imported>Stephen Ewen |
imported>John Stephenson |
| (190 intermediate revisions by 50 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| | {{NOINDEX}} |
| {{archive box|auto=long}} | | {{archive box|auto=long}} |
| ==Acquisition of German by English speakers==
| |
| Hi John--I see that you are expert in matters and as a result of all I know, I added a couple of sections to the end of the [[German_language]] article regarding relative ease of learning German for English speakers. This is based on (I don't know what all in) my past training and experience, but I wonder if you could take a look at it and screen for opinionated quackery, or add references, or whatever kind of feedback it needs. Thanks in advance if you can get to it. Incidentally I did become fluent in German after adulthood and got a good accent too, and I always thought a lot of those theories about early childhood "windows of opportunity" being lost for adults was, well, a lot of hooey. That's why I'm asking for a second pair of eyes in this matter; I'm definitely not neutral; rather, I'm a teacher who tries to motivate students and give them hope.[[User:Pat Palmer|Pat Palmer]] 14:16, 4 April 2007 (CDT)
| |
| :Hi - I'm not so sure about the idea that German is easier than a lot of other languages, though it depends on what aspect of the language is to be learned. I'm not sure there's even anecdotal evidence to back this up; for example there's a poll [http://www.englishforum.ch/language-corner/4217-french-german-easiest-learn.html here] of learners claiming that French is easier. Originally, specialists argued that 'difference=difficulty', and this idea persists in some circles to this day. And there can be 'positive transfer' where the first language similarity makes it easier to learn the second. However, more recently the prevalent view is that languages that are similar can be harder to learn because they fool learners - they don't recognise what is to be learned. There are some famous examples of German sentences which many learners accept when in fact they're unacceptable, e.g. *''dieses Hotel verbietet Hunde'' ('this hotel forbids dogs') and *''meine Gitarre riss eine Saite'' ('my guitar broke a string'). Maybe in the earliest stages, German is easier, but the differences in semantics in particular makes it difficult. An example of this is Caroll et al. (discussed [http://journals.cambridge.org/production/action/cjoGetFulltext?fulltextid=322780 here]) where there was some limited evidence that English speakers did better than Spanish speakers on picture description tasks using German, because there were more cognates the English speakers could draw on. However, this was only a slight advantage and neither group performed like native speakers. That study also argues that translating German is difficult because although the languages are superficially similar, preserving the writer's attitude is difficult due to different stylistic devices. So overall I would say it's easier in some contexts, particularly early on, but the language doesn't help you to get good quickly. I'm not sure it's worth empahsising this in the article. [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 00:24, 5 April 2007 (CDT)
| |
|
| |
|
| == English grammar == | | == Welcome back! == |
|
| |
|
| Hi John, and thanks for your excellent earlier emendations to [[English grammar]]. It is great to see another linguist here. What is happening, I fear, is that someone with a background in ESL, but without other linguistic training, has started off the article and the "parts of speech" entries rather on the wrong foot, basically giving the "commonsense" notions of language but only making a slight nod to the state of affairs in modern linguistics. Gently, but firmly, I hope that linguists on CZ can steer these entries into a better direction; I have made some edits but would be delighted if you could look over what I've said and see what you think can be further clarified or improved. Thanks!! [[User:Russell Potter|Russell Potter]] 10:57, 18 April 2007 (CDT)
| | The Universe is always in flux -- some are leaving, some are coming. Hope that all goes well.... [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 18:53, 24 August 2011 (UTC) |
| | :CZ is cooler when you are here. Welcome back!--[[User:Domergue Sumien|Domergue Sumien]] 11:01, 25 August 2011 (UTC) |
| | ::Yes, welcome back, and warmly so! --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 11:21, 25 August 2011 (UTC) |
| | :::Thanks, everyone! [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 06:23, 29 August 2011 (UTC) |
|
| |
|
| ::Thanks for the reply on my talk page. I agree with you wholeheartedly, but at the same time, I don't want to represent linguistics as necessarily abstract, theoretical, or arcane. What I'd like to see is a man article, and other entries, which gently and elegantly introduce their readers to the models of language used by linguists, and demonstrate (in the case of grammar) some of the limits of the traditional, public school (US) model. I've taught linguistics and grammar for seventeen years at the college level, and what I see in my students is what I like to call grammatical "bad conscience" -- the fear that you have done something wrong, but don't know what it is. I work to take the fear out of grammar, parlty by disabusing them of needless rules (such as the old prejudice against "split" infinitives), while explaining the meaningful ones (when to use "whom" instead of "who"). I'm hoping to do something similar in these entries.
| | == Returning to Citizendium == |
|
| |
|
| ::I very much like your emendations to the fist paragraph(s), but did change one phrase, both to make it scan better and to take out what seemed a rather guarded stance toward linguistics. I certainly do not want gobbledygook and jargon! -- but I think that most of the concepts of modern linguistics can be explained and demonstrated without jargon, and that it's worth doing. Cheers, [[User:Russell Potter|Russell Potter]] 07:58, 19 April 2007 (CDT)
| | Your message to inactive users is well worded and very encouraging. I think the link to their contributions is a nice touch. Good job! [[User:David Finn|David Finn]] 13:25, 19 November 2011 (UTC) |
| | :Thanks. Actually, thanks to you they will see a lot of edits in the 'recent changes' list specific to each workgroup. |
|
| |
|
| == The article on Code-switching and Turkish Linguistics ==
| | :I think I've done over 140 people now, about a third of the absent editors (all Natural Sciences workgroups, plus Engineering). So far not much luck coaxing many people back, but I have tried the 'hook' of pointing out that they have public bios here that they might at least like to update. I have personalised the template I've been using to point to the workgroups of which they are members... this takes quite a bit of time and ideally is something a robot should do, but we don't see many robots around here these days. There are certainly people labelled 'inactive' who have been editing in the last few months; this could be fixed by a robot, but I lack the technical skill to run one. [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 14:43, 19 November 2011 (UTC) |
|
| |
|
| Hi John. First of all, thank you very much for your warm welcome and encouraging words. I will edit the article on code-switching day by day, also with reference to pioneering studies published up till now. As you know, the phenomenon has attracted many schlars in different areas of study like sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics, neurolinguistics, SLA, and language teaching. What I believe is that the article-when completed- should present insights from many perspectives, which means it requires contributions from many authors and editors in Citizendium. So we may share different aspects of code-switching with other authors, which will require time.
| | ::That is something I have seen working with the "[http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Special:SpecialPages Special Pages]" - in some cases the lists are not updating on anything like a regular basis. Maybe there is a central problem to do with CZ statistics not updating regularly - sounds like one for the tech team. [[User:David Finn|David Finn]] 14:51, 19 November 2011 (UTC) |
| After this, as a native speaker of Turkish, I will try to contribute the project with an article on Turkish language. Hopefully, I will attact other professionals in Turkish linguistics both in my university as well as many others in Turkey. Infact, I believe that we do not need to build everything upon Wiki articles, though they may inspire our contributions. What do you think about this? Should we first check the wiki content before starting?
| |
| All the best, [[User:Olcay Sert|Olcay Sert]] 08:18, 23 April 2007 (CDT)
| |
|
| |
|
| ==[[Noam Chomsky]]== | | == Helping to understand Japanese phrases == |
| Hello! Sorry for previously over-rude comment. Last night I was editing after I just finished stress-laden homework and studying. I was pointing out about some mistakes on [[Noam Chomsky]] article. Please accept my apology. Thanks! [[User:Yi Zhe Wu|Yi Zhe Wu]] 16:00, 7 May 2007 (CDT)
| |
|
| |
|
| ==Language article and Linguistics template==
| | "このときの歩行速度は時速0.5km にも満たない" |
| I was a bit startled to find the <nowiki>{{Linguistics}}</nowiki> template in the [[Language]] article. I propose to remove it, on grounds that this particular article is cross-disciplinary, of interest in Computers, History, Philosophy etc. It is currently heavily weighted towards [[natural language]] but I think that might change simply by moving some of that material out into a [[natural language]] subarticle. Would you mind terribly if I removed the template from [[Language]]? I think that template belongs on articles that belong indisputably to Linguistics Workgroup and nowhere else. [[User:Pat Palmer|Pat Palmer]] 23:43, 13 May 2007 (CDT)
| |
| :That's only temporary, so OK. Perhaps you could create another template with links to language and linguistics-related articles, which could go there. You could grab the one at [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Template:Linguistics Template:Linguistics], copy it to [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Template:Language Template:Language] and hack out/add stuff. If the Language article is to be cross-disciplinary, such a template pointing to things like [[computational linguistics]], [[philosophy of language]] etc. might help and show people which articles need creating to support the main page. [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 04:32, 14 May 2007 (CDT)
| |
|
| |
|
| == Auntie and Beep ===> BBC ==
| | Hello. I tried really hard to find out what the walking speed of the E0 prototype was. I'm afraid that the sentence above states "at the time it was really difficult to reach 0.5km/h" rather than saying "E0 walked at 0.5km/h." Do you know what it means? Thank you. ([[User:Chunbum Park|Chunbum Park]] 03:48, 22 November 2011 (UTC)) |
| | :My Japanese is really not very good, but I think it means 'At this time, the walking speed was less then 0.5km per hour'. [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 13:56, 22 November 2011 (UTC) |
| | ::Yes, the walking speed "did not reach 0.5km/h". --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 14:34, 22 November 2011 (UTC) |
| | :::Thank you. ([[User:Chunbum Park|Chunbum Park]] 13:10, 7 December 2011 (UTC)) |
|
| |
|
| I think you caught me red handed, but why this redirect? [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]] | <span style="background:grey"> <font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font> </span> 22:46, 17 May 2007 (CDT)
| | == EC == |
| :Er, come again? Do you mean, why are there redirects from [[Auntie]] and [[Beeb]] (not 'Beep') to [[BBC]]? Because 'Beeb' and 'Auntie' are both popular nicknames for the BBC, which the Beeb has used itself commercially, e.g. beeb.com. [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 22:51, 17 May 2007 (CDT)
| |
| :No doubt obvious for an islander :) it took me by surprise. Well explanation enough - thanks John. I wonder where auntie comes from though, got a clue? it can't be the dragon coronation street :) [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]] | <span style="background:grey"> <font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font> </span> 22:53, 17 May 2007 (CDT)
| |
| ::No-one knows for sure, but it might be due to the saying that "auntie knows best". [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 22:59, 17 May 2007 (CDT)
| |
| ::auntie knows best, we (the dutch) have another saying, when we do not know what will happen: "Joost mag het weten" - Joost may know. And that Joost is in effect the devil. The webservice Joost got its name from that expression. [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]] | <span style="background:grey"> <font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font> </span> 23:11, 17 May 2007 (CDT)
| |
|
| |
|
| ==Japanese Linguistics==
| | Hey John, I have nominated you for the EC election. I don't think there is any mechanism for you to know that without research or me telling you so here I am. You have a good overview of CZ past and present and some good ideas about its future so I hope you will consider accepting the nomination. [[User:David Finn|David Finn]] 09:20, 27 November 2011 (UTC) |
| | :Thank you and I will certainly take the nomination very seriously. [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 05:06, 28 November 2011 (UTC) |
|
| |
|
| Hi John!
| | == Referenda == |
| Thanks for welcome and the heads up about the Japanese English article.
| |
| I have some comments (just one really) but I'll put them in the talk page of the article.
| |
| [[User:Axel Theorin|Axel Theorin]] 11:29, 18 May 2007 (CDT)
| |
|
| |
|
| == Speedy ==
| | Should the discussion be [[CZ_Talk:Referenda_(Citizen-Initiated)#Voting|here]] or [[CZ_Talk:Referenda_(Citizen-Initiated)/Elections#Electoral system|there]]? [[User:David Finn|David Finn]] 13:52, 6 December 2011 (UTC) |
| | :What about on the Talk pages for the referenda subpages? [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 14:20, 6 December 2011 (UTC) |
|
| |
|
| I think the speedy deletion for the ID theory redirect is premature, because there is still much controversy and there may be broken links. Regards. [[User:Yi Zhe Wu|Yi Zhe Wu]] 21:34, 23 May 2007 (CDT)
| | ::Suits me! [[User:David Finn|David Finn]] 08:40, 7 December 2011 (UTC) |
|
| |
|
| == Penguin == | | == Thank you! == |
|
| |
|
| As fascinating as the etymology of Penguin is, the subject seems to me entirely different from that of the bird itself, so I've moved it to [[Penguin (word)]]. I also wonder whether, though, such an extensive paraphrase of an OED-sourced text should be in CZ, and whether a length entry on a single word doesn't raise issues (is it encyclopedic? Is it maintainable?). If you feel strongly that the material you've contributed ''should'' be here, I'd welcome your comments on that article's talk page. [[User:Russell Potter|Russell Potter]] 06:27, 27 May 2007 (CDT)
| | Indeed. I've been in college so things were busy. Time flies and I have a semester left to graduate. Hope I will have more time soon to edit this encyclopedia. [[User:Yi Zhe Wu|Yi Zhe Wu]] 05:01, 4 February 2012 (UTC) |
|
| |
|
| :Hi John. An update: Nancy Sculerati posted to [[Penguin (word)]] to say that she planned a considerable expansion of the main [[Penguin]] entry. Assuming this happens, I think a slightly condensed version of your original contribution could indeed be a ''part'' of that entry, and so I've taken the liberty of moving it back into the entry. I think we won't want subheaders for the three explanations (this would crowd the Table of Contents and looks a bit awkward), but how about a bulleted list? That might do the trick. Please go ahead and tweak what I've moved if needed. Cheers, [[User:Russell Potter|Russell Potter]] 11:15, 29 May 2007 (CDT)
| | == Messed up adding quotes to Welcome Page == |
|
| |
|
| == Vasco da Gama (disambiguation) ==
| | John, I tried adding quotes #s 50 & 51 to Welcome Page, but somehow messed up, as Welcome Page now shows no quotes. |
|
| |
|
| Hi. I noticed you asked for a speedy deletion of this page: [[Vasco da Gama (disambiguation)]]. Your justification was "Nothing to disambiguate", yet there is something to disambiguate as that pages links from [[Vasco da Gama]]. --[[User:José Leonardo Andrade|José Leonardo Andrade]] 10:01, 30 May 2007 (CDT)
| | Will you rectify, and explain what I did wrong. |
| :Hello again. I read the link you gave me, but I couldn't find something there that supports your request. That page says this:''The function of a disambiguation page is strictly to list the various articles (including '''planned articles''') that go under a title''. I started the [[Vasco da Gama]] page, so I thought I would also start a disambiguation page for the other meanings. Since most people who work on the Citizendium are from the U.S or from the U.K., I thought that they wouldn't be too familiar with the other things named after the navigator (a bridge, sports clubs, etc...). I also had seen this page: [[Bombay (disambiguation)]]. I was merely trying to help. It´s not that fun to see that the time I spent on that page was worthless. Sooner or later we are going to need that page, so why delete?. --[[User:José Leonardo Andrade|José Leonardo Andrade]] 05:12, 31 May 2007 (CDT)
| |
| ::The page you quote refers to "planned articles" - i.e. that you or someone else has the intention of starting articles on those subjects in the foreseeable future. If articles are not planned then there's no point having a disambiguation page. As wasting time, I know the feeling - but the idea of a wiki is that others can mercilessly edit or even delete your work. Regarding the Bombay page, that has been imported from Wikipedia, so lists articles there that have no Citizendium equivalent. Strictly speaking, it should be deleted unless the author plans to start those articles. [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 22:49, 1 June 2007 (CDT)
| |
|
| |
|
| == [[:Image:Dust-box.jpg]] ==
| | Thanks. [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 19:29, 27 April 2012 (UTC) |
|
| |
|
| That appears to be an example of [[CZ:Fair_Use_Policy%2C_Media#Category_Three:_Company_logos.2C_trademarks.2C_copyrighted_packaging.2C_and_closely_similar|copyrighted packaging]], which means you can't release a photo you took of it into the Public Domain. It's like if I used a camera to zoom in on a book cover and snapped. The cover does not become PD just because I took the photo. I'd have to reset the book cover in a larger photo in a new way to make its incorporation part of a new work, in which case it'd become fair use. I just changed the data to copyrighted for now. Probably in a few weeks, you'll be able to use the photo under fair use because you are re-setting it into a new work--one on Japanese English--so let's just ignore this any further for now. But because the photo as an item itself is simply a copy of copyrighted packaging, you'd still not be able to release it under PD. [[User:Stephen Ewen|Stephen Ewen]] 23:48, 1 June 2007 (CDT)
| | :There were some 'nowiki' tags next to the 'mod' value. Fixed now. [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 00:19, 28 April 2012 (UTC) |
| | |
| | ::Thanks, John. I saw the tags, but gave them no attention, possibly because quotes had been appearing before I opened the editor to add my quotes. It's a mystery to me how and when those tags got there. [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 16:15, 28 April 2012 (UTC) |
| | |
| | |
| | ==Pompeii== |
| | Hi, I just wanted to say thanks for adding related articles to the Pompeii page. That's one less thing to do! [[User:Richard Nevell|Richard Nevell]] 12:06, 26 September 2012 (UTC) |
| | :No problem. :) [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 11:27, 1 October 2012 (UTC) |
| | |
| | |
| | == Picture of George Fox == |
| | It would be really helpful to know the provenance of the picture of George Fox. I have developed the stub article on him, but am reluctant to add the picture without knowing more about it. It appears to be an imaginative reconstruction rather than derived from an actual portrait. The latest biographer of Fox (Larry Ingle) is reduced to using a "supposed" portrait extracted from a caricature of a Quaker meeting (as evidenced in a book by Rosemary Moore). The picture you have provided could conceivably have been constructed as a younger version of that image. --[[User:Martin Wyatt|Martin Wyatt]] 19:24, 16 November 2012 (UTC) |
Welcome back!
The Universe is always in flux -- some are leaving, some are coming. Hope that all goes well.... Hayford Peirce 18:53, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
- CZ is cooler when you are here. Welcome back!--Domergue Sumien 11:01, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, welcome back, and warmly so! --Daniel Mietchen 11:21, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks, everyone! John Stephenson 06:23, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
Returning to Citizendium
Your message to inactive users is well worded and very encouraging. I think the link to their contributions is a nice touch. Good job! David Finn 13:25, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. Actually, thanks to you they will see a lot of edits in the 'recent changes' list specific to each workgroup.
- I think I've done over 140 people now, about a third of the absent editors (all Natural Sciences workgroups, plus Engineering). So far not much luck coaxing many people back, but I have tried the 'hook' of pointing out that they have public bios here that they might at least like to update. I have personalised the template I've been using to point to the workgroups of which they are members... this takes quite a bit of time and ideally is something a robot should do, but we don't see many robots around here these days. There are certainly people labelled 'inactive' who have been editing in the last few months; this could be fixed by a robot, but I lack the technical skill to run one. John Stephenson 14:43, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
- That is something I have seen working with the "Special Pages" - in some cases the lists are not updating on anything like a regular basis. Maybe there is a central problem to do with CZ statistics not updating regularly - sounds like one for the tech team. David Finn 14:51, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
Helping to understand Japanese phrases
"このときの歩行速度は時速0.5km にも満たない"
Hello. I tried really hard to find out what the walking speed of the E0 prototype was. I'm afraid that the sentence above states "at the time it was really difficult to reach 0.5km/h" rather than saying "E0 walked at 0.5km/h." Do you know what it means? Thank you. (Chunbum Park 03:48, 22 November 2011 (UTC))
- My Japanese is really not very good, but I think it means 'At this time, the walking speed was less then 0.5km per hour'. John Stephenson 13:56, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, the walking speed "did not reach 0.5km/h". --Daniel Mietchen 14:34, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you. (Chunbum Park 13:10, 7 December 2011 (UTC))
EC
Hey John, I have nominated you for the EC election. I don't think there is any mechanism for you to know that without research or me telling you so here I am. You have a good overview of CZ past and present and some good ideas about its future so I hope you will consider accepting the nomination. David Finn 09:20, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you and I will certainly take the nomination very seriously. John Stephenson 05:06, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Referenda
Should the discussion be here or there? David Finn 13:52, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
- What about on the Talk pages for the referenda subpages? John Stephenson 14:20, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
- Suits me! David Finn 08:40, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Thank you!
Indeed. I've been in college so things were busy. Time flies and I have a semester left to graduate. Hope I will have more time soon to edit this encyclopedia. Yi Zhe Wu 05:01, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
Messed up adding quotes to Welcome Page
John, I tried adding quotes #s 50 & 51 to Welcome Page, but somehow messed up, as Welcome Page now shows no quotes.
Will you rectify, and explain what I did wrong.
Thanks. Anthony.Sebastian 19:29, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
- There were some 'nowiki' tags next to the 'mod' value. Fixed now. John Stephenson 00:19, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks, John. I saw the tags, but gave them no attention, possibly because quotes had been appearing before I opened the editor to add my quotes. It's a mystery to me how and when those tags got there. Anthony.Sebastian 16:15, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Pompeii
Hi, I just wanted to say thanks for adding related articles to the Pompeii page. That's one less thing to do! Richard Nevell 12:06, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
- No problem. :) John Stephenson 11:27, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
Picture of George Fox
It would be really helpful to know the provenance of the picture of George Fox. I have developed the stub article on him, but am reluctant to add the picture without knowing more about it. It appears to be an imaginative reconstruction rather than derived from an actual portrait. The latest biographer of Fox (Larry Ingle) is reduced to using a "supposed" portrait extracted from a caricature of a Quaker meeting (as evidenced in a book by Rosemary Moore). The picture you have provided could conceivably have been constructed as a younger version of that image. --Martin Wyatt 19:24, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
![→[[:Image:Dust-box.jpg]]](#Image:Dust-box.jpg){kind=link}