区域协会在MLA中的地位

W. D. Schaefer
{"title":"区域协会在MLA中的地位","authors":"W. D. Schaefer","doi":"10.1353/rmr.1972.0011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The MLA has approximately 30,000 members, of which fewer than 20 percent (only some 5,000) also belong to one of the regional associations. The six regional associations have a combined membership of approximately 10,000, so it follows that the other 5,000 regional members (roughly 50 percent) do not belong to the national MLA. Now, these are very interesting figures; the only problem is that I am not at all sure, even with a heavy dose of \"roughlys\" and \"approximatelys,\" that they are accurate enough to be useful in any way. I didn't exactly make them up, but I came pretty close to doing just that. To atone for this sin of creativity I have another set of figures which I assure you are extremely accurate. The current PMLA Directory Issue reveals that from the eight states considered by the MLA to be in the Rocky Mountain Region (which should not be confused with the Rocky Mountain MLA) there are 952 MLA members. The current RMMLA Directory lists 383 members as belonging to the Regional, of which 279 come from these same eight states-Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming. I do not know how many of the 279 are also MLA members, but I do know, because I counted them, that 196 (51.2 percent) of the total number of 383 listed as members of RMMLA are also listed as MLA members in the current PMLA Directory. If half of the 279 eight-state RMMLA members are also MLA members, then we have about 140 of the 952 (or 14.7 percent) as double members. These figures are so accurate as to turn one's stomach, but unfortunately they too have to be qualified because the MLA statistics were \"peak figures\" taken last April before membership drops, whereas the RMMLA figures are presumably taken this fall after drops for non-renewal. Moreover, the MLA has already added well over 1,000 new members since the time its September Directory went to press. Some of these no doubt come from the area in question, and I am sure new members have also been added to the RMMLA list. One tends to despair; we will never know for sure. If, however, it is true, as it is with the RMMLA, that 50 percent of a regional group belongs to the national group (and I think it probably works out on an average), and if there really are 10,000 regional members, then that means 5,000 belong to both MLA and a regional. Well, let us not worry about it; the number of double members is possibly 5,000-maybe it's 4,000, maybe it's 6,000-but let's say 5,000. Moreover, let us not worry at this time about the other 25,000 (or 83 percent) of MLA members who have not joined a regional; and by all means let us not even","PeriodicalId":344945,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the Rocky Mountain Modern Language Association","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Place of the Regional Associations in the MLA\",\"authors\":\"W. D. Schaefer\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/rmr.1972.0011\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The MLA has approximately 30,000 members, of which fewer than 20 percent (only some 5,000) also belong to one of the regional associations. The six regional associations have a combined membership of approximately 10,000, so it follows that the other 5,000 regional members (roughly 50 percent) do not belong to the national MLA. Now, these are very interesting figures; the only problem is that I am not at all sure, even with a heavy dose of \\\"roughlys\\\" and \\\"approximatelys,\\\" that they are accurate enough to be useful in any way. I didn't exactly make them up, but I came pretty close to doing just that. To atone for this sin of creativity I have another set of figures which I assure you are extremely accurate. The current PMLA Directory Issue reveals that from the eight states considered by the MLA to be in the Rocky Mountain Region (which should not be confused with the Rocky Mountain MLA) there are 952 MLA members. The current RMMLA Directory lists 383 members as belonging to the Regional, of which 279 come from these same eight states-Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming. I do not know how many of the 279 are also MLA members, but I do know, because I counted them, that 196 (51.2 percent) of the total number of 383 listed as members of RMMLA are also listed as MLA members in the current PMLA Directory. If half of the 279 eight-state RMMLA members are also MLA members, then we have about 140 of the 952 (or 14.7 percent) as double members. These figures are so accurate as to turn one's stomach, but unfortunately they too have to be qualified because the MLA statistics were \\\"peak figures\\\" taken last April before membership drops, whereas the RMMLA figures are presumably taken this fall after drops for non-renewal. Moreover, the MLA has already added well over 1,000 new members since the time its September Directory went to press. Some of these no doubt come from the area in question, and I am sure new members have also been added to the RMMLA list. One tends to despair; we will never know for sure. If, however, it is true, as it is with the RMMLA, that 50 percent of a regional group belongs to the national group (and I think it probably works out on an average), and if there really are 10,000 regional members, then that means 5,000 belong to both MLA and a regional. Well, let us not worry about it; the number of double members is possibly 5,000-maybe it's 4,000, maybe it's 6,000-but let's say 5,000. Moreover, let us not worry at this time about the other 25,000 (or 83 percent) of MLA members who have not joined a regional; and by all means let us not even\",\"PeriodicalId\":344945,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bulletin of the Rocky Mountain Modern Language Association\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-01-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bulletin of the Rocky Mountain Modern Language Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/rmr.1972.0011\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin of the Rocky Mountain Modern Language Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/rmr.1972.0011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

MLA有大约3万名成员,其中不到20%(只有约5000人)属于一个地区协会。这6个地区协会的会员总数约为1万人,因此,其他5000个地区会员(约占50%)不属于国家MLA。这些是非常有趣的数字;唯一的问题是,我一点也不确定,即使用了大量的“大概”和“大概”,它们是否足够精确,在任何方面都有用。我并没有完全编造出来,但我已经很接近了。为了弥补这种创造性的过失,我有另一组数字,我向你保证它们是非常准确的。目前的PMLA目录问题显示,从MLA认为在落基山脉地区的八个州(不应与落基山脉MLA混淆)中,有952名MLA成员。当前的RMMLA目录列出了属于该地区的383名成员,其中279名来自这八个州——亚利桑那州、科罗拉多州、爱达荷州、蒙大拿州、内华达州、新墨西哥州、犹他州和怀俄明州。我不知道279人中有多少人也是MLA会员,但我知道,因为我统计了他们,在被列为RMMLA会员的383人中,有196人(51.2%)在当前的PMLA目录中也被列为MLA会员。如果279个8州RMMLA成员中有一半也是MLA成员,那么952个成员中有140个(14.7%)是双重成员。这些数据准确到让人反胃,但不幸的是,它们也必须经过验证,因为MLA的统计数据是去年4月会员数量下降之前的“峰值数据”,而RMMLA的数据可能是在今年秋天会员数量下降之后的数据。此外,自九月份指南出版以来,MLA已经增加了1000多名新成员。其中一些无疑来自相关领域,我相信RMMLA的名单中也加入了新成员。一个人容易绝望;我们永远不会知道确切的答案。然而,如果像RMMLA一样,一个地区集团的50%属于国家集团(我认为这可能是一个平均值)是真的,如果真的有10,000个地区成员,那么这意味着5,000个成员既属于MLA,也属于一个地区。好吧,我们不必为此担心;双成员的数量可能是5000,也许是4000,也许是6000,但我们假设是5000。此外,我们现在不必担心其他25,000(或83%)尚未加入地区的MLA成员;无论如何,让我们不要
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Place of the Regional Associations in the MLA
The MLA has approximately 30,000 members, of which fewer than 20 percent (only some 5,000) also belong to one of the regional associations. The six regional associations have a combined membership of approximately 10,000, so it follows that the other 5,000 regional members (roughly 50 percent) do not belong to the national MLA. Now, these are very interesting figures; the only problem is that I am not at all sure, even with a heavy dose of "roughlys" and "approximatelys," that they are accurate enough to be useful in any way. I didn't exactly make them up, but I came pretty close to doing just that. To atone for this sin of creativity I have another set of figures which I assure you are extremely accurate. The current PMLA Directory Issue reveals that from the eight states considered by the MLA to be in the Rocky Mountain Region (which should not be confused with the Rocky Mountain MLA) there are 952 MLA members. The current RMMLA Directory lists 383 members as belonging to the Regional, of which 279 come from these same eight states-Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming. I do not know how many of the 279 are also MLA members, but I do know, because I counted them, that 196 (51.2 percent) of the total number of 383 listed as members of RMMLA are also listed as MLA members in the current PMLA Directory. If half of the 279 eight-state RMMLA members are also MLA members, then we have about 140 of the 952 (or 14.7 percent) as double members. These figures are so accurate as to turn one's stomach, but unfortunately they too have to be qualified because the MLA statistics were "peak figures" taken last April before membership drops, whereas the RMMLA figures are presumably taken this fall after drops for non-renewal. Moreover, the MLA has already added well over 1,000 new members since the time its September Directory went to press. Some of these no doubt come from the area in question, and I am sure new members have also been added to the RMMLA list. One tends to despair; we will never know for sure. If, however, it is true, as it is with the RMMLA, that 50 percent of a regional group belongs to the national group (and I think it probably works out on an average), and if there really are 10,000 regional members, then that means 5,000 belong to both MLA and a regional. Well, let us not worry about it; the number of double members is possibly 5,000-maybe it's 4,000, maybe it's 6,000-but let's say 5,000. Moreover, let us not worry at this time about the other 25,000 (or 83 percent) of MLA members who have not joined a regional; and by all means let us not even
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Blindfolded and Backwards: Promethean and Bemushroomed Heroism in One Flew Over the Cuckoo'S Nest and Catch-22 Marino and Italian Baroque Chaucer's Psychologizing of Virgil's Dido Instant Publication Love, Identity, and Death: James' The Princess Casamassima Reconsidered
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1