Thu 10 May 2007
The ‘Endowment Fund’ – A letter to the Herald
Posted by jangari under Environment, Indigenous, Linguistics
[6] Comments
Posted to the Herald’s letters page on Thursday.
~
Thursday’s editorial on the budget and tertiary education overlooked a serious point. The estimated $304 million annual harvest will be divided up among the universities at the government’s discretion.
Under past Ministers such as Nelson and Kemp, funding for tertiary programs have gradually moved from quality research in worthy areas, such as the anthropological and linguistic documentation of Australian and international cultures, an area in which I am heavily involved, towards those areas that are ‘commercially applicable’, those that generate immediate monetary return for their investment.
I would think that if the Howard government were re-elected later this year, we may see this trend continue with a further bias towards, say, pharmaceutical research and development, which would ordinarily be privately sponsored, at the expense of programs that are vitally important, yet are not immediately profitable.
In an era that is witnessing the most rapid loss of indigenous language and culture, among other areas, than any other time in history, I seriously question whether this is the right way to go.
~
I haven’t attempted writing to the Herald in a while, and when I do they rarely get published. Then, if they do, they’re usually edited for space constraints. But since 300 editorial staff have gone on an indefinitely long strike over the sacking of 35 people as of today, editing letters may not be their priority right now.
<update>
It got in. Yay.
</update>

May 11th, 2007 at 12:02 am
IRT? Really?!? And you call yourself a linguist?!?!? You can’t even recognize blogspeak when you see it….sheesh.
IRT= In Regards To
It started in the online-forum world where it’s a bit more difficult to keep different conversations in order. It quickly made the jump to blogging when people started responding to multiple comments within the same comment.
EX: IRT SallyBlogger: Blah blah blah blah
IRT JoeBlowBlogger: Blah blah blah blah
There ya’ go. Your history lesson for the day.
[that's the blogging symbol for winking....just so you're not confused.]
May 11th, 2007 at 7:58 am
Cassie, the antipodean blogging tradition has its roots more in the British Memorandum nomenclature rather than internet chatspeak, the latter of which is noted mainly for its acronyms. Thus, we use Re: and not IRT. I’m sure Michael has more to say about this.
Well, alright, I am being perhaps a little bit facetious, and trying to rationalise my irrational fear of utterly unpronounceable acronyms and initialisms.
Cassie is writing in reply to a comment of mine on another blog, in case anyone thinks they missed something. Another violation of blog etiquette! (S’alright Cassie, I don’t mind)
May 11th, 2007 at 9:35 am
Congrats on getting your letter in the paper. That’s great.
(Also, thanks for explaining the bit about the IRT comment business. I was among the confused. Which is not all that unusual, actually.)
May 11th, 2007 at 3:25 pm
Thanks Alejna, it got second-from-prime position.
May 15th, 2007 at 2:34 pm
I love the new header background image (liked the last one too)!
May 15th, 2007 at 2:44 pm
Thanks Bulanjdjan. There are plenty more too, I’ll be changing them every few days or so.
And… after August, I should have many many more!