User:Kelleedine/sandbox

Week 3: a) Answers: The article “Genitive Construction” does not appear to have a “grade” because there is a debate as to whether or not this article should be merged with the article for “Attributive Construction” with other editors finding that since not every language has a genitive marking then perhaps the information given should be combined with the other article. While some agree others feel that if someone is searching for the possessive form they would search genitive and not attributive. No each fact Is not referenced with an appropriate or reliable source because most of the facts on this article do not have a source. Everything in the article does seem relevant to genitive construction. Nothing particularly distracted me from the article expect the layout. The heading of the articles I feel should have been capitalized at each word rather than just left lowercase. The section under “Using a clitic” starts by saying, “The English so-called Saxon […]” and I feel this feels as though they do not like or approve of the name or the form? Either way I do not know why it was written in with “so-called” as a descriptor and thus feels biased. The only citation that seems to be included in the article is the biannual journal, Japanese Language and Literature. The source does seem to be unbiased an d neutral but is the only one cited and should only be referenced for discussions of Japanese. Yes, I think that many of the subtopics are underrepresented as the article as a whole seems to be lacking sources. Particularly the “Using suffixaufnahme” and ‘By placing the dependent noun in the genitive case” are only a few lines when the rest are described much further. There is only one citation and the link does work when I looked and no signs of direct paraphrasing or plagiarism as far as I could tell. Yes the major issues are that 1) it should be merged. Which I do agree with if it has a sufficient subcategory of genitive being clearly marked, 2) would be the opposing view to that where someone feels that it needs its own separate page since this is an informal tool and p[people using it may search genitive not attributive. Which I do not agree with because I do not think there is enough material for its own separate page, 3] to list nouns right after the other instead of the format that it has now. Which I also agree with because the format now is not the nicest layout.

b) New source for something that is not explicated fully: http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/hahn.koo/teaching/ling115/papers/kreyer_2003.pdf

Week 5: Genitive construction takes on two forms syntactically. There are genitive pronouns that are essentially used as determiners (similar to “the” or “a”). The second form is known as genitive Noun Phrases that have the apostrophe “S”. http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~xtag/tech-report/node165.html