fuzzylogician

Francophile, I really think you need to take a step back and ask yourself why you want a MA and/or a PhD in linguistics. I think you would benefit a lot from taking time off from school, getting a job, and finding out what's out there and what you might want to do with your life. Do you want to be a research professor, or do anything else that requires a PhD in linguistics? Doing a MA+PhD without having some kind of goal like this in mind could be an investment of a lot of time and money that could go to other venues that might be better for your overall growth. It's not enough to have a vague idea that you're interested in a field to do a PhD in it and be successful, and MAs are not cheap. But to answer your question, it probably depends on the department and what they are looking for. Generally speaking, there are "formal" departments and "applied" departments. The research questions, methods, and goals of applied and formal linguistics are quite different. You need to figure out which kind interests you. Neither one is "better," they are just different. If you study general linguistics in a formal/theoretical department, you'll have the preparation to apply for those kinds of jobs. Likewise, if you study in an applied department, you'll have that kind of preparation. Some departments have some of both, but at least as a student my impression is that you very quickly specialize in one or the other and don't get a very round education. There are also foreign languages department that have some linguistics, often applied. When you apply for jobs, you'll compete against people with extensive training and expertise in the area that the job is advertised for. If you are a formal linguist applying to an applied department, you'll be at a disadvantage. You can try and make that a strength by standing out and explaining why you're nonetheless a good fit for the department and why you are applying for a position that's very different from your training, but no doubt people will wonder about your cultural fit and your ability to teach the courses that the department needs taught. (And same for an applied linguist applying to a formal department.) For reference, I suggest you look at the jobs page on the Linguist List. You can see what jobs are currently advertised, where they are and what qualifications they are looking for. Jobs vary from year to year, but this can still give you some indication of what's out there. Keep in mind that it's early in the season -- a lot of jobs won't be advertised for another few weeks, but if you look again in November, most TT jobs will probably be on there.

Out-of-state students who are US citizens can become residents of the state and pay in-state tuition after a year (at least in some states). International students can never become residents and have to pay out-of-state tuition for the entire duration of their program. I think at least some states also distinguish in-state, out-of-state, and international, but a quick google search didn't yield anything that seemed relevant so maybe I'm wrong on that one.

That's actually only true for some states but not others. Some states will let any US citizen become a resident after one year of living there, but others don't allow students to become residents no matter how long they live there. You have to live in the state for one year prior to applying to school to be considered a resident and be eligible to pay in-state tuition.

Some schools will trust the letter less. If you don't waive your right to see it, then it is not truly confidential and therefore the prof is not really free to write their true opinion of you.

Taking two months completely off from your research sounds like too much. You need to find a way to integrate studying with research in some way, meaning that you need to reduce the amount of hours you invest in your research somehow, but without coming to a complete halt. Starting up again will be significantly more difficult if you completely stop as opposed to slow down. Given that you have already had a conversation with your advisor about this, I think you need to go back and instead of just informing him of what you're planning to do (which is never a good idea, btw), have a conversation where you ask for his advice on integrating intense preparation for your exam with your current research. It may be helpful to start by confirming exactly what level of preparation is expected of you. It's possible that you don't need to do much more than be familiar with your proposal and information from your current coursework (which you basically already know and don't need to study for), and on the other hand you may be expected to remember everything from every course in detail (which obviously requires more preparation). After you both agree on what's expected, you can assess together with your advisor how much work you need to do to be prepared, and come up with a plan for getting the studying done in time. I am sure that this approach will work better than the one you tried before.

My new university is taking almost a month now to process my records. I can't get access to university services (health care, email, internet, the library, the course management system, payroll). They can't pay me until I'm in their system -- they owe me three paychecks by now. But that's ok, it's not like moving to a new city involves sudden high costs. And it's not like I need time to set up the course I am teaching starting next week or would perhaps like to know how many students I will have and what their backgrounds are like, or might want to communicate with my students. And it's not like I need to be on my department's mailing list and be informed of any and all departmental activities. And it's not like I need any internet access or library access for my research, ever. And of course I am perfectly fine without access to health care services. That's only for losers anyway.

Another anecdote: in my PhD program, students are required to TA for just 2 semesters (14 weeks each). The program usually takes students 10 semesters (5 years) so the rest of the time everyone is supported in other ways. Any additional teaching is on a voluntary basis only, and you get paid extra for it. The amount of work a TA does depends on the course. If you TA for a large undergrad intro, you sit in lectures, prepare and give a recitation, give office hours, and grade, all of which usually takes roughly 10-12 hours but changes over time depending on what grading needs to be done on a given week. Some weeks it goes up closer to 20. If you TA for an advanced undergrad or grad course, there is a lot less grading to do and you may only work 5-7 hours a week.

Are you able to live and work mostly or exclusively in the non-English language of the professor? If not, I think you have to contact them in English and see how things play out. Same for choosing locations--they would have to be in larger cities. If you are fluent in another language, that gives you more options and you can work that into the initial email. I'd still write in English. Any researcher who can't read an English email is also someone who will not be able to write you a decent letter of recommendations and doesn't present or publish to an audience that you probably want to reach.

(I merged your two posts and moved them to a more appropriate location. Please don't cross-post the same question multiple times.)

Eigen -- normally, yes, but I've seen people go to great lengths to avoid having headings with just one entry on their CV, and I understand that preference. I don't think there is anything wrong with having just one 'presentations' heading with the poster and guest lecture under it, instead of two headings with one entry each in this case. You structure your CV however it best highlights your accomplishments for your current purposes. (I attended a series of professionalization workshops last year where one activity was to go over each participant's CV with the workshop leader and the other participants making suggestions for improvement. Different people got different advice, depending on their situation. For example, some participants were advised to have a 'publications' heading that included all of their publications: proceedings papers, book chapters, and journal papers; this happened when they had very few or no real peer-reviewed publications (which is not unusual in my field for grad students who have not graduated yet), so for them having day 8 entries under a single heading made a better impression than 1+1+6, or 0+1+7 (especially when the 1 isn't a high tier publication). Some people were advised to separate posters from talks to highlight how many talks they have given at prestigious conferences; others had an imbalance and were told to just have a 'talks and poster presentations' heading. Some were told it'd be good to have "teaching as an instructor" vs. "teaching as a TA" subsections. It really all depended on what would work best for them and for the particular job they were applying for, and there is an element of personal taste here too.) Also, FWIW, I don't list references on my CV even when applying for jobs. There is always another place to specify references on the application and I don't think it needs to be on my CV. But I've seen people choose to do otherwise, too, and do just fine.

Only submit optional materials that will enhance your application. I think it would be a mistake to submit a writing sample that you don't feel is strong.

In my field people list references when they are on the job market, but not before and not once they have a TT job. So, there may be some subtlety to this.

Sounds like a notification that your scores arrived, not an acceptance email.

As an applicant to PhD programs, I think you can list all three - the poster presentation, the abstract, and the invited lecture (assuming that it was in front of a class that you were not a student in, otherwise I don't know if it belongs on your CV). The way you list all three entries seems concise so I like it. Once you are in grad school, I would consider removing the smaller stuff - i.e. the abstract and the guest lecture. These are fine in the beginning of your career, but look like padding at some point down the road. For example, I have recently removed all grad student conferences and small within-department awards that I have won, so that they don't drown out the international conferences and national competitive awards. I also don't have entries for abstracts, so it's easier to see the journal papers. Earlier on, all those things were on there, before there was enough other stuff that I needed to worry that someone skimming might miss something important because of something unimportant. So, you want to structure your CV so that it serves your interests, and those may change over time.

This might depend on the field and school, but if the programs you are applying to don't have rolling admissions or e.g. a fellowship deadline that you need to submit early for, there is no real advantage to applying early. Applications are only looked at after the deadline, regardless of when you submitted them. It is theoretically possible (though perhaps technically not so easy) that someone might look at the application website early and you'll catch their eye if you submit early, but I think this is unlikely and not a good reason to submit a less polished application with a worse GPA. This is not like undergraduate admissions. I'd submit the strongest application possible by the deadline and not worry about anything else.

How many hours do students spend on class work -- doing the assigned readings, solving problem sets, prepping for class, sitting in lectures and discussion sections -- and how many hours to they spend on their research? The answers vary just as greatly as the answer to your question. It depends, as others pointed out above. Points of variation include: how many classes the professor teaches in the semester (a 1/2 load is very different than a 4/4 load); For each class: the level of the class; whether the professor has taught the class before or not; the level of the students and how prepared they are; whether the professor has a TA; whether the class is reading or problem-set based; the type of institution the professor is in; whether the professor is tenured and what other time commitments they have.

Google calendar, synced with my phone, and using different calendars to keep track of what I'm spending time on. I also keep multiple to-do lists (using workflowy.com), mostly organized on a monthly and then weekly basis, to keep track of deadlines and notes. I used to have a paper planner but after a couple of years in grad school it became too small to keep all my entries and also it's easy to forget when you actually need it, making it overall less convenient. I occasionally use an actual whiteboard in my office for long-standing tasks that can stay on there for a while, just because of the satisfaction of physically crossing something off my list when it's finally done, but now I get the same level of satisfaction crossing things off my workflowy list (which allows me to still keep the old list for reference, which is often useful), and I can make my lists much more elaborate , with small daily goals, so there is even more to cross off .

Most programs are only set up for fall admissions. If you join in the spring, you will be behind a semester and face the consequences of that, as mentioned above -- being behind on courses, entering an already established cohort, perhaps lacking funding. Logistically, you may have trouble finding a lease that starts mid-year, at least in some cities. If you are joining a program that is set up for spring admissions in addition to fall admissions, then I don't think there is any particular disadvantage, if the spring and fall incoming classes end up having the same opportunities.

I suggest a combination of headphones and establishing a routine of quiet time for work during most office hours (a few 'I'm sorry, I really need to get some work done now, but why don't we grab coffee later and you can tell me the rest of the story' with consistency usually gets the message across), with coffee breaks where you do chat and are friendly, when you have the time for it.

I'm only here because I can BS my way along. My colleagues are way smarter than me. But I just started a prestigious two-year postdoc, so I've come to trust that I am a good bullshitter and that that can get you ahead in the field. (If you can't beat them, join them.)

I asked the schools I applied to how important the diversity statement was. Only two schools wanted one. Both said it would only be used in case I was admitted in order to determine if I was eligible for special diversity fellowships, but I would not be since I was an international student. Otherwise, they said, no one would really look at it too much. I didn't spend too much time on it, but I think I still wrote something decent. The moral of the story: ask.

Well, you say there is no good explanation for the grades and you don't even remember exactly what happened. Why would you want to spend more ink on this, rather than less? I don't see what you gain by individually discussing each grade and giving a poor excuse as opposed to talking about them all together briefly and moving on to your current strengths. You've been out of school long enough that a D from 10 years ago doesn't matter much. You have a lot more recent work experience that you should be discussing, along with your future career goals and how this program will help you achieve them.

Whatever you do, don't email the professor again. You're making a big deal out of something small and in the process making yourself out to be a demanding and perhaps even unreasonable/annoying student. I can't remember even once receiving a syllabus this early. You receive it in the first class, and it's designed so that you do the work starting in week 1 of classes, not some time earlier in the summer. This is normal. Relax.

This post has been locked because it has been cross-posted to another forum. To reply, follow the link here:

It's probably good to separate the actual physical writing aspect from the writing aspect that also includes conceptualizing the essay, researching it, adapting it for each school, editing it, and revising it according to comments from professors. The former can (perhaps) be done in just a few hours, but if you do the latter in just a few hours then you may be in very bad shape. These documents need to develop and mature over time, and it takes much longer to arrive at a final version than just a few hours. I think it's important to have a first draft early that you can walk away from for a few weeks and come back to with fresh eyes later. It's very important to get feedback from multiple people, and to revise accordingly. People also often advise customizing the SOP for each application, which also takes time and work. Months (and stress) doesn't seem like an inaccurate estimate to me.