Area 51 » Science

147

followers

Announcements

There is generally quite a bit of confusion over what linguistics is (and what linguists do). It might be helpful to add an explicit definition here, such as "the scientific study of naturally-occurring human languages" or something along those lines. – Alan Hogue Jun 28 '10 at 6:40

That's just a list of the traditional subfields, not really a definition. – Alan Hogue Jun 28 '10 at 21:45

Maybe it would be easier to have a list of potentially more definable non-linguistics topics. Language learning of a particular language, translation requests, style and rhetoric questions, etc. – MatthewMartin Jun 30 '10 at 18:16

show 10 more announcements

33 Example Questions (8 closed)

active newest votes

up vote 24 down vote

added by David Grellscheid Jun 17 '10 at 22:19

The earlier "What does [word] mean in [language]?" seems off-topic to me, but what about this one? – David Grellscheid Jun 17 '10 at 22:21

Looks good to me. Potentially a little basic, but not off-topic. – JSBձոգչ Jun 18 '10 at 0:48

But assuming that the content is obscure enough to be difficult to look up, then I think this question should be allowed, as it has to do with linguistics. – Sasha Jul 4 '10 at 23:13

and even if it's not difficult to look up, putting it here will make it yet easier int he future to find again – warren Aug 20 '10 at 19:40

“easy to look up”? Etymology? I’ve always had huge difficulty finding anything about etymology of any words in languages other than English. So I think this kind of question is perfect for this site. – Timwi Aug 21 '10 at 21:41

show 1 more improvement suggestion

up vote 23 down vote

added by JSBձոգչ Jun 17 '10 at 13:57

up vote 23 down vote

added by MatthewMartin Jun 20 '10 at 17:07

This is a great question, IMHO. – JSBձոգչ Jun 21 '10 at 20:30

up vote 22 down vote

added by JSBձոգչ Jun 17 '10 at 13:54

I really hope this group doesn't become yet another forum for debates about Chomsky... – Alan Hogue Jun 25 '10 at 19:03

up vote 20 down vote

added by MatthewMartin Jun 20 '10 at 19:23

up vote 13 down vote

added by JSBձոգչ Jun 17 '10 at 13:54

This is intended as an example lower bound for a simple on-topic question. – JSBձոգչ Jun 17 '10 at 13:54

Again, this is a question that two seconds on wikipedia would answer. OK, it's on topic, but do we want to vote for this as an exemplary on-topic question? I don't think so. – Alan Hogue Jun 25 '10 at 19:08

I don't think it should be put forward as an exemplar. Agreed with @Alan – James Tauber Aug 7 '10 at 14:00

I agree. This is not a suitable question. – Mancuniensis Nov 10 '10 at 1:54

Not a suitable question for a site that targets specialists in the field; and, as Alan points out, it would take the questioner just a few seconds to find the answer on wikipedia.. – Mancuniensis Nov 10 '10 at 2:05

up vote 12 down vote

added by Ophiuroid Jul 9 '10 at 21:20

up vote 12 down vote

added by James Tauber Aug 6 '10 at 18:59

up vote 7 down vote

added by Alan Hogue Jun 25 '10 at 19:19

up vote 6 down vote

added by David Grellscheid Jun 17 '10 at 22:25

This seems like something the poster could easily look up for him/herself. – Alan Hogue Jun 25 '10 at 19:06

@Alan lots of questions on Q&A sites could be looked up but that doesn't make the site less useful. This seems like an on-topic example to me. It's especially useful if you don't have particular knowledge in a language area but still want input from people that do on some other issue you're researching. – James Tauber Aug 7 '10 at 13:59

up vote 6 down vote

added by David Grellscheid Jun 17 '10 at 22:28

+1, but I suggest a rewording: "What are the differences, if any, between revived Cornish and the original extinct version"? – JSBձոգչ Jun 18 '10 at 13:32

As worded this question invites empty value judgments. – Alan Hogue Jun 25 '10 at 19:05

up vote 6 down vote

added by RegDwight Sep 1 '10 at 19:22

I don't understand this question. Are you asking why we use different verbs? – CesarGon Oct 12 '10 at 12:08

@CesarGon: I didn't have enough room for a better wording, the number of characters is limited. What I'm asking is why in English we say "there are two cars in the garage", in German "it gives two cars in the garage", in French "it has two cars in the garage", in Russian "in garage two cars", etc. The usage differs between closely related languages, and sometimes even between dialects of the same language. I am wondering what the mechanisms behind that are. – RegDwight Oct 12 '10 at 14:35

@RegDwight: I understand; thanks for clarifying. You can always add a comment to your own question to clarify it in cases like this. After all, real questions in a real Q&A site are supposed to have content as well as a title. – CesarGon Oct 15 '10 at 16:21

@CesarGon: yeah, good point; I should have done that right away. – RegDwight Oct 15 '10 at 20:38

up vote 5 down vote

added by David Grellscheid, edited by WikiSpeedia hang-around Oct 30 '10 at 13:59

A great question for English Language and Usage. – RegDwight Oct 7 '10 at 10:06

Done. :-) – David Grellscheid Oct 11 '10 at 12:06

up vote 5 down vote

added by MatthewMartin Jun 21 '10 at 2:43

off-topic: belongs on superuser. it's a computer question. – Heath Hunnicutt Jul 13 '10 at 6:54

I would be shocked if this got a answer on SuperUser better than what a random person could get by typing this question into google. Experts on graphics cards and linux file systems are unlike to have ever tried to type in Hittite. – MatthewMartin Jul 13 '10 at 14:11

The corpora part of the question is unquestionably on-topic. – JSBձոգչ Jul 13 '10 at 15:38

@Heath I doubt superuser users would even understand what "concordance" "corpora" or "Hittite" mean :-) – James Tauber Aug 6 '10 at 15:34

@James: I have an account there, don't you? I admit I don't login there often. ;) – Heath Hunnicutt Aug 6 '10 at 18:27

show 3 more improvement suggestions

up vote 5 down vote

added by Dusty Nov 26 '10 at 3:34

up vote 4 down vote

added by JSBձոգչ Jun 17 '10 at 14:00

up vote 4 down vote

added by Heath Hunnicutt Jul 13 '10 at 6:55

Good question. I always found Lakoff's work so English-centred. – CesarGon Sep 29 '10 at 9:43

up vote 2 down vote

added by Alan Hogue Jun 25 '10 at 19:16

up vote 2 down vote

added by Alan Hogue Jun 25 '10 at 19:18

up vote 2 down vote

added by Alan Hogue Jun 25 '10 at 21:14

up vote 2 down vote

added by Guijarro Jun 29 '10 at 15:57

up vote 2 down vote

added by Carl Manaster Aug 9 '10 at 14:39

closed as off topic by Vincent McNabb, Icode4food, Ilari Kajaste, Cumbayah, keithjgrant Sep 22 '10 at 17:23

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

Could be asked at english.stackexchange.com – Vincent McNabb Aug 10 '10 at 4:04

Well it can be starting sometime tomorrow. ;) – kitukwfyer Aug 12 '10 at 0:11

I think this is very interesting, because it addresses the isue of encodings. – CesarGon Oct 12 '10 at 12:09

I also think that could be interesting here, because it address an issue of etymology: Where does these words come from. – Mnementh Nov 15 '10 at 9:12

up vote 1 down vote

added by MatthewMartin, edited by Charles Stewart Sep 20 '10 at 12:47

closed as off topic by Ophiuroid, kitukwfyer, Willbill, warren, Ivan Cherevko Aug 17 '10 at 15:17

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

	On topic, surely? It's asking about a phonological fact and what that says about a relevant question. It'd be a better question if the first part wasn't easy to look up: maybe better "Has the shape of the hyoid bone changed significantly in the last 7 million years, and does it tell us anything about the dawn of language?". – Charles Stewart Sep 20 '10 at 12:56
	I wouldn't say this is off-topic, but I find it too borderline. – CesarGon Oct 3 '10 at 16:58

up vote 0 down vote

added by JSBձոգչ Jun 17 '10 at 13:55

closed as off topic by David Grellscheid, Lee, MatthewMartin, Alan Hogue, Sasha Jul 4 '10 at 23:12

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

As stated, off topic, although could be reworded into a legitimate question – James Tauber Aug 7 '10 at 14:01

up vote 0 down vote

added by MatthewMartin Jun 21 '10 at 2:39

closed as off topic by David Grellscheid, Christian, ascarb, Alan Hogue, Ophiuroid Jul 9 '10 at 21:13

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

	I can't vote on my own question, but I can comment that this is a question of stylistic conventions and is a classic example of something not in the domain of linguistics. – MatthewMartin Jun 21 '10 at 2:41
	Right, this belongs on the English language site. – Mark C Sep 18 '10 at 5:15

up vote 0 down vote

added by Beska Jun 26 '10 at 1:29

closed as off topic by David Grellscheid, MatthewMartin, Heath Hunnicutt, kitukwfyer, ParanoiaPuppy Jul 28 '10 at 0:40

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

Pidgins and creoles are not at all the same thing as made-up languages. – Alan Hogue Jun 27 '10 at 3:40

I feel pretty strongly that languages invented for fiction or personal use should be off-topic for this site. Constructed languages that have real speaker communities (like Esperanto) can be on-topic, but only insofar as they show features of linguistic interest--this is not a site to answer questions about Esperanto grammar any more than its a site to answer questions about French grammar. And pidgins and creoles are not constructed languages in the usual sense, so they're as on-topic as any other natural language. – JSBձոգչ Jun 27 '10 at 23:16

What Bangs said. The fact that a few people speak Sindarin to each other doesn't make it comparable to a pidgin or creole or any other naturally occurring language. I don't think something like Esperanto need be off limits necessarily, but it's certainly of marginal interest as far as the scientific study of naturally occurring human language is concerned. – Alan Hogue Jun 28 '10 at 6:02

I think a priori it is hard to say if a question involving conlanguages is scientific or answerable. I concur, how to conjugate Sindarian is just as off topic as conjugating French. Fake languages are being used by real linguists in experimental settings to answer questions like, does grammatical gender bleed over into peoples semantic perception of words. I would be just as happy with a separate site for conlangs, but it is too early to tell if SO will be founding 1000s of sites or 10s. – MatthewMartin Jun 28 '10 at 11:43

I have created a planned language SE proposal. bit.ly/cxe2mw and added this question to it. May they both catch on, I for one would use both. – MatthewMartin Jul 9 '10 at 21:58

show 6 more improvement suggestions

up vote 0 down vote

added by Kosmonaut Dec 13 '10 at 20:56

up vote 0 down vote

added by Eldros Dec 17 '10 at 12:29

An obvious off-topic example. – Eldros Dec 17 '10 at 12:30

up vote 0 down vote

added by Jon Purdy Dec 29 '10 at 0:53

up vote -1 down vote

added by D W Oct 8 '10 at 5:43

closed as off topic by Antal S-Z, K L, Eldros, warren, ShreevatsaR Dec 27 '10 at 19:14

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

up vote -2 down vote

added by RegDwight Sep 12 '10 at 17:21

closed as off topic by JSBձոգչ, Charles Stewart, keithjgrant, CesarGon, anno Oct 21 '10 at 10:11

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

Obviously, an off-topic candidate. We don't want to have discussions along the lines of "Russian/Tagalog/Esperanto/Chinese is so stupid, Bulgarian/Saaroa/Volapük/Limbu is so much better". – RegDwight Sep 12 '10 at 17:24

up vote -3 down vote

added by Alan Hogue Jun 25 '10 at 19:25

	Why has this been voted as "not a good example?" – Vincent McNabb Aug 10 '10 at 4:01
	@Vincent McNabb - I could see this as "off-topic", but not "nage" – warren Dec 8 '10 at 17:33

up vote -5 down vote

added by JoFrhwld Jul 22 '10 at 21:52

closed as off topic by JSBձոգչ, MatthewMartin, Charlie, James Tauber, kitukwfyer Aug 12 '10 at 0:11

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

As a grad student, we spend a lot of time talking about stuff like this, but I think it should be off topic. – JoFrhwld Jul 22 '10 at 21:53

I don't think this does anything to help define the boundaries of a linguistics forum. – K L Nov 24 '10 at 18:38

Is this an insider joke or something? I don't get it... (Not voting "not a good example", but rather abstaining completely, since I have no idea what this could possibly mean.) – RegDwight Nov 24 '10 at 19:37

voting "not a good example" if only precisely because I don't know what it means -- perhaps if it was more explicit, it would get my vote as a good off-topic example? – lindes Dec 11 '10 at 21:15