Language, a journal of the Linguistic Society of America (LSA), has appeared continuously since 1925 (4 issues per year). It publishes scholarly articles that report on original research covering the field of linguistics broadly, thus treating topics that include, among others, linguistic theory (phonology, morphology, syntax, and semantics); language description; language in its social setting; the history of individual languages; language acquisition; experimentation on language perception, production, and processing; computational modeling of language; and the history of linguistics. Language also publishes research reports, discussion notes, and reviews and, beginning in 2013, has expanded to include digital content in four online-only sections: Perspectives, Phonological Analysis, Language and Public Policy, and Teaching Linguistics. Language also included the LSA Bulletin newsletter as a supplement from 1930 - 1969.
THE LINGUISTIC SOCIETY OF AMERICA (LSA) was founded in 1924 for the advancement of the scientific study of language. The Society serves its nearly 5,000 individual members, institutional subscribers and the larger linguistics community through its scholarly meetings, publications, linguistic institutes, professional development programs, and special activities designed to advance the discipline. An interest in linguistics is the only requirement for membership. The LSA works to educate and inform the broader public about the unique role of human language and the value of linguistic research in understanding that role.
This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
For terms and use, please refer to our
Language
© 1952 Linguistic Society of America