A Linguistlist posting by Stefan Müller, “Glossa: a journal of general linguistics is the new Lingua” :

Today I have heard of a quite dramatic change for our field: all 6 editors of Lingua resigned and all 31 members of the editorial board resigned as well.

They will start a new journal called: Glossa: a journal of general linguistics.

The new journal will work under the conditions of fair OA:

– The editorial board owns the title of the journals.
– The author owns the copyright of his articles, and a CC-BY license applies.
– All articles are published in Full Open Access (no subscriptions, no ‘double dipping’).
– Article processing charges (APCs) are low (around 400 euros), transparent, and in proportion to the work carried out by the publisher.

As for the new journal, APCs are covered by the Dutch government and later by Open Lib Humanities.

I think transferring the journal to Fair OA is a very good move into the right direction towards scholarly owned journals and book outlets.

I think so too; long live open access, down with predatory publishers!

Update. See now Scott Jaschik’s story for Inside Higher Ed, with further details and quotes. (Thanks, Nick!)


  1. Yet another linguistics journal called Glossa?

  2. Great news! And wow, no pussyfooting around in that email when it comes to the author’s feelings about Elsevier. The wheels of justice etc.

  3. In the next message on that thread, Müller had to tone it down:

    Just learned that the editors have contracts runing for half a year and
    that Lingua has to phase out. So I will continue to do reviewing till
    Mai 2016 and it would be helpful if others did this too.

    Best wishes

  4. Down with Elsevile and all their works!

  5. Yet another linguistics journal called Glossa?

    Yes, that struck me too. A little imagination, people!

  6. Compared with “Lingua”, “Glossa” is refreshingly distinctive….

  7. “Glotta”?

  8. Glossy?

    This seems a good move, but other publications are going in the opposite direction. Pacific Linguistics, long published by The ANU, is now published by De Gruyter-Mouton, and the pub agreements are far less author-friendly than the old PL agreements used to be. The old PL used to assign copyright to each author, but Mouton now routinely removes copyright from the author. On the plus side, the entire archives of PL have been digitized and are now available online.

  9. “Glotta”?

    Too late:

  10. ə de vivre says

    How about ‘Lisan’ or ‘Eme‘?

    The move to open access kinda seems inevitable, given how many academics already make available online on their own. The size of the market has bought them some time, but I imagine the rights holders over at Elsevier and its ilk are just trying to squeeze as much money out of their racket as possible until they go the way of Tower Records.

  11. I vote for EME.GIR.

  12. Heh. Nipped at the wire by ə de vivre!

  13. ə de vivre says

    Great minds and all that.

  14. I imagine the rights holders over at Elsevier and its ilk are just trying to squeeze as much money out of their racket as possible until they go the way of Tower Records.

    You mean, holding on in a few last redoubts in Japan?! Nooooo

    But seriously, even once everyone gets with the program and at least switches to non-evil publishers, the real question is what happens to all the IP that the devils we know have accumulated over the years? As far as I can see our only hope to get those gates open is a buyout by some philanthropic zillionaire.

  15. ə de vivre says

    Have you heard of/seen the Tower Records Documentary? I’ve only heard the director talk about it in interviews, but it’s been pretty favourably received.

  16. ə de vivre says

    Hmm, the software didn’t like my imdb link. Maybe anti-spam protection? Anyways, it’s called “All Things Must Pass: The Rise and Fall of Tower Records” (

  17. This is Languagehat post #5600.

    (throws non-existent hat in the air in celebration)

Speak Your Mind