![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
so many different kinds of linguists
Sitting outside Mike's office, listening to him have a meeting with some of his undergrad students, and I'm using a windows machine to edit our linguistics project paper in Word.
Mm, Word.
My teammates sent me a nearly-complete paper, very nice of them. It was like 12 pages (cut down from 16!) about clitic pronoun placement in Spanish, with little bits about how we made it go with OpenCCG. I'm expanding out the parts that describe our implementation. I get the impression that they come from a very different academic culture -- even the paper-writing feels different. So many citations right there inline (Chomsky 1988; Rudnick 2010); they want you to know for sure where this work sits in the history of linguists who've worked on Spanish clitics.
Have we had this conversation before, about paper style?
I like the one-column approach. That's something that I wish CS papers did more often.
Mm, Word.
My teammates sent me a nearly-complete paper, very nice of them. It was like 12 pages (cut down from 16!) about clitic pronoun placement in Spanish, with little bits about how we made it go with OpenCCG. I'm expanding out the parts that describe our implementation. I get the impression that they come from a very different academic culture -- even the paper-writing feels different. So many citations right there inline (Chomsky 1988; Rudnick 2010); they want you to know for sure where this work sits in the history of linguists who've worked on Spanish clitics.
Have we had this conversation before, about paper style?
I like the one-column approach. That's something that I wish CS papers did more often.
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
no subject
(no subject)