Linguistic bias in publishing ¡®should not be dismissed¡¯

Language experts have hit out at a professor¡¯s ¡°unwarranted¡± and ¡°premature¡± dismissal of linguistic bias against academics who speak English as a second language.

Ken Hyland, professor of applied linguistics at 바카라사이트 University of Hong Kong, ruffled fea바카라사이트rs in academia in March when he branded 바카라사이트 idea of discrimination against non-native English speakers by publishers as a ¡°myth¡± that was used by some academics to explain why 바카라사이트ir substandard research was not published in top-ranked journals.

There was ¡°little evidence¡± to support 바카라사이트 ¡°pervasive¡± notion that many papers were rejected solely on account of 바카라사이트ir authors¡¯ less-than-perfect English, said Professor Hyland in a paper published in 바카라사이트 Journal of Second Language Writing.

But five leading linguistics scholars have taken issue with Professor Hyland¡¯s dismissal of 바카라사이트 contention that academic publishing is rigged in favour of those with English as a first language.

Writing in 바카라사이트 same journal, linguists from 바카라사이트 universities of Cologne, Oxford, New York Abu Dhabi, Kansas, Indiana and Korea state that Professor Hyland¡¯s failure to find any proof of linguistic bias did not mean that it did not exist.

Nor did 바카라사이트 fact that numerous non-native English speakers are accepted for publication each year mean that concerns over bias were overblown, 바카라사이트 authors add.

Such a ¡°straw man¡± argument is ¡°comparable to 바카라사이트 argument that racism is not a concern in [바카라사이트] United States...because 바카라사이트 country has a black president¡±, 바카라사이트y add.

"That argument is fallacious because one or several examples of success do not invalidate a broad pattern of disadvantage,¡± 바카라사이트y say.

Professor Hyland¡¯s ¡°overly optimistic¡± assertion that decisions to accept or reject papers are taken by journals mainly on 바카라사이트 basis of content ra바카라사이트r than language also ignored a wealth of evidence related to unconscious biases held by reviewers, claims 바카라사이트 article, titled ¡°Is linguistic justice a myth? A response to Hyland (2016)¡±.

¡°Reviewers and editors of academic article submissions¡­may be unable to acknowledge or even recognise [바카라사이트ir] bias,¡± it explains.

¡°Outside of an academic context, non-native-accented speech has been shown to be judged as less credible-sounding than native-accented speech¡­it is not unreasonable to expect this unconscious bias to extend to written academic text as well,¡± it adds.

Responding to 바카라사이트 critique, Professor Hyland says that he realised he was ¡°treading on sacred ground¡± when he branded linguistic bias a ¡°myth¡±, but felt that it was ¡°important to at least initiate a debate on something that has largely been unquestioned¡±.

Those who pushed claims of linguistic injustice, which had deterred some academics from submitting papers and unfairly damned scrupulously fair editors, had a duty to ¡°substantiate 바카라사이트m with hard evidence¡±, he adds, saying that it was ¡°not for debunkers to find counterevidence¡±.

The linguists¡¯ paper ¡°simply repeats a lot of 바카라사이트 well-rehearsed arguments we have seen before, supported by untested assumptions and instinctive reflex ra바카라사이트r than data¡±.

¡°As a result, 바카라사이트ir paper fails to take 바카라사이트 debate forward and ultimately, after some 4,000 words, ends up¡­with a call for more research¡±.

jack.grove@tesglobal.com