PDF (Online Text) - EURAC

taught at university. Students then implicitly learn what valuable research is, that
is, research on Big Languages and recent research paradigms.
To sum up, we observed that BLPs are conducted in a competitive and sometimes
commercialised environment. Competition is a main factor that shapes the way in
which BLPs are conducted. In such an environment, it is quite natural for research
to overlap and to repeatedly produce similar resources. Not sharing the developed
resources is seen as enhancing the competitiveness of the research centre. It is not
considered to be an obstacle to the overall advance of the research field: similar
resources are available elsewhere in any case. Different research paradigms can be
freely explored in BLPs, with an obvious preference for the latest research paradigm,
or for the one to which the research centre is committed. Gaining visibility, funding
and eternal fame are not subordinated to the goal of producing working language
resources.
The situation of SLPs is much more critical. SLPs have to account for the persistence
and portability of their data beyond the lifespan of the project, beyond the involvement
of a specific researcher, and beyond the lifespan of a format or specific memory
device. As Small Languages are not that much involved in the transition of paradigms,
data cannot be reworked, especially if research is discontinuous. The refunding of a
project due to a shift in research paradigms or lost or unreadable data is unthinkable.
With few or no external competitors, most inspiration for SLPs comes from BLPs.
However, the motivation for BLPs to choose a research paradigm and their capacity
to handle research paradigms (given per definition) is not that of a SLP. For talented
young researchers, SLPs are not attractive. As students, they have been trained in
BLPs and share with the research community a system of values according to which
other languages and other research paradigms are preferred.
2. Improving the Situation: Free Software Pools
Although most readers might consent with the obvious description of SLPs I have
given above, few have turned to the solutions I am about to sketch below. The main
reason for this might be possible misconceptions or unsubstantiated fears. Let us
start with what seems to be the most puzzling question; that is: how can projects and
researchers guarantee the existence of their data beyond the direct influence of the
researcher him/herself? To give a hypothetical example: you develop a spellchecker
for a language of two hundred speakers, all above the age of seventy (including
yourself), and none of them having a computer (except for you). How can you ensure
that the data survives? The answer is: Pool your data with other data of the same
form and function and let the community take care of YOUR data. If you make your
34