When I tell someone that I'm concentrating in Linguistics, by far the most common response is, "What is that?" I must then try to explain the unconscious system of knowledge of language, the universal principles underlying all languages and the formal, rigorous analysis of linguistic phenomena.

The other, less common response is more fun to hear: "That's awesome! I took a Linguistics class last fall and I loved it. Let me tell you what I think is cool about human language.." Then sometimes I'll be asked about my senior thesis, which is on child languages acquisition, and maybe I can explain my experiment, or even the theory behind it.

Unfortunately, the frequency of Response Number Two will decline drastically over the next few yeas. in fact, it may disappear entirely. This coincides with the emergence of a new response to "I'm concentrating in Linguistic." This new response is something like: "Oh no. It must be terrible having your department eliminated;" or, "Are you going to be able to graduate?"

The reason underlying both decline of Response Number Two and the rise of Response Number Three is that, if the Harvard administration has its way, there won't be a Department of Linguistics here anymore.

There's no point in my rehashing the arguments over whether or not linguistics is an autonomous discipline and whether or not the Harvard Linguistics Departments is up to snuff. Most of the arguments for eliminating the Linguistics Department, such as the supposed "tremendous linguistic strengths" in other departments, are completely specious.

For my thesis, I need to understand the case-marking properties of unaccusatives and their relationship to A-chains, and how and when children come to know these properties, One would be hard pressed to find anyone outside of the Linguistics Department who studies these issues and anyone who tells you otherwise really has no idea what linguistics is about.

Instead of responding to the administration's vague and contradictory allegations, which have been convincingly refuted in The Crimson and elsewhere, I'd like to explain why so many of us are strongly attached to the Department itself, and why I think that (contrary to what the administration says) Linguistics is actually one of the best run departments at Harvard.

The Linguistic Department is one of the few at Harvard that approximates the feel of a small liberal arts college. It's just what I wanted at Harvard.

Graduate students are like friendly older siblings, and faculty and undergraduates are one a first name basis. "I'm even on a first name basis with professors with whom I've never studied.

Furthermore, the undergraduate concentrators are a pretty tight group. When there's a phonology problem set due on Friday, drop by the department lobby Thursday night and you'll see 10 young linguists gathered over Entenmann's cookies and Coke, formulating hypotheses and arguing over their implications.

Or then there was the "Linguistics Lunch" my junior year, held once a week in Eliot House, right after Intro. to Indo-European. At the Department's biannual wine and-cheese parties, it's become a tradition for the undergraduates to put on a humorous five-minute skit satirizing the department (or, more likely these days, the administration).

At cold and impersonal Harvard, the Linguistics Department is a cozy friendly home. I don't think most undergraduates can say the same for their departments.

From the perspective of "the undergraduate experience," the Linguistics Department is a resounding success which few other departments can match.

Eliminating or decimating it would be a grave mistake.

I still don't' understand why the administration originally decided to eliminate ("restructure," as they euphemistically call it department. Whatever the original reasons, which were never made clear, I don't think anyone in the administration was prepare for the response from the undergraduates.