Fall 2014 applications

[KWIKKI]

Yep, super nervous! I hope to submit everything by the end of December

[longforit]

I should have looked into this website (I've been here a lot during my last application). It would save me tons of trouble looking for schools!

I'm interested in phonology-phonetics interface. I'm currently working on issues on actuation of sound change. My ultimate interest is to figure out (well.. not really figure out but at least know more about)  the relationship between categorical/invariant phonological knowledge and continuous/variant phonetic realizations, and I have interest in many sub-topics under this topic, like categorical/fine-grained perception, categorization (agent-level), phonologization (historical-level), phonetically-based phonology (structrual-level), etc.. I'm super interested in the idea of complex system theory, which seems to be able to piece my interests in various subareas together into a big picture. I'm applying to OSU, UMich, NYU, UChicago, UMD, Cornell, Toronto and Stony Brook (not sure about UMass. Any suggestions?). 

 

I have several questions:

The programs I'm applying to are among the best programs in North America. Do I aim too high? Should I consider some other safety schools? I don't know if my background is strong or weak. I had not received linguistics training in my B.A. study (major in English) but I somehow managed to finish a B.A. thesis on SLA (two papers of this projects have been presented in two US conferences). I came to the US one and half a year ago (Omy time flies!) and started my journey on linguistics. The first year of my focus was on syntax, and I've written two papers that were presented in two conferences. But my love is always on phonology and phonetics. However, because I'm more on the experimental side, and the teaching resourses on phonology-phonetics interface are very limited in my M.A. program, I didn't started my lab phonology research until this semester when I was preparing for my M.A. thesis project. So basically, my previous works scatter around many fields of linguistics, and I lack experience of working in labs. I'm really afraid that these will influence my chance to get into a PhD program...

 

Also, my current interest on phonology-phonetics interface is also quite broad. I'm not sure what strategy should I apply in writing my Statement of Purpose: should I mention all the interests I have (with focuses), or avoid showing such a broad interest in case application reviewers might think that I'm too ambiguous and unrealistic?  Any suggestions?

 

I'll really appreciate any comments. Thank you so much!

[fuzzylogician]

longforit - I'm not a phonologist so take this with a grain of salt, but I think you could have a good chance of admissions to the schools you mention, if you play your cards right. You have research experience, 2 papers and 4 conference presentations, which is a lot. Many people didn't do a BA in linguistics, so that's not a problem, especially since you are doing an MA in linguistics. It's also ok to have only discovered what you are interested in this year (it's even ok to change your concentration after you begin your PhD program.. gasp!). I wouldn't talk about your lack of lab experience as a negative, but instead talk about what you're doing this year and what you already learned, and also about what you hope to do next. Lab experience is also part of what your PhD training will be about.

 

I'd spend some time thinking about how you present your interests. You have a good start - an overarching theme ("the relationship between categorical/invariant phonological knowledge and continuous/variant phonetic realizations") with some examples of sub-questions ("categorical/fine-grained perception, categorization (agent-level), phonologization (historical-level), phonetically-based phonology (structrual-level)") and a methodology/theory you want to use to study them ("complex system theory"). That's exactly how you want to structure your research interests in your SOP. What you are missing, I think, are examples of specific questions that you want to study within these sub-interests -- that is very important! I'm not a phonologist/phonetician so it's hard for me to know but it sounds like you listed quite a few diverse interests. That's ok, but you need to be careful that they have a common theme and that they are feasible. If it's too much, or unrelated, it'll show a lack of understanding of the field, unless you can tie them together and explain why they should be studied in tandem. I'd propose spending some time thinking about which questions best relate to your current strengths and represent things that people are worrying about now or (better yet) that you think are where people should be looking next (explain why!). This might mean that you only talk about a subset of the sub-interests you listed above, and that would be fine. Choose the topics that would be relevant for the most people and that would be considered broad and exciting. Be specific -- that is very important for showing that you are an independent thinker and that you (1) can identify questions in your field and (2) understand what is a reasonable size project. This is hard work, but once you're at the end of the process I guarantee that it will be worth it. You learn a lot from this kind of introspection.

 

(Also, I just had to ask -- why aren't you considering MIT at all?)

[longforit]

longforit - I'm not a phonologist so take this with a grain of salt, but I think you could have a good chance of admissions to the schools you mention, if you play your cards right. You have research experience, 2 papers and 4 conference presentations, which is a lot. Many people didn't do a BA in linguistics, so that's not a problem, especially since you are doing an MA in linguistics. It's also ok to have only discovered what you are interested in this year (it's even ok to change your concentration after you begin your PhD program.. gasp!). I wouldn't talk about your lack of lab experience as a negative, but instead talk about what you're doing this year and what you already learned, and also about what you hope to do next. Lab experience is also part of what your PhD training will be about.

 

I'd spend some time thinking about how you present your interests. You have a good start - an overarching theme ("the relationship between categorical/invariant phonological knowledge and continuous/variant phonetic realizations") with some examples of sub-questions ("categorical/fine-grained perception, categorization (agent-level), phonologization (historical-level), phonetically-based phonology (structrual-level)") and a methodology/theory you want to use to study them ("complex system theory"). That's exactly how you want to structure your research interests in your SOP. What you are missing, I think, are examples of specific questions that you want to study within these sub-interests -- that is very important! I'm not a phonologist/phonetician so it's hard for me to know but it sounds like you listed quite a few diverse interests. That's ok, but you need to be careful that they have a common theme and that they are feasible. If it's too much, or unrelated, it'll show a lack of understanding of the field, unless you can tie them together and explain why they should be studied in tandem. I'd propose spending some time thinking about which questions best relate to your current strengths and represent things that people are worrying about now or (better yet) that you think are where people should be looking next (explain why!). This might mean that you only talk about a subset of the sub-interests you listed above, and that would be fine. Choose the topics that would be relevant for the most people and that would be considered broad and exciting. Be specific -- that is very important for showing that you are an independent thinker and that you (1) can identify questions in your field and (2) understand what is a reasonable size project. This is hard work, but once you're at the end of the process I guarantee that it will be worth it. You learn a lot from this kind of introspection.

 

(Also, I just had to ask -- why aren't you considering MIT at all?)

 

Thank you again for your suggestions. I actually incorporated many of what you said in my statement of purpose. I've talked about specific questions I'm working on and what I plan to do to extend my previous studies. I'm so encouraged that I'm on the right track!

 

As for MIT, it seems to be a too theoretical program to me (I don't consider myself a big fan of generative grammar). I know Professor Flemming and Professor Steriade are big names (giant names!) in the field of lab phonology, but it seems that they already have a pretty complete theory about relationship between phonology and phonetics (which I only have a little knowledge of). I might want to seek for more perspectives to explore the issue I'm interested in. That's probably one of the reasons why I have such diverse interest..

Edited December 3, 2013 by longforit

[fuzzylogician]

As for MIT, it seems to be a too theoretical program to me (I don't consider myself a big fan of generative grammar). I know Professor Flemming and Professor Steriade are big names (giant names!) in the field of lab phonology, but it seems that they already have a pretty complete theory about relationship between phonology and phonetics (which I only have a little knowledge of). I might want to seek for more perspectives to explore the issue I'm interested in. That's probably one of the reasons why I have such diverse interest..

 

Your choice, obviously. I'm not sure I know why (not) being a fan of generative grammar should affect your research in phonology. You'll have to do first year classes in syntax at every(?) program you might attend and many of the programs you listed will tell you quite a lot about minimalism (e.g. NYU, UChicago, UMD, Cornell, UMass, maybe one or two of the others but I'm not sure). After your first year you can put that behind you and not do any more syntax ever again (more or less, specifics depend on program). I wouldn't use that criterion to choose schools because frankly it's not all that relevant.

 

I'm also not sure I understand what it means for some professor to "already have a pretty complete theory about relationship between phonology and phonetics." I doubt that they think their work is done and they can now retire happily ever after. Do you mean that they don't work on questions that interest you, or they study them in a way you disagree with?

[LinguisticMystic]

longforit, you've chosen mostly east-coast schools ("schools" as in "schools of thought"), yet the way you describe your interests in the phonetics/phonology interface all rehash the same big concerns of laboratory phonology (phonetics + phonology), essentially. I agree with Fuzzy in that you are probably capable of narrowing your focus. Then again, there's a lot to do in lab phon being that it's a newish field, so going into a PhD program with those interests will necessarily be specific in a way. As far as your statement, the things you mention don't have to be unrelated--I don't think they are.

 

All this to say ... yes, your interests as you describe them may be broad. But it sounds like you would be capable of easily pitching a line of inquiry that would link one or more of your interests together.

[longforit]

Your choice, obviously. I'm not sure I know why (not) being a fan of generative grammar should affect your research in phonology. You'll have to do first year classes in syntax at every(?) program you might attend and many of the programs you listed will tell you quite a lot about minimalism (e.g. NYU, UChicago, UMD, Cornell, UMass, maybe one or two of the others but I'm not sure). After your first year you can put that behind you and not do any more syntax ever again (more or less, specifics depend on program). I wouldn't use that criterion to choose schools because frankly it's not all that relevant.

 

I'm also not sure I understand what it means for some professor to "already have a pretty complete theory about relationship between phonology and phonetics." I doubt that they think their work is done and they can now retire happily ever after. Do you mean that they don't work on questions that interest you, or they study them in a way you disagree with?

 

By "generative grammar" I intended to refer to not only syntax but also generative/constraint-based phonology. I think both of them more or less use OT as the basic framework (but I might be wrong cause I only read a few of their papers), but I feel like not being ready to accept constraint-based model and reductionist point of view as a matter of fact--maybe they are better explanatory models, but I just want to have a chance to explore other possibilities and make the judgment by myself.  

Sorry for causing confusions by using "complete theory". I wanted to say "established theory" or something along this line. Professor Flemming, for example, has been working on Dispersion Theory for years. I found this point of view tremendously interesting, and I would love to entertain it as one possible explanation for the issue in question. But I think maybe if someone works with him, he/she is most likely to work within this framework and have a "stronger belief" in this theory? Or I'm not making any sense here.. maybe students don't have to work within the same framework as their professors (advisors).. 

[longforit]

longforit, you've chosen mostly east-coast schools ("schools" as in "schools of thought"), yet the way you describe your interests in the phonetics/phonology interface all rehash the same big concerns of laboratory phonology (phonetics + phonology), essentially. I agree with Fuzzy in that you are probably capable of narrowing your focus. Then again, there's a lot to do in lab phon being that it's a newish field, so going into a PhD program with those interests will necessarily be specific in a way. As far as your statement, the things you mention don't have to be unrelated--I don't think they are.

 

All this to say ... yes, your interests as you describe them may be broad. But it sounds like you would be capable of easily pitching a line of inquiry that would link one or more of your interests together.

 

Thank you for your comments! Yes lab phonology is the covering term of the things I'm interested in, and better places for this line of study might mostly be along the west coast. I have to limit myself to east-coast programs because my boyfriend is in Cornell.. I actually had a very hard time picking out programs that do lab phon among all the "schools-of-thought" programs. What do you think of the list I have (OSU, UMich, NYU, UChicago, UMD, Cornell, Toronto and Stony Brook)? 

Edited December 3, 2013 by longforit

[fuzzylogician]

By "generative grammar" I intended to refer to not only syntax but also generative/constraint-based phonology. I think both of them more or less use OT as the basic framework (but I might be wrong cause I only read a few of their papers), but I feel like not being ready to accept constraint-based model and reductionist point of view as a matter of fact--maybe they are better explanatory models, but I just want to have a chance to explore other possibilities and make the judgment by myself.  

Sorry for causing confusions by using "complete theory". I wanted to say "established theory" or something along this line. Professor Flemming, for example, has been working on Dispersion Theory for years. I found this point of view tremendously interesting, and I would love to entertain it as one possible explanation for the issue in question. But I think maybe if someone works with him, he/she is most likely to work within this framework and have a "stronger belief" in this theory? Or I'm not making any sense here.. maybe students don't have to work within the same framework as their professors (advisors).. 

 

Well I certainly don't mean to pressure you about applying to MIT, it's not like they pay me to recruit students for them, it just seemed like a conspicuous omission given the other schools you listed. I'm glad I asked because your answer shows something important that I would like to point out -- if you value your independence, I think it's important that you spend some time investigating the potential schools you might apply to in order to learn whether in fact students there work on independent projects or on derivatives of their professors' work. For me this point turned out to be very important and one of the key ways I decided between my top two offers - at one, students were given a lot of freedom and did not appear to be working on their professors' interests; in the other, students mostly worked on problems related to their advisor's interests. Both are valid ways of doing things, but I preferred the more unstructured program that allowed you to develop your own project. That doesn't work for everyone - you need to be able to deal with feeling lost and having less guidance than if you work more closely with an advisor on something that they are an expert in. I don't know whether MIT phonology (or any other department for that matter) is of the former or latter kind, but I think it's important not to make assumptions here. I, at least, was surprised at which schools were in which category when I was making decisions. I was not smart enough to do this before applying, but you can make your school selections based on this question. It will require some work - find out who the recent graduates are in the past, say, 5 years, who had your POIs as their advisors. Look at their dissertations/other papers/homepage and see whether the questions they are asking seem to be derivatives of their professors' work (e.g. confirming their theory's predictions, applying their theory to a new construction or language, etc) or whether they are independent (caution: they may be using a theory developed by an advisor for part of their work, especially if it's a mainstream one. That by itself doesn't mean anything, it's all about how the questions are formed.).

[goldheartmountaintop]

I'm applying to OSU, UMich, NYU, UChicago, UMD, Cornell, Toronto and Stony Brook (not sure about UMass. Any suggestions?). 

 

Longforit, I did my BA and MA at Toronto (I'm now at MIT). Feel free to PM me if you have any questions about the program/the admissions process/the city!

[longforit]

Well I certainly don't mean to pressure you about applying to MIT, it's not like they pay me to recruit students for them, it just seemed like a conspicuous omission given the other schools you listed. I'm glad I asked because your answer shows something important that I would like to point out -- if you value your independence, I think it's important that you spend some time investigating the potential schools you might apply to in order to learn whether in fact students there work on independent projects or on derivatives of their professors' work. For me this point turned out to be very important and one of the key ways I decided between my top two offers - at one, students were given a lot of freedom and did not appear to be working on their professors' interests; in the other, students mostly worked on problems related to their advisor's interests. Both are valid ways of doing things, but I preferred the more unstructured program that allowed you to develop your own project. That doesn't work for everyone - you need to be able to deal with feeling lost and having less guidance than if you work more closely with an advisor on something that they are an expert in. I don't know whether MIT phonology (or any other department for that matter) is of the former or latter kind, but I think it's important not to make assumptions here. I, at least, was surprised at which schools were in which category when I was making decisions. I was not smart enough to do this before applying, but you can make your school selections based on this question. It will require some work - find out who the recent graduates are in the past, say, 5 years, who had your POIs as their advisors. Look at their dissertations/other papers/homepage and see whether the questions they are asking seem to be derivatives of their professors' work (e.g. confirming their theory's predictions, applying their theory to a new construction or language, etc) or whether they are independent (caution: they may be using a theory developed by an advisor for part of their work, especially if it's a mainstream one. That by itself doesn't mean anything, it's all about how the questions are formed.).

 

 

Thank you! That's a great suggestion. I'll start looking into it right now. 

Just one more question: if it's ok (or valued in some programs) for students to work on independent project (as opposed to derived from their advisors' research), why "fitness to the program" matters so much in the Ph.D. application? Does it mean programs of this kind pay more attention to applicants' academic abilities rather than fitness?  

Edited December 4, 2013 by longforit

[fuzzylogician]

Thank you! That's a great suggestion. I'll start looking into it right now. 

Just one more question: if it's ok (or valued in some programs) for students to work on independent project (as opposed to derived from their advisors' research), why "fitness to the program" matters so much in the Ph.D. application? Does it mean programs of this kind pay more attention to applicants' academic abilities rather than fitness?  

 

Two things. First of all, you should be careful about how you define "independent" and "derived" projects. That a student has similar interests to their advisors is not really surprising and doesn't tell you much about their independence - choosing an advisor who can support your interests (=shares some of them, is an expert in something you care about, etc) is usually a good idea and will help you make progress on your own work. If that student ends up working on something similar to what their advisor does and (gasp) using their theory, that doesn't mean they did not develop their project independently. An important question is how the advising system works at a given program - whether it basically works with an advisor-advisee system, where a student mostly works with just one professor, or whether students are free to meet with whoever they want on different projects - I think it gives you some indication of the freedom that program allows. If it's the former, you can look at a particular professor's students (plural, multiple of them) and decide whether they as a whole work on what looks like their advisor's stuff or whether they have their own diverse projects going on. If it's the latter it's slightly more complicated but not by much. You just want to look at profiles of recent graduates and ask whether they have diverse projects that seem to reflect their own research agenda, or whether it's a mix of the professors' interests.

 

Second, maybe we should also be more careful about how we define "fit" with a program. On the larger scale, if you e.g. applied to both Brown and UCLA to do the same exact semantics project, or UMD and OSU to work on the same syntax project (disclaimer: these are examples, other schools and topics could have been chosen here!), I'd worry you don't have a good understanding of what these programs are about. On an advisor level, a lot has to do with personal chemistry which is hard to judge but on a more objective level, you want to have at least 1-2, preferably 3-4, people at a given school who could guide different aspects of your work. That is, you want them to be experts in at least some aspect of what you want to do. However, at some point in your career you need to become the expert and they can provide guidance because of their experience in general in the field. At that point, you just want to be able to trust them and get along with them. Since that is the case, when schools are choosing applicants, they want students with a proven track record of successful research, who are smart and motivated, and those students will "fit" if it also seems that they want to study questions that the faculty could support through their own expertise and past work. If you want to study something that a school has no way of guiding you in, then having superb academic abilities is not going to get you very far.

 

And finally on a more personal note: you want to work with the experts. Being afraid of working with them because their theory might be forced on you is unfounded - I would apply and meet them if you get accepted to see what they are really like, or at least I would verify (not assume) that indeed these people force their theories on people. For example, it's hard for me to think of anyone who would be more excited to debate a serious well thought-out challenge to her theory than Donca Steriade. So at least for her, I don't think your assumption is at all well-founded.

[longforit]

I didn't got the chance to thank you for the past of few days because of one application ahead. I've incorporated many of your suggestions into my statement of purpose and gave a lot of thoughts of what you said. That really helps. Thanks a lot!

[wardword]

I'm really starting to panic again. I'm only applying to 4 schools because it's all I can afford, and my advisor and letter writer chewed me out the day I graduated when he learned I was only applying to four... He basically said I screwed myself over, and to think about applying for more next season like it was pretty much a given I would not get in anywhere. I chose my 4 VERY carefully, but now I'm freaking out.

 

He also gave me a bunch of conflicting advice, telling me one time that graduating early was a plus, and then telling me later that it wouldn't matter at all or might be a strike against me for having a semester of stagnation after I graduated. My school is SUCH a no-name school that even lab experience and related work experience might not help me. I just wish this could all be over with so I wouldn't have to obsess over grad school EVERY day.

[rksdf]

I'm really starting to panic again. I'm only applying to 4 schools because it's all I can afford, and my advisor and letter writer chewed me out the day I graduated when he learned I was only applying to four... He basically said I screwed myself over, and to think about applying for more next season like it was pretty much a given I would not get in anywhere. I chose my 4 VERY carefully, but now I'm freaking out.

 

He also gave me a bunch of conflicting advice, telling me one time that graduating early was a plus, and then telling me later that it wouldn't matter at all or might be a strike against me for having a semester of stagnation after I graduated. My school is SUCH a no-name school that even lab experience and related work experience might not help me. I just wish this could all be over with so I wouldn't have to obsess over grad school EVERY day.

 

I would say don't lose heart. This process is soul-destroying, to be sure, and its results can be very disappointing at first, but things tend to work out for the best, I think. I went through this process a long time ago, with a number of disappointments, and ended up doing something else, which was perfectly fine and, in retrospect, a better outcome for me at that time--of course it was very difficult to see that at the time. Now I'm trying again (also applying to only four schools--I think that's a perfectly fine number if you thought about it and reached the conclusion those were the right places for you to apply to given the circumstances), always expecting disappointment, and if I am pleasantly surprised, then so be it. If not, then it wasn't meant to be (not now, anyway), and I'll move on. Good luck! /B/

[antecedent]

I'm really starting to panic again. I'm only applying to 4 schools because it's all I can afford, and my advisor and letter writer chewed me out the day I graduated when he learned I was only applying to four... He basically said I screwed myself over, and to think about applying for more next season like it was pretty much a given I would not get in anywhere. I chose my 4 VERY carefully, but now I'm freaking out.

 

He also gave me a bunch of conflicting advice, telling me one time that graduating early was a plus, and then telling me later that it wouldn't matter at all or might be a strike against me for having a semester of stagnation after I graduated. My school is SUCH a no-name school that even lab experience and related work experience might not help me. I just wish this could all be over with so I wouldn't have to obsess over grad school EVERY day.

 

I don't have much heartening advice, I just wanted to say I'm sorry that you had such a negative interaction with an advisor you trust, respect, and in some ways rely on during this process. I know how that can make things seem pretty hopeless because it happened to me too. 

 

You'll know you're results soon enough, when this awful period of waiting is over (it doesn't feel soon enough, but Feb-March will come sooner than we all think). Try and keep busy til then. 

 

Like rksdf said, in the event that it goes poorly, it feels like the end of the world but it isn't. Many people (myself included) apply 2 or even 3 times. Look for something meaningful to keep you busy and you'll make it through.

Edited December 11, 2013 by antecedent

[hoviariel]

Grad Application's a b*tch. Get over it with chocolate and Plan C

[Guest Gnome Chomsky]

Grad Application's a b*tch. Get over it with chocolate and Plan C

Isn't that birth control? 

[Joleana]

Hello everyone! I'm so excited to finally post here, I've been following since this thread began and only just now feel equipped (albeit slightly) to contribute!

Although I won't be applying until next Spring for grad admission, I'd like to get a head start as much as possible! I'm curious if anyone has any recommendations on linguistics departments that have a heavy focus on psycholinguistics or cognitive psychology/linguistics? I'm particularly interested in Edinburgh and the work being put forth by Simon Kirby but I can't very well apply to only one university. Although I am a junior undergrad, I just finished my first quarter in all ling courses so I am very much a newbie. Any and all advice would be greatly appreciated!

[antecedent]

Has anyone else applied for the fellowship deadline at UBuffalo? I've gotten several emails from them since submitting my application (wishing me a happy holidays, notifying that my app is complete, etc.), and every time I get one my heart momentarily stops beating. I got one this morning, and rationally I know no one is going to send out nominations on Christmas Eve, but a little voice in my head somewhere was like 'Hey! This could  be it!'

 

SO. STRESSFUL. 

[KWIKKI]

I know it might be too early, but has anyone heard anything from any school?

[tspier2]

I know it might be too early, but has anyone heard anything from any school?

 

Not yet. The application deadlines haven't even passed at some schools yet.

[wardword]

My POI at NCSU told me they aren't looking at apps any time soon.

They are also ridiculously nice and everyone in the department always emails me back past 11 PM. Do they ever sleep??

[antecedent]

My POI at NCSU told me they aren't looking at apps any time soon.

They are also ridiculously nice and everyone in the department always emails me back past 11 PM. Do they ever sleep??

 

I got a really nice, unsolicited email from a professor on Dec 29th, which was a Sunday. My dad was like "are you sure you wanna go there? They work on the weekends AND over winter break!" lol. 

[tspier2]

I got a really nice, unsolicited email from a professor on Dec 29th, which was a Sunday. My dad was like "are you sure you wanna go there? They work on the weekends AND over winter break!" lol. 

 

Which school was that?