Wiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2015-12/Part of speech
Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Wiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2015-12/Part of speech. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Wiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2015-12/Part of speech, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Wiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2015-12/Part of speech in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Wiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2015-12/Part of speech you have here. The definition of the word Wiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2015-12/Part of speech will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofWiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2015-12/Part of speech, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
Numerals
Wasn’t cardinal/ordinal number/numeral disallowed a while back? — Ungoliant (falai) 14:51, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
- I didn't remember that. If that's true, I'd gladly remove them. (and perhaps put them on the disallowed list) --Daniel Carrero (talk) 14:59, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
General commentary
As a non-linguist non-native speaker, 'part of speech' wasn't self-explanatory to me when I first encountered it. All sections should have a quick definition in their first sentence so you know whether this is something you look for or want to skip. So in this case I propose something like 'Part of speech' is the word used to describe what type of word an entry deals with or something like that in less clumsy. Or alternatively link part of speech. Korn (talk) 14:22, 17 December 2015 (UTC) Also, since that abbreviation is used elsewhere, I propose adding it to the headline: Part of speech (POS). Korn (talk) 14:25, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
- @Korn:
- Adding a quick definition in the first sentence.
Done - Linking to part of speech. Done
- Adding "POS". Done (I added it to the first sentence)
- Adding a quick definition in the first sentence.
- Looks good? --Daniel Carrero (talk) 14:36, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
- @Korn: Just to be clear, "part of speech" is not some obscure linguistic term, it is a standard grammatical term that is even used in elementary school grammar lessons. --WikiTiki89 17:09, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
- Looks good to me as it is now. In the grand scheme, the problem with en.wiktionary is that it has to choose whether it primarily sees itself as the English Wiktionary or the international Wiktionary. As someone who had no lessons on either English nor German grammar in his German elementary school, I think it's a good deed to use these quick-and-easy opportunities to convenience people who like me have to acquire the terminology when they first get into the world of working with language here. I think ELI5 is generally the best mantra for help and tutorial pages. Korn (talk) 22:18, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
- I have no problem with linking the word, I just wanted to clear up your potential misconception of this word's register (now "register" is an obscure linguistic term). --WikiTiki89 15:28, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
- I see. I actually appreciate that. I never encountered it anywhere but here, though, despite having 'reading about languages' as a main hobby - whereas 'register' I read daily. A look around the internet tells me, as you did, that it really is a very basic word. I'm amazed I managed to dodge it so thoroughly. Korn (talk) 21:02, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
- I have no problem with linking the word, I just wanted to clear up your potential misconception of this word's register (now "register" is an obscure linguistic term). --WikiTiki89 15:28, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
- Looks good to me as it is now. In the grand scheme, the problem with en.wiktionary is that it has to choose whether it primarily sees itself as the English Wiktionary or the international Wiktionary. As someone who had no lessons on either English nor German grammar in his German elementary school, I think it's a good deed to use these quick-and-easy opportunities to convenience people who like me have to acquire the terminology when they first get into the world of working with language here. I think ELI5 is generally the best mantra for help and tutorial pages. Korn (talk) 22:18, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
- @Korn: Just to be clear, "part of speech" is not some obscure linguistic term, it is a standard grammatical term that is even used in elementary school grammar lessons. --WikiTiki89 17:09, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
Question
If this vote passes, what happens with Wiktionary:Entry layout/POS headers? --Droigheann (talk) 20:00, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
- Good question. It's kind of outdated and less complete (if more wordy), compared to the voted "Part of speech" EL section. Wiktionary:Entry layout/POS headers is bigger than the the EL section, but do we really need multiple tables and lists like that? The EL section seems to do the same work just fine. I say, if there's anything worth moving from Wiktionary:Entry layout/POS headers to WT:EL#Part of speech, then let's do it and delete the former or mark it
{{inactive}}. - This reminds me: I got everything I wanted from Wiktionary:Spelling variants in entry names and Wiktionary:Redirections, then marked them inactive and created a vote which became our current WT:EL#Entry name. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 20:15, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
- It is worse than outdated, it often contradicts this proposal: it allows (as L3 headers) Acronyms/Abbreviations/Initialisms (in addition to POS headers for the same, with this explicit example, Ordinal numbers for Latin and several other things being prohibited here, so I'm glad to hear it would be done away with instead of remaining a possible source of confusion for new editors who might come across it. --Droigheann (talk) 14:22, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
- @Droigheann: Done. I
deletedredirected Wiktionary:Entry layout/POS headers. I realize this could have been done one year ago. Better late than never, I guess. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 01:30, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
- @Droigheann:
- It is worse than outdated, it often contradicts this proposal: it allows (as L3 headers) Acronyms/Abbreviations/Initialisms (in addition to POS headers for the same, with this explicit example, Ordinal numbers for Latin and several other things being prohibited here, so I'm glad to hear it would be done away with instead of remaining a possible source of confusion for new editors who might come across it. --Droigheann (talk) 14:22, 23 January 2016 (UTC)