Anthropological Linguistics, a quarterly journal founded in 1959, provides a forum for the full range of scholarly study of the languages and cultures of the peoples of the world, especially the native peoples of the Americas. Embracing the field of language and culture broadly defined, the editors welcome articles and research reports addressing cultural, historical, and philological aspects of linguistic study, including analyses of texts and discourse; studies of semantic systems and cultural classifications; onomastic studies; ethnohistorical papers that draw significantly on linguistic data; studies of linguistic prehistory and genetic classification, both methodological and substantive; discussions and interpretations of archival material; edited historical documents; and contributions to the history of the field.
The Board of Trustees is Indiana University’s governing board, its legal owner, and its final authority. The nine-member board holds the university’s financial, physical, and human assets and operations in trust for future generations. The board has responsibility for Indiana University’s mission and role.
This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
For terms and use, please refer to our
Anthropological Linguistics © 1979 Anthropological Linguistics