User:Jake9101/sandbox

Article Evaluation Canadian English -The article is on topic. There is nothing that is largely distracting. The article talks about a few other English dialects, but only as comparative tools. -The article is neutral. 99% of the information appears to facts-based, and not leaning towards one opinion or another. Another user pointed out that there may be some original research in the article, which would need further verification prior to publishing. -The article goes into great detail about the usage of language in applications such as law and transportation, but for the purposes of a dialect class, the phonology is more important. -There are two obvious citation errors, but those have been previously noted by another user. The rest of the references and citations work appears fine. -None of the sources appear to be clearly biased based on a quick scan. 99% references to facts or information, either directly or paraphrased have a citation for a proper source or inspiration. There are only a few that are questionable. -None of the information seems out of date. During my research, if I come across any updated information, I will be sure to update the article. I will be sure to add any relevant, objective, and substantiated information I come across. -Most of the conversations are personal additions based on anecdotes, such as words or terms for items the differ across English dialects, as well as spelling or usage differences. -Across all of the projects it it involved in (WikiProject Ontario, WikiProject Quebec, WikiProject Nova Scotia, WikiProject New Brunswick, WikiProject Manitoba, WikiProject British Columbia, WikiProject Prince Edward Island, WikiProject Saskatchewan, WikiProject Alberta, WikiProject Newfoundland and Labrador, WikiProject Canadian Territories) it has a C-class, High Importance rating. -This article spends much more time talking about the usage and current applications of Canadian English in practices like measurement, politics, law, and transportation. In class, we focus more on learning the phonological nuances of the languages. Jake9101 (talk) 18:26, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Week 10

Content to research and clarify or add:
 * Missing Canadianism distinction: "try to" versus "try and"
 * http://web.uvic.ca/~marisabrook/Brook_and_Tagliamonte_2016.pdf

Will go under Section 7, probably 7.12
 * One of the other distinctions between Canadian English and British English is the use of the the phrase "try to + infinitive" versus the use of the phrase "try and + infinitive". Canadian English uses "try to" while British English uses "try and". The subordinate word, "to" or "and." Originally, the distinction did not exist, but through the evolution of the French term trier, meaning ‘pick out’, ‘separate’, or ‘distinguish’ into the English try, a number of meanings were adopted along the way, including 'attempt'. Brook and Tagliamonte found that Canadian English speakers used "try and" 30% of the time while British English speakers used it 73% of the time. However, since the 2000s, the two terms have begun to see equally frequent usage in British English.
 * Brooke, Marisa & Tagliamonte, Sali, (2016) Why Does Canadian English Use Try To But British English Use Try And? Let’s Try And/To Figure It Out, University of Toronto
 * Officially added and cited on Wikipedia 15 April 2018