At 12:02 AM 9/11/2002 +0200, you wrote:
>As Julia's message about the TEI, Geoffrey's about ACH and mine about ALLC
>would
>show, there are quite a few fields of collaboration already and there are
>quite a few goals
>which one association alone cannot realise. I still think, it would be
>really helpful if some
>sort of table could be created where these things would be visualised in
>an accessible way
>and which could be filled in as we go along with our discussion. I am sure
>that more goals
>for example could pop up.
I'll take that one on, but it will take me a little while to get that
up--next week, at the earliest.
>Now, lets perhaps look at the question from another point. I am for
>example also a member of
>the German Association for Applied Linguistics which itself as all the
>other regional chapters
>is member of AILA, some sort of umbrella organisation but which is acting
>also as such on a
>world wide level by organising really big conferences. I do not know
>whether we would like to
>go for the last bit if we talk about synergies, but a combination of
>regional and global structure
>could be something to think about.
I agree, emphatically--I think this is the model we should be working
on. Regional associations have their own identity, but are part of a
larger organization that provides some services, some economies of
scale. One advantage of this model is also, as I may have said, that it
could provide easier ways to bootstrap new regional chapters (a humanities
computing organization for Australia, for Japan, etc.).
>If we take up this question then we have to think straight
>away also about what position we take to languages and cultures.
As a matter of principle, yes.
J.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Sep 10 2002 - 19:32:02 EDT