N N N N Given the potential cost and the broad range of languages in Asia, the author would need to take responsibility for the translation Authors would need to make a case for publishing a previously published piece Authors would need to redraft the article, carefully considering audience and making sure they have argued the intercultural significance of their findings The article would need to pass through the review process (albeit in a modified form) to avoid being seen as a second-class publication Ultimately, given the review capacity and the competitive nature of article acceptance among popular journals (AEJ can currently accept only around 10% of submissions), I cannot help but conclude that local authors will end up in many cases having to what all published authors end up doing: adapting their writings to a particular international journal’s criteria and persisting until they succeed It is therefore incumbent on the journal itself, after due consideration of issues of quality, to adopt any innovative suggestions that will encourage the dissemination of a broader range of alternative international voices THE AUTHOR Roger Nunn has worked in language education for 33 years in seven different countries He is currently working as Professor in Communication at the Petroleum Institute in Abu Dhabi, a university specializing in engineering education and research He has been Chief Editor of the Asian EFL Journal since 2005 REFERENCE Wen, Q & Gao, Y (2007) International Journal of Applied Linguistics,17, 221–225 An Alternative Question and Possible Answers: Making Local Research Publications Accessible Internationally GWENDOLYN GONG The Chinese University of Hong Kong Hong Kong SAR, China Wen and Gao (2007) initiate a conversation on the need to publish in English language journals the translated versions of articles first & 696 TESOL QUARTERLY Tesol Quarterly tesol_symposium.3d 30/12/09 20:05:52 The Charlesworth Group, Wakefield +44(0)1924 369598 - Rev 7.51n/W (Jan 20 2003) published in local language journals As co-editor of the Asian Journal of English Language Teaching (AJELT), an international journal published in Hong Kong (i.e., a publication on the periphery), I am pleased to join this dialogue by giving my views on the original and follow-up responses by Hamp-Lyons (in this issue) as well as Gao and Wen (in this issue) In the original essay, Wen and Gao (2007) call for editors of international journals that publish applied linguistics research articles in English to relax their policies, thus allowing the consideration of work that has been previously published, and specifically, English translations of articles originally published in Chinese language journals In supporting their proposal, Wen and Gao provide evidence to justify the need for research published in Chinese to be made more available to the native-English-speaking applied linguistics community Indeed, the staggering number of English language learners, teachers, and researchers in China is an overwhelming testament to their call for change (pp 223–224) To this, Hamp-Lyons presents a fair and balanced discussion, reviewing major contrasting ethical and professional viewpoints Importantly, she notes that publishing a direct translation of an article first published in a local language in a local journal is not rhetorically feasible For a translation to be considered by another journal, the text would have to be reworked to take into account the different publication’s mission and focus, readership, and manuscript style guidelines This ‘‘new’’ rhetorical situation (along with the ‘‘new’’ manuscript reviewers and process that might follow) would surely yield a significantly different manuscript As a consequence, the question of dual publication or direct translation is moot It is neither necessary nor prudent for journals to relax their editorial policies on rhetorical grounds—the international rhetorical situation, as well as the reality of the subsequent manuscript review process, would discount the likelihood of a local article being appropriate for an international journal without considerable revision and development In their response to Hamp-Lyons, Gao and Wen (in this issue) agree ‘‘that the product is not ‘the same paper’ as publication in the local language’’ (p ??) However, they go on to point out that EAL authors find it difficult to write for an international audience, resulting in their contributions receiving limited access beyond the local arena Gao and Wen indicate that EAL authors may find the ‘‘process of meaningful research presentation especially challenging’’ (p ??) They suggest that such ‘‘authors may not know how to present their own research meaningfully to the target reader group or groups’’ (p ?? ) Gao and Wen’s response to Hamp-Lyons invites a discussion about local versus international journals Many local journals first begin as SYMPOSIUM 697 Tesol Quarterly tesol_symposium.3d 30/12/09 20:05:52 The Charlesworth Group, Wakefield +44(0)1924 369598 - Rev 7.51n/W (Jan 20 2003) collections of occasional papers, working papers by authors in a particular department as well as local and regional universities This was the case with the AJELT, which was previously called the Occasional Papers in English Language Teaching, and was published mainly as a local Hong Kong journal In 1996, however, the scope of that local publication was expanded to an international refereed journal, thus providing a forum for previously unpublished scholarship on theory, research, and pedagogy relating to teaching English to Asians at the tertiary level As a result, the journal changed from a local to an international mission and audience Whereas journals in the Center may publish mostly native speakers of English, AJELT is on the periphery and publishes mostly nonnative speakers of English, authors from the periphery, providing evidence that, though admittedly difficult, EAL authors can write for an international professional publication And our authors are working across the globe, not mainly employed in ‘‘native-English-speaking countries or co-authors of native English speakers’’ (Wen & Gao, 2007, p 222) We publish appendices and citations in other languages (along with English translations of the titles, for practical purposes) AJELT and its many EAL authors have made the conversion from local to international readerships and writing, so I know it is demanding yet possible Fittingly, Gao and Wen (in this issue) invite all involved in review processes to share in the co-responsibility and co-construction of authors’ work In all candor, such collaboration already occurs In AJELT as well as other academic journals that I am familiar with, editors, reviewers, and project editors work cooperatively to provide guidance and editorial assistance to authors from the time a manuscript is submitted, revised for further consideration, and published The process is a dynamic and demanding one for the entire community of practice involved At this juncture, let me return to a central question that remains unaddressed: How can EAL scholars disseminate their work in English for the applied linguistics community at large if they cannot yet adapt their work for an international journal’s rhetorical situation? Researchers, be they EAL or native speakers of English, often gain their first experiences in publishing by getting their work accepted in local and regional journals, conference proceedings, and newsletters This record of achievement often leads to their work appearing in national and international journals and edited collections—a natural progression for many colleagues in their professional development Given Gao and Wen’s response to Hamp-Lyons, it seems to me that the key question has changed and cannot really be about translating local publications for consideration by an international journal The 698 TESOL QUARTERLY Tesol Quarterly tesol_symposium.3d 30/12/09 20:05:53 The Charlesworth Group, Wakefield +44(0)1924 369598 - Rev 7.51n/W (Jan 20 2003) question really is how to make EAL authors’ research accessible to readers outside their locales, for example, China Instead of emphasizing the need for academic journals to publish English translations of previously published articles, let us explore creative possibilities for how original research in other languages might be made available Here are some alternatives that may help to bridge the gap that Wen and Gao have identified: N Posttranslated works on EAL author Web pages Authors often hold the copyright to publications or can get their publisher’s permission for posting their translations on the condition of appropriate attribution; as a consequence, legalities related to copyright, questions about self-plagiarism, or concerns about the translation’s accuracy are not issues N Develop online sites that specialize in approved translations of published works By creating a centralized location for translation (e.g., an online consortium of universities or a regional cluster of professional organizations), all involved can find themselves in a win–win situation The local research, researchers, and their consortium or professional organizations can gain greater visibility; likewise, applied linguists in other parts of the world can gain access to local knowledge and knowledge makers in a timely and efficient manner N Encourage other applied linguistics colleagues and professional organizations to include on their Web sites hot links to EAL author Web pages and online sites containing approved translations N Consider making local journals bilingual publications This practice is done in Malaysia, for example, in an effort to increase the international access and visibility of their publications on the periphery N Guest edit special issues of journals devoted to English translations of key articles that have appeared in those periodicals These kinds of special issues provide local authors with opportunities and experience in academic editing and publishing These possibilities can empower EAL authors to become their own gatekeepers and bridge builders (Gao & Wen, in this issue, p ?? ), fostering greater communication and access among everyone in the applied linguistics community In this way, all members of our profession can engage in lively conversation and idea exchange We can interact openly to not only bridge the gap between different demands of manuscript development and readerships, but also access the voices and contributions of all applied linguistic researchers— especially those from the periphery SYMPOSIUM 699 Tesol Quarterly tesol_symposium.3d 30/12/09 20:05:53 The Charlesworth Group, Wakefield +44(0)1924 369598 - Rev 7.51n/W (Jan 20 2003) THE AUTHOR Gwendolyn Gong is professor of English at the Chinese University of Hong Kong and founding editor of the Asian Journal of English Language Teaching She teaches applied linguistics and literature courses, and her book Editing: The Design of Rhetoric was named the Best Book for Excellence in Technical and Scientific Writing REFERENCES Wen, Q & Gao, Y (2007) Viewpoint: Dual publication and academic inequality, International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 17(2), 221–225 Co-Responsibility in the Dialogical Co-Construction of Academic Discourse YIHONG GAO Peking University Beijing, People’s Republic of China QIUFANG WEN Beijing Foreign Studies University Beijing, People’s Republic of China & In her response to our paper on academic equality, Liz Hamp-Lyons, editor of several important English journals in applied linguistics, expressed her sympathetic attitudes toward English journal publication of research already published in another language (Hamp-Lyons, this issue) She also shared her own editing experience in responding to papers written by authors of English as an additional language (EAL) In our view, this indicates a positive step toward equity in knowledge creation, distribution and access, which is what we strongly look forward to For a ‘‘better way forward’’ toward this direction, Hamp-Lyons suggests that authors should ‘‘frame the reporting of their research within the social, linguistic, academic, and professional setting in which their study took place, and present this framing with a strong sense of the audience of the specific journal they are targeting’’ (p XX) This argument raises the issue of a gap in background knowledge and assumption, i.e., the gap between what the reader expects the writer to know about what the reader knows, and what the writer knows about what the reader knows about the writer’s context The task of bridging this gap is not as simple as it appears Hamp-Lyons’ suggestion to 700 TESOL QUARTERLY Tesol Quarterly tesol_symposium.3d 30/12/09 20:05:53 The Charlesworth Group, Wakefield +44(0)1924 369598 - Rev 7.51n/W (Jan 20 2003)