Students Mourn Dept.

A Harvard department is dying for the first time in almost four decades, drawing the expected ire of students and faculty while generating uncertainty about the future of a discipline that has existed for just 36 years.

The Department of Linguistics, now slated to become a committee, is at the center of a debate over whether linguistics should be treated as a distinct field or as part of an interdisciplinary approach to education.

The administration's decision last spring to change the status of the department is now facing strong defiance from students and faculty as well as national experts on linguistics, raising questions about how difficult it can be to kill a department.

The Yale powers-that-be tried to kill their linguistics department last year for budget reasons, only to fail after suffering continued attacks from students and faculty. Other schools are actually expanding their linguistic departments, reflecting the field's increasing popularity nationwide, scholars say.

And at Harvard, top deans say the linguisticsmove was pushed by ideology, not budgetaryconcerns.

In part for this reason, perhaps, even ifHarvard's department has only two seniorprofessors and 30 concentrators, the din ofprotest will not be quiet.

Yesterday, top administrators met withconcerned linguistics students about the future ofthe department.

Dean of the Faculty Jeremy R. Knowles, Dean ofthe Graduate School of Arts and Sciences andacting chair of the department Christoph J. Wolffand Dean of Undergraduate Education Lawrence Buelleach had meetings with Genevieve Roach '94, JoelL. Derfner '95 and Glenn Davis '95.

Derfner and Roach say they wanted to find outwhy the administration made the decision totransform the department, and to explain why theyand the 28 other undergraduate linguisticsconcentrators are opposed to the decision.

"[Buell] was certainly receptive to us," saidRoach. "I think he understands what linguistics isa lot more now...why it's not an interdisciplinaryfield."

The interdisciplinary nature of linguistics hasbeen one of the main issues of contention over thedecision.

The administration has said that "thefundamental interdisciplinary nature oflinguistics suggests that an instructional programin linguistics could...be conducted under theauspices of a more broadly based faculty committeerather than a small department."

But scholars in the field have denied thatlinguistics is "inherently interdisciplinary,"saying instead that it has its own independentacademic validity.

"The administration doesn't get it straight,"said Treasurer-Secretary of the LinguisticsSociety of America (LSA) Frederick Newmeyer. "Itis true that linguistics has implications in otherfields, but that doesn't mean [it] is not adepartment on its own."

The LSA, which is the largest linguisticssociety in the world, sent a letter Wednesdaycriticizing the administration's decision.

Knowles, who had not yet received the letter,presented the administration's defense of thedecision that same day, saying that the bestinterests of the students are their main concern.

"After lengthy discussion with the academicdeans, there has been recognition that thedepartment is not serving the students' bestinterest," Knowles said.

Yesterday Buell echoed Knowles, saying, "In myopinion, its possible for a committee structure toserve the needs of the undergraduates quitewell...I will try to ensure that Harvardundergraduates continue the study of linguisticsin substantial ways."

Derfner, who met with Wolff and Knowles, saidhe was not as pleased with their responses, whichhe said were vague save for Wolff's comment that adistinguished visiting linguist would be coming toHarvard next fall.

"I basically wanted to ask them questions,"said Derfner. "The problem was that the morespecific my questions got, the more vague theiranswers got."

The main questions raised by students andprofessors this week are logistical andintellectual: What kind of committee will beinstituted? How will the basic linguistic coursesbe taught? And will this, in effect, mean theimpoverishment of linguistics at Harvard?

The answers are not yet clear, but anadvisory committee formed this fall intends toprovide them.

According to current University rules, if adepartment is dissolved, it must be replaced by anundergraduate degree committee, a graduate degreecommittee, or an interdisciplinary degreecommittee.

Opponents of the change say theinterdisciplinary committee is the worst optionbecause it would not have the authority to assignany formal degree to either undergraduates orgraduates.

"The exact one of these paths remains to berecommended," says Buell, a member of the advisorycommittee. The advisory committee, chaired byProfessor of Philosophy Warren D. Goldfarb '69,expects to make its recommendation this spring.

And it has been a while--almost fourdecades--since Harvard had to choose another pathfor a department.

"The action is quite unusual," says GraduateSchool of Arts and Sciences Administrative DeanJohn B. Fox Jr. '59. "The last time a departmentceased to be, according to lore, was theDepartment of Geography, 30 or 40 years ago...Thisdoesn't happen much."

"It's a healthy thing for an institution toshow willingness to reexamine and alter itsexisting structure from time to time," says Buell,who also referred to the change as quite unusual."It is a combination of phasing down in one sensebut a metamorphosis in another."

The reallocation of linguistic resources willbe incorporated into other departments such asclassics, English, romance languages, Slavic, NearEastern languages and civilizations, psychologyand computer science, Wolff said in a letter sentto all members of the department during thesummer.

"We have many more resources within the Facultyof Arts and Sciences...and many more facultyinterested [in linguistics] than are brought tobear," said Knowles. "We are concerned with usingthese resources as best we can."

The administration has cited a"multiplicity of problems" that prompted thedecision to transform the department, but deanshave not been clear on what "problems" beset thedepartment.

"Buell claimed that the department had not beenable to get the appointment of a seniorprofessor...and that suggests a lack of integrityof the department," Roach says.

But opponents of the change say the departmentis on solid enough ground, and that the move willquite plainly weaken the discipline of linguisticsat Harvard.

"We felt it was in fact an unfortunate move,"says Noam Chomsky, MIT professor of linguisticsand widely considered the founder of modernlinguistics. "The Harvard department has beenstrong and active...This is...another way ofsaying the program will disappear."

"The strengths of the currently existingdepartment at Harvard--the scholarship andrenown...the vitality of the junior and visitingprofessors...the strength of the undergraduate andgraduate products of the department...are not tobe abandoned lightly," said Yale's linguisticsdepartment chair Lawrence R. Horn in a letter ofcomplaint to Wolff.

Thomas Professor of Linguistics and ClassicsCalvert Watkins, one of the two department seniorprofessors, says, "A field of learning is going tobe marginalized at Harvard, and is going todeprive some of the best students Harvard has."

At Yale, the linguistics department wasseverely jeopardized in January 1992 when arestructuring committee recommended to disband thedepartment and reallocate its resources into otherdepartments.

And according to Horn, the administrativepretext at Harvard is similar to the one presentedat Yale last year. But in Yale's case, saidHorn--who is also on the executive committee ofthe LSA--the administration was moving to cutcosts, dropping several departments.

Despite Yale's budget-cutting maneuvers,however, the linguistics department survived inthe end, as an ad hoc committee told Yale whatnational experts are trying to tell Harvard: It isimpossible to maintain a coherent, systematicprogram of linguistics at a major institution ifthe resources of the department are redistributed.

"The Linguistics Department at Harvard seems tohave been singled out," Horn says. "[Professor ofLinguistics Susumu] Kuno and Watkins are close toretirement and there is no commitment to thejunior professors...They [Harvard administrators]don't see a downside to this decision."

Horn says the Harvard and Yale administrations"feel as if they know best...and they're not goingto be dissuaded by experts."

"If there's not a department," says Horn,"there needs to be a program with its ownbudgetary lines."

The problem with a committee instead of adepartment, said Horn, is that it will not havethe power to make its own administrative decisionsor to appoint its own professors.

The linguistics program at MIT, which is ajoint linguistics and philosophy department, isvery strong, says Horn, because, first of all, ithas excellent professors, and second it is able tomake its own administrative decisions.

"Linguists are in charge of making thedecisions of faculty and staffing," said Horn.

And at Rutgers University, the linguisticsprogram is actually expanding--with several newappointments in the last five years.

"There's been a lot of pressure here to do awaywith linguistics," says Jean Ritzke-Rutherford,professor of linguistics at Rutgers. "I think I'vesuccessfully countered it."

"We are going in the opposite direction [asHarvard]," says Jane B. Grimshaw, chair of theRutgers linguistics department. "It's not the casethat the department is diminishing here."

"I'm surprised that this is happening at auniversity with the reputation of Harvard," saidGrimshaw. "They have some very good people."CrimsonJohn C. MitchellLinguistics concentrators JOEL L. DERFNER'95 and GENEVIEVE ROACH '94.

And at Harvard, top deans say the linguisticsmove was pushed by ideology, not budgetaryconcerns.

In part for this reason, perhaps, even ifHarvard's department has only two seniorprofessors and 30 concentrators, the din ofprotest will not be quiet.

Yesterday, top administrators met withconcerned linguistics students about the future ofthe department.

Dean of the Faculty Jeremy R. Knowles, Dean ofthe Graduate School of Arts and Sciences andacting chair of the department Christoph J. Wolffand Dean of Undergraduate Education Lawrence Buelleach had meetings with Genevieve Roach '94, JoelL. Derfner '95 and Glenn Davis '95.

Derfner and Roach say they wanted to find outwhy the administration made the decision totransform the department, and to explain why theyand the 28 other undergraduate linguisticsconcentrators are opposed to the decision.

"[Buell] was certainly receptive to us," saidRoach. "I think he understands what linguistics isa lot more now...why it's not an interdisciplinaryfield."

The interdisciplinary nature of linguistics hasbeen one of the main issues of contention over thedecision.

The administration has said that "thefundamental interdisciplinary nature oflinguistics suggests that an instructional programin linguistics could...be conducted under theauspices of a more broadly based faculty committeerather than a small department."

But scholars in the field have denied thatlinguistics is "inherently interdisciplinary,"saying instead that it has its own independentacademic validity.

"The administration doesn't get it straight,"said Treasurer-Secretary of the LinguisticsSociety of America (LSA) Frederick Newmeyer. "Itis true that linguistics has implications in otherfields, but that doesn't mean [it] is not adepartment on its own."

The LSA, which is the largest linguisticssociety in the world, sent a letter Wednesdaycriticizing the administration's decision.

Knowles, who had not yet received the letter,presented the administration's defense of thedecision that same day, saying that the bestinterests of the students are their main concern.

"After lengthy discussion with the academicdeans, there has been recognition that thedepartment is not serving the students' bestinterest," Knowles said.

Yesterday Buell echoed Knowles, saying, "In myopinion, its possible for a committee structure toserve the needs of the undergraduates quitewell...I will try to ensure that Harvardundergraduates continue the study of linguisticsin substantial ways."

Derfner, who met with Wolff and Knowles, saidhe was not as pleased with their responses, whichhe said were vague save for Wolff's comment that adistinguished visiting linguist would be coming toHarvard next fall.

"I basically wanted to ask them questions,"said Derfner. "The problem was that the morespecific my questions got, the more vague theiranswers got."

The main questions raised by students andprofessors this week are logistical andintellectual: What kind of committee will beinstituted? How will the basic linguistic coursesbe taught? And will this, in effect, mean theimpoverishment of linguistics at Harvard?

The answers are not yet clear, but anadvisory committee formed this fall intends toprovide them.

According to current University rules, if adepartment is dissolved, it must be replaced by anundergraduate degree committee, a graduate degreecommittee, or an interdisciplinary degreecommittee.

Opponents of the change say theinterdisciplinary committee is the worst optionbecause it would not have the authority to assignany formal degree to either undergraduates orgraduates.

"The exact one of these paths remains to berecommended," says Buell, a member of the advisorycommittee. The advisory committee, chaired byProfessor of Philosophy Warren D. Goldfarb '69,expects to make its recommendation this spring.

And it has been a while--almost fourdecades--since Harvard had to choose another pathfor a department.

"The action is quite unusual," says GraduateSchool of Arts and Sciences Administrative DeanJohn B. Fox Jr. '59. "The last time a departmentceased to be, according to lore, was theDepartment of Geography, 30 or 40 years ago...Thisdoesn't happen much."

"It's a healthy thing for an institution toshow willingness to reexamine and alter itsexisting structure from time to time," says Buell,who also referred to the change as quite unusual."It is a combination of phasing down in one sensebut a metamorphosis in another."

The reallocation of linguistic resources willbe incorporated into other departments such asclassics, English, romance languages, Slavic, NearEastern languages and civilizations, psychologyand computer science, Wolff said in a letter sentto all members of the department during thesummer.

"We have many more resources within the Facultyof Arts and Sciences...and many more facultyinterested [in linguistics] than are brought tobear," said Knowles. "We are concerned with usingthese resources as best we can."

The administration has cited a"multiplicity of problems" that prompted thedecision to transform the department, but deanshave not been clear on what "problems" beset thedepartment.

"Buell claimed that the department had not beenable to get the appointment of a seniorprofessor...and that suggests a lack of integrityof the department," Roach says.

But opponents of the change say the departmentis on solid enough ground, and that the move willquite plainly weaken the discipline of linguisticsat Harvard.

"We felt it was in fact an unfortunate move,"says Noam Chomsky, MIT professor of linguisticsand widely considered the founder of modernlinguistics. "The Harvard department has beenstrong and active...This is...another way ofsaying the program will disappear."

"The strengths of the currently existingdepartment at Harvard--the scholarship andrenown...the vitality of the junior and visitingprofessors...the strength of the undergraduate andgraduate products of the department...are not tobe abandoned lightly," said Yale's linguisticsdepartment chair Lawrence R. Horn in a letter ofcomplaint to Wolff.

Thomas Professor of Linguistics and ClassicsCalvert Watkins, one of the two department seniorprofessors, says, "A field of learning is going tobe marginalized at Harvard, and is going todeprive some of the best students Harvard has."

At Yale, the linguistics department wasseverely jeopardized in January 1992 when arestructuring committee recommended to disband thedepartment and reallocate its resources into otherdepartments.

And according to Horn, the administrativepretext at Harvard is similar to the one presentedat Yale last year. But in Yale's case, saidHorn--who is also on the executive committee ofthe LSA--the administration was moving to cutcosts, dropping several departments.

Despite Yale's budget-cutting maneuvers,however, the linguistics department survived inthe end, as an ad hoc committee told Yale whatnational experts are trying to tell Harvard: It isimpossible to maintain a coherent, systematicprogram of linguistics at a major institution ifthe resources of the department are redistributed.

"The Linguistics Department at Harvard seems tohave been singled out," Horn says. "[Professor ofLinguistics Susumu] Kuno and Watkins are close toretirement and there is no commitment to thejunior professors...They [Harvard administrators]don't see a downside to this decision."

Horn says the Harvard and Yale administrations"feel as if they know best...and they're not goingto be dissuaded by experts."

"If there's not a department," says Horn,"there needs to be a program with its ownbudgetary lines."

The problem with a committee instead of adepartment, said Horn, is that it will not havethe power to make its own administrative decisionsor to appoint its own professors.

The linguistics program at MIT, which is ajoint linguistics and philosophy department, isvery strong, says Horn, because, first of all, ithas excellent professors, and second it is able tomake its own administrative decisions.

"Linguists are in charge of making thedecisions of faculty and staffing," said Horn.

And at Rutgers University, the linguisticsprogram is actually expanding--with several newappointments in the last five years.

"There's been a lot of pressure here to do awaywith linguistics," says Jean Ritzke-Rutherford,professor of linguistics at Rutgers. "I think I'vesuccessfully countered it."

"We are going in the opposite direction [asHarvard]," says Jane B. Grimshaw, chair of theRutgers linguistics department. "It's not the casethat the department is diminishing here."

"I'm surprised that this is happening at auniversity with the reputation of Harvard," saidGrimshaw. "They have some very good people."CrimsonJohn C. MitchellLinguistics concentrators JOEL L. DERFNER'95 and GENEVIEVE ROACH '94.