasterios de Arlanza, San Millán y Silos en el siglo XIII.” In “Feindre, leurrer, fausser: fiction et falsification dans l'Espagne médiévale, edited by C. Heusch. Special issue. Cahiers d'Études Hispaniques Médiévales 29: 359-394.? Becerro Galicano de San Millán de la Cogolla (digital edition). 2013. Accessed October 12, 2016. http://www.ehu.eus/galicano.?

XIII.” In “Feindre

.?

Notes: [1]. The classical reference for this conceptual shift is the 1991 Paris Conference Les Cartulaires (Guyotjeannin, Morelle, and Parisse 1993), which triggered a sustained wave of studies in most European countries, up to the present. French research remains the most active in this field, especially through the works of Pierre Chastang, who has proposed the term 'cartularisation' to define the emergence of cartularies as a documentary genre in the central Middle Ages (Chastang 2001, 2006). Major landmarks in the process are a number of national and international conferences and collective volumes including the Colloquium of the Commission Internationale de Diplomatique in Princeton and New York in 1999 (Kosto and Winroth 2002) and the 2002 Béziers Conference on the cartularies from southern France (Le Blévec 2006). The most recent major international meeting is the Lisboa 2015 Conference Cartularies in Medieval Europe (http://medievalcartularies.letras.ulisboa.pt/). For a more detailed contextual discussion, see (Escalona and Sirantoine 2013). [2]. The cases of multiple cartularisation have been insufficiently researched to date. Their study is a very promising avenue of research for the immediate future. In the Iberian Peninsula steps have recently been taken in this direction, as shown in the comparative study of three cases presented at the international conference entitled “Cartularies in Medieval Europe: Texts and Contexts” held in Lisbon in June 2015 (see Tinti, Peterson and Agúndez 2015). [3]. Cartulario: Spain. Ministry of Culture. National Historical Archive. AHN, Diversoso y Colecciones, Códice 998. Becerro: Spain. Ministry of Culture. National Historical Archive. AHN, Diversos y Colecciones, Códice 1375. The two codices were digitised as part of the CRELOC project, and images can be viewed at www.creloc.net (Jular Pérez-Alfaro, 2006). [4]. The Becerro plan announced that there would be eight chapters: 1) Foundation of the monastery; 2) Donations by the founders; 3) Donations from benefactors; 4) Papal and Royal Confirmations; 5) Sales and Purchases; 6) Property rights; 7) Censuses; 8) List of Abbots (Abadologio) (which probably eventually gave rise to a separate volume). AHN, Cod. 1375, fols 1v-2r. AcknowledgementsThis study was conducted with the support of the research projects of the Spanish National R & D Plan ref. HAR2013-47889-C3-2-P, led by Julio Escalona and ref. HAR2012-34756, led by Cristina Jular Pérez-Alfaro, respectively. Some preliminary aspects of this research were presented at the international conference entitled Cartularies in Medieval Europe: Texts and Contexts, held in Lisbon, Portugal, on 11-12 June, 2015 and the PraME Séminaire (Séminaire Pratiques médiévales de l'écrit) at the University of Namur, Belgium, on 3 December, 2015. The authors wish to acknowledge the criticisms and comments received from those present at these events. The draft was read by Francesca Tinti and we particularly appreciate the suggestions received from her. In the early stages of research, we benefitted from the comments and insights provided by Carmen Escalona Noguero, whom we heartedly thank. Finally we want to acknowledge the very helpful criticism received from Digital Medievalist's two anonymous readers, who have helped us greatly in defining the final version of the text. Any errors, however, are the sole responsibility of the authors.

Notes: [1]. The classical reference for this conceptual shift is the 1991 Paris Conference Les Cartulaires (Guyotje

ere repositories of documentation, to now seeing them as cultural objects worthy of study in and of themselves.[1] There has also b

nt –eve

s ‘-2’ and

maker™

ria—of

Competing interestsDuring the course of her undergraduate studies at Columbia University, the reviewer consulted with Professor Stephen Murray for academic advice. She has had, however, no part in either the design or production of the website under review.

ology” an

les—like

ing’s

tions—a pr

Hrinc

Lefčbvre

s – buil

Author:

essay will argue that creative writing represents a special and crucially important case, one where the neo-naturalism of writing technologies must necessarily break down.

If historians want to be represented on the information superhighway, they and their organizations need to become active participants in the information process, ensuring that future programs for training in the humanities do not exclude history. Without such representation, histo rians will be on the equivalent of the interstate ramps that were built before the highway itself. They will be there, hanging in the air with others speeding past, but will lack the connectivity that will make the highway a meaningful part of their academic and

I have touched briefly on what I consider to be some important sources for the newly wired historian and suggested that the challenges that this part of the humanistic disciplines face will affect other humani ties disciplines as well. I have not touched on such important topics as WAIS, an acronym for Wide Area Information System, which pro vides access to diverse information resources, or the WORLD WIDE WEB, commonly abbreviated as WWW or simply W3, a wide-area hypermedia information retrieval initiative that intends to provide universal access to Internet documents, or any of the other new tech nical innovations in existence or being planned to ease Internet access and use.

tion. Since electronic publications and/or editorial work have not, at least not as far as discussions that have appeared on the HUMANIST and other listservers suggest, achieved the same level of recognition as works published in traditional sources, some changes are needed to provide the stability that electronic res

That is clearly no longer the case. I know personally of five closed lists and was accepted as a subscriber to two of them, but their owners have requested that I reveal neither their existence nor their addresses. It is hard to discover purposely hidden resources. These five may be just hints of a trend that will result in a relatively closed system in which elite scholars, wherever they are located in the world, will utilize private and specialized mailing lists—that, by the way, do not appear in any of the general directories—as their real forum for infor mation interchange

n active listserv will generate is growing exponentially and is derived from an increasingly diverse population. As a result, the "noise" to information ratio is rising and unwanted information crowds the listserver. Even after dropping off several lists, I receive more than 100 messages a day which consume at least an hour each morning despite expediency necessitated pr

from railroads to

There are five factors involved with listservers: quantity, quality, scholarly withdrawal from general lists, cost, and the structure of the professional reward system that might affect these potentially important tools in the future

References

References

Robinson,P. (1994).TheTranscriptionof Primary TextualSourcesusing SGMI.Oxford: Office forHumanitiesCommunication

References

References

References

References

References

References

PackardHumanitiesInstitute(1992).PHICDROM FormatDescription.LosAltos, CA: PackardHumanitiesInstitute

Duggan, H. N. (1994). Creating an electronic archive of Piers Plowman.http://j efferson.village.virginia.edu/piers/report94.html

Many systems have been implemented that provide resource sharing capabilities by establish- ing "robot users" O.e., computer programs that operate continuously, without human monitoring). These programs are capable of responding to commands sent to them in electronic mail mes- sages. Users send mail to the service's network address. When the message is received and inter- preted, the program will attempt to respond to the embedded commands. In this way users can control programs operating on computers located thousands of miles away that manage access to large repositories of resource materials. Such programs can be instructed to send particular files or programs or to perform other operations, such as searching a database of information (e.g., an index for a scholarly journal). Results are returned to the user in the form of electronic mail or files sent back over the network

conference members

We also argue that CMC can have a more substantial impact on scholarship than that achieved simply in facilitating interaction. This new medium offers the opportunity to realize the advantages of oral and written discourse simultaneously, producing a text with "dialogic" qualities. Generated in on- going computer-mediated exchange between scho- lars, a dialogic text allows us to re-appropriate and preserve some of the interactive, conversational qualities of knowledge production lost since the development of printed text.

Although CMC offers great promise, its development cannot be taken for granted. Systematic and organized efforts are required to integrate the use of CMC into the communication practices of an academic community.

Empirical research has sought to determine whether CMC as a tool for scholarly communica- tion achieves its expected advantages. The earliest studies reported that participants were enthusias- tic about the medium, finding that the computer facifitated information exchange within larger groups, enhanced creative thinking and idea gen- eration, fostered more complete examination of ideas, and generated new interaction and friend- ship patterns among participants (Ferguson, 1977; Freeman, 1980; Spelt, 1971; Zinn, 1977). In one of the most extensive evaluations of interaction in "on-line communities" (Hiltz, 1984), participants reported that their scholarly contacts were broad- ened, that they better understood the research of others and how their research related to that of others, and that the conferences had clarified theoretical controversies

Any communication between people about the same thing isa common revelatory experience about informational models of that thing.Each model is a conceptual structure of abstractions formulated initially inthe mind of one of the persons who would communicate, and if the conceptsin the mind of one would-be communicator are very different from those inthe mind of another, there is no common model and no communication

The Computer as a CommunicationDevice

not a student of science fiction, I placed a query on the CompuServe science fiction forum -- I suppose that such a query might in some modest way resemble the brother Grimm's interrogation of bearers of folktale.

PACS-L @UHUPVM 1

Discussions contained in the Bitnet list PACS-L @UHUPVM 1 suggest that there is some interest in recognizing the Internet as a publica- tion, albeit an amorphous one, that might never- theless be subject to cataloging.

Ultimately, we may discover that an Internet- based system for distribution, together with the donated, institutionally subsidized, labors of au- thors and editors can result in less cost to aca- demic consumers and a greater variety of mate- rials becoming available

With the dissemination of large textual data- bases via media such as disks, authors and editors lose control over their work: users can generate subsets, modify them according to their own sense of what constitutes improvements, and even change them so as to avoid charges of plagiarism and copyright infringement.

In effect, their exchange of corre- spondence (e-mail) publicly on lists over global networks constitutes participation in a new form of publication. This dimension is central; such network communications systems as Bitnet and the Internet offer new modes of publication, often but not always with counterparts in print media.

?.

Other conventions mentioned by experienced users include keeping e-mail correspondence short, and acknowledging receipt of mail. "I hate it when I get messages with three or four questions, some of which I can handle immediately, and others which require more time," writes Jane N. Ryland, president of CAUSE, an association of university computer administrators. "If a message is more than one screen long [about 20 lines], I find it difficult to respond without first printing a copy of the message, which defeats much of the benefit of electronic messaging."

while the technology has boomed, the conventions and etiquette of computer interaction are still nascent.

e. Editors and system operators must contend with the fact that electronic transmissions, lacking even the friendly cues that attractive letterhead and a signature can provide, often seem unnecessarily harsh (Turner, 1988, p. A

he has read. The purpose of a humanistic list is not to encourage fan mail; it is to transmit ideas cleanly and clearly with as little interference from social conventions designed for face-to-face meet- ing as possible. That, of course, means that we have to d

The primary consideration in creating any efficient electronic discussion group is not technical, but social. It is not enough to amass the names of a group of individuals who may or may not be interested in the focus of the list and to tell them how to contact one another; what is needed is a core of participants who will have reasons to correspond with one another, who will introduce more people to the list, and who can be counted upon to become dependent on the discussion group they themselves create. In other words, we must first begin with a group of people who already form a social network. Then that has to be transferred to a system such as Bitnet or Internet. Finally, the whole endeavour must be supported until, through computerization, it transcends the limitations of time and space imposed on earlier forms of communicatio

can figure out how to contact anyone else on the system, or even who is available for contact, so I have undertaken to provide telecommunications resources

My own experience with the system suggests that it is better than the telephone because communications can be captured to disk and kept for reference; because the receiver of a question has time to check his/her responses; because once a message or file is sent, it is delivered immediately to the recipient's account; and because the system is funded on a subscription basis by the institu- tions, and users are not normally charged for the distance a message travels. I have used Bitnet and Internet to put together conference programs; to help write a major grant application with three other people spread over two continents; to locate and receive software one-half hour after I realized I needed it; to trade ideas and information with others working on similar projects and to learn of publication opportunities for projects on which I was currently workin

The ability to assemble ourselves quickly into groups capable of concentrating everyone's focus on a problem without the difficulties and consequences of bringing the participants together physically would seem to be the genuine successor to flight in anyone's register of the most important technological developme

y. Writing and talking are not merely tools of our trade; they are our product and our raw material and the subjects of our investiga- Patrick W. Conner is Professor of English at West Virginia University where he teaches and researches Anglo-Saxon language and literature. He is the author of Anglo-Saxon Exeter (Boydell and Brewer, 1992) and the editor of The Abingdon Chronicle, volume 12 in the Collaborative Edi- tion of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (forthcoming). He is also creator of The Beowulf Workstation, a HyperCard application to aid students in studying Beowulf. tion

"' First, humanists must be aware that they are engaging primarily in social, not technical, end

The ideal seminar, whether traditional or electronic, is a kind of long conversation, con- vened by a single person but conducted by everyone for mutual enlightenment. Its purpose is not so much to convey facts as to further under- standing of its subject, to train the minds of its participants, and so to help create a community of scholars. It is a pedagogical structure in which every member is both teacher and student

ListServ lists are sometimes called "discussion groups," and McLuhan has made the term "global village" almost unavoidable. As I have indicated, I prefer to call HUMANIST an "electronic semi- nar" (henceforth "e-seminar") and so invoke the academic metaphor of a large table around which everyone sits for the purpose of argumentation, in

Because e-mail is restricted to verbal expression, it tends to favor those with highly developed rhetorical skills (Spitzer, 1986; Adrianson and Hjelmquist, 1988, pp. 91, 96), and because it is particularly good for lively argument, it serves well the need of scholars to reach consensus

On the practical level, HUMANIST and similar groups have demonstrated that we can certainly take advantage of the new medium for traditional scholarly and academic purposes. Experience with HUMANIST suggests that the new medium, care- fully managed, may be just what is needed to foster widespread humanistic discussion and collabora- tion in a world largely indifferent to its goal

ote, we have used speech and gestures for some 50,000 years, writing for 5,000, printing for 500, the telephone for 100, but e-mail for less than two decades (1985, p. 11; Rice, 1987, p. 69). Thus it is not surprizing that although the sociology and social-psychology of groups constituted by it have been repeatedly studied during this period,4 our knowledge is s

d to our immature understanding of the new me

Nonetheless, the costs of disseminating one’s best work on an SDG are considerable.Academic success demands that scholars make contributions to the body of knowledge intheir research area. However, electronic outlets like SDGs provide little basis upon which tovalidate this success. SDGs have not been in existence long enough to instill confidence intheir institutional permanence. This is further complicated by ambiguous copyright law andcitation conventions, making the establishment of one’s claim to original ideas unclear.Unlike electronic journals, it is still unclear how institutional rewards will be distributed forthe kind of collaborative electronic scholarship takes place in ListServ-based communities.Unless lists gain more of a scholarly legitimacy, it is likely that little of traditional academicvalue, or that which can compete with the more traditional forms of scholarly production

In commenting on the development of H-Net, a consortium of close to 100 scholarlydiscussion groups with a collective membership of over 50,000 participants, Peter Knupfer,the organization’s associate director explained the value of the SDG.Knupfer (1996)notedthat SDGs have brought the information revolution to the desktops of working scholarsaround the world. SDGs have not only increased the opportunities for scholars to conversewith each other, they have pried open previously restricted fields of editing and informationmanagement. Through SDGs, the Internet is best exploited as a collective enterprise byacademics and teachers who mediate an environment many regard as forbidding and hostile.As an example of this power, H-Net is particularly illustrative of how an internationalconsortium of scholars can use these electronic networks to advance humanities and socialscience teaching and research

When the moderator takes an active role, the rates ofparticipation and user satisfaction are significantly higher

Online scholarly collaboration needs to be carefully designed, and SDGs are most useful asa collaborative medium if the group has a specific task to accomplish, a deadline to meet, anda shared cultural or knowledge base

Commentator Kat Nagel outlined a life cycle that every list seems to go through. First thereis initial enthusiasm and evangelism (where people complain about the infrequency ofpostings). This is followed by a period of growth and then community (with lots of threadsand information and willingness to help). When the number of messages increases both involume and in diversity, a certain discomfort arises (often marked by complaints that the listhas lost its central purpose). Finally, if a group of purists emerges and is allowed to ‘‘flame’’(attack ad hominem) and act self-righteously, while others leave to form groups of their own,then a complacency develops, or worse stagnation and death. If, however, the self-righteousare minimized and a balance develops between community and diversity, then a list will reachmaturity

One 1997 study found that scholars who self-select as participants inscholarly discussion groups can spend over 40% of their office hours working on the Internet,and the most popular professional uses of the Internet revolve around sending and receivingelectronic mail, both personal and list-mediated

The depth of interactivity varies widely among discussion groups. Some groups are likecocktail parties with many conversations (threads) competing. Some, like formal seminars,focus around specific topics. Some are like notice boards in the local grocery store wheremessages are pinned and left for others to read and comment on. And some groups merelyfunction as newspapers, disseminating electronic journals or computer programs, advertisingconferences or job vacancies. Many people are content to just read and listen, even in themost interactive groups, while a relatively few dominate conversations

One of the earliest nonscience scholarly uses of this technology was the listHumanist,

McCarty saw a kind of electronic seminar, whosepurpose was ‘‘not so much to convey facts as to further understanding of its subject, to trainthe minds of its participants, and so to help create a community of scholars.’’

In some ways, the exchange of correspondence publicly over these networksconstitutes a new form of publication. The posting on a list frequently resembles a letter to theeditor where someone conveys their opinions on a subjec

This lot worked at one job all life through. Byron, 'Tanner', 'Lieth 'ere interred'. They'll chisel fucking poet when they do you and that, yer cunt, 's a crude four-letter word. 'Listen, cunt!' I said, 'before you start your jeering the reason why I want this in a book 's to give ungrateful cunts like you a hearing!' A book, yer stupid cunt, 's not worth a fuck!

So what's a cri-de-coeur, cunt? Can't you speak the language that yer mam spoke. Think of 'er! Can yer only get yer tongue round fucking Greek? Go and fuck yourself with cri-de-coeur! 'She didn't talk like you do for a start!' I shouted, turning where I thought the voice had been. She didn't understand yer fucking 'art'! She thought yer fucking poetry obscene!

They're there to shock the living, not arouse the dead from their deep peace to lend support for the causes skinhead spraycans could espouse. The dead would want their desecrators caught!

Some, where kids use aerosols, use giant signs to let the people know who's forged their fetters

How many British graveyards now this May are strewn with rubbish and choked up with weeds since families and friends have gone away for work or fuller lives, like me from Leeds?

With Byron three graves on I'll not go short of company, and Wordsworth's opposite. That's two peers already, of a sort, and we'll all be thrown together if the pit,

Half this skinhead's age but with approval I helped whitewash a V on a brick wall. No one clamoured in the press for its removal or thought the sign, in wartime, rude at all.

'My father still reads the dictionary every day. He says your life depends on your power to master words.'

How many British graveyards now this May are strewn with rubbish and choked up with weeds since families and friends have gone away for work or fuller lives, like me from Leeds?

£49.07

Peake

Three or four years later, Engelbart repeated his hypertext-meets-desktop-sharing-meets-video-conferencing demo. In the audience was an MIT prof described by Andries van Dam, another east-coast prof in attendance, as among "the best and the brightest" of the early 1970s computing cognoscenti. According to van Dam, at the end of the presentation, the MIT man raised his hand and said "I don't get it - everything you've shown me today I can do on my ASR-33."

"Doug's demo was not unlike a flying saucer dropping out of the sky and landing on the White House lawn,Â" Saffo continues. Â"It just electrified this industry because it showed people the potential of computers that they never considered."

Engelbart was the very image of a test pilot for a new kind of vehicle that doesn't fly over geographical territory but through what was heretofore an abstraction that computer scientists call "information space."

process hierarchies

People say that the 1968 Fall Joint Computer Conference in San Francisco was a watershed. After seeing your demonstration, people left that room never thinking about computers the same way again. Would you say that's an accurate encapsulation?

The Scholarly Commons is a consensus among knowledge producers and users that

If we truly wish to transform scholarly communication on a global scale, then we need to be open and honest about what that entails. As much as we declare the importance of openness and transparency for our research, we should be doing the same in our scholarly communication discourse. The conversation needs to be an actual conversation and not a one-way soliloquy from the global north that gets imported colonial-style to the global south. There needs to be a dialogue, real dialogue, that decenters white North American and Western European values and knowledge creation. Those of us from the global north need to acknowledge the harm our neoliberal colonizing has done to scholarship around the world and take responsibility. Then, we need to step back and listen. Maybe instead of always having these kind of meetings in places like Madrid or San Diego, let’s schedule events in Dhaka or Lilongwe. (Don’t know where those places are? Well, that’s part of the problem. Look it up!) Let’s truly transform and radicalize scholarly communication by decolonizing these conversations.

Thebeliefinsomethingcalled‘thecrisisofthemonograph’isoftenvoicedbutnotgreatlyexamined.

v

According to the language periodical Språktidningen, ‘hen’ was by 2014 used once in the Swedish media for every 300 used of ‘hon’ or ‘han’, up from one in every 13,000 in 2011

A Swedish headteacher has been reported to the country’s Equality Ombudsman for refusing to use ‘hen’, the new gender-neutral pronoun, in what could be a landmark case for transgender rights.

The Swedish school system has wholeheartedly, and probably too quickly and eagerly, embraced this new agenda. Last fall, 200 teachers attended a major government-sponsored conference discussing how to avoid "traditional gender patterns" in schools. At Egalia, one model Stockholm preschool, everything from the decoration to the books and toys are carefully selected to promote a gender-equal perspective and to avoid traditional presentations of gender and parenting roles

acceptable for parents to, say, name a girl Jack or a boy Lisa

Activists are lobbying for parents to be able to choose any name for their children (there are currently just 170 legally recognized unisex names in Sweden).

"ip," "nis," and "hiser"

"It maximises the student's ability to control their identity," says Keith Williams, the university's registrar, who helped to launch the updated student information system in 2009

For example, when new students attended orientation sessions at American University in Washington DC a few months ago, they were asked to introduce themselves with their name, hometown, and preferred gender pronoun (sometimes abbreviated to PGP).

“We introduce ourselves with the pronouns we use and explain why that’s done,” they said. “Literally from the day that students step on campus for the first time, we want them to know about nonbinary pronouns and that we are not going to assume their pronouns.”

“My name is Aubri and I use they/them pronouns, what pronouns do you use?” Drake said. “It should be part of social interaction.”

The use of they/them to identify a single person, rather than two or more people, has not been without controversy.Maryland state education official Andy Smarick made headlines earlier this month after sharing his thoughts via Twitter on Merriam-Webster Dictionary’s use of the singular “they” when referring to one of the dictionary’s staffers.“The singular they is an affront to grammar. Language rules are all that separates us from animals. We. Must. Stand. Firm,” Smarick wrote in a tweet that has since been deleted.The dictionary retorted in a tweet: “Then you’re talking to the wrong dictionary — we’re descriptivists. We follow language, language doesn’t follow us.”

Wald settled on ey/em — a pronoun set that comes from the ends of the words “they” and “them.”“Now when I introduce my pronouns, I usually say ‘ey/em, or anything else gender-neutral,’” ey said.

We still need deliberate effort to remove sexism – like the Washington Post’s recent move from she/he to they as their default pronoun.

Jane Austen uses they in the singular 75 times in Pride and Prejudice (1813) and as Rosalind muses in 1848’s Vanity Fair: “A person can’t help their birth.”

Around 1809, Samuel Taylor Coleridge rejected “he” as the generic pronoun (“in order to avoid particularising man or woman, or in order to express either sex indifferently”, he wrote in his notebooks), settling on “it” as an ideal, neutral solution

heesh

Shakespeare followed in 1594, in The Comedy of Errors: “There’s not a man I meet but doth salute me/As if I were their well-acquainted friend”

At the start of 2016, the good folks of the American Dialect Society got together to crown their Word of the Year. They (see what I’m doing here) have decided that the word could now be used as a singular pronoun, flexing the English language so a plural could denote a singular, genderless, individual.

Geoffrey Chaucer in 1395, who wrote in The Pardoner’s Tale: “And whoso fyndeth hym out of swich blame, They wol come up…”