Talk:Noun ellipsis

[Untitled]
Mundart, You appear to be making changes to this article that I will likely disagree with. I suggest that you first describe the changes that you think should be made here so that we can go over them first. As things stand, I will likely undo your work. --Tjo3ya (talk) 14:13, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I think the issue is that in many cases, it is a misdescription of the phenomenon to call it "N-ellipsis" or "noun ellipsis", as what is targeted for ellipsis--as the article itself mentions--can be more than a noun. This is why the traditional term for this is N'-ellipsis (following Jackendoff's work), or NP-ellipsis (in more recent theoretical clothes). A more consistent and less theoretically-bound term is simply "nominal ellipsis", which some of the recent literature on these topics adopts as well. (For example, the forthcoming overview article on ellipsis in den Dikken's handbook, as well as the chapter in the Oxford Handbook of Ellipsis that van Craenenbroeck and Temmerman are editing). So I just applied this logic to this article, and I think it leads to an improvement in accuracy (it's not just "nouns" that are elided in this construction) and in scholarship. I'm open to hearing why you'd object, though. Mundart (talk) 16:49, 17 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I am fine with the change to "nominal ellipsis". I struggled with the choice of terms when I first drafted the article, so I have no particular attachment to the term "noun ellipsis". However, changing the term requires that the title of the article be changed. That can be done, but it sometimes requires the engagement of an editor with the authority and know-how to do it.


 * But is that the only change you intend to make? I noticed that you removed the table drawing attention to distinction between possessive determiners and possessive pronouns. That distinction is important content. Do you disagree? Why? --Tjo3ya (talk) 17:18, 17 July 2013 (UTC) (talk) 17:10, 17 July 2013 (UTC)


 * That was the only change I intended to make. If I deleted a table, it was by accident. Whoops! I'm more comfortable in the old style editing boxes than the wysiwyg one. As for changing the title, yes, we have move the article to the new name, but I don't know how to do that, sorry. Mundart (talk) 17:49, 17 July 2013 (UTC)


 * OK, I suggest that you continue your effort to change all occurrences of "noun ellipsis" and "N-ellipsis" to "nominal ellipsis". Restore the table. Once you've accomplished that I will produce a proper suggestion for the title of the article to be changed, so that an editor with the authority and know-how to do that can take care of it. --Tjo3ya (talk) 18:01, 17 July 2013 (UTC)