User talk:Ehryn/sandbox

Wikipedia discussion/evaluation assignment 2
Jose Ramirez Ling 403 Wikipedia Assignment: Word Formation

a. The article is part of WikiProject Linguistics which is a group of editors focusing on maintaining and reviewing linguistic article on Wikipedia. The group has labeled this article on word formation as being of mid-level importance so it’s currently not really a priority for them. The article itself is considered a Start-class level article because according to the notification on the top of the page the article is lacking citations for the information that has been written in. It is also missing in text citations for the links in the reference section that are being cited for the information provided which makes it difficult to know where the information is coming from.

b. There are only about two comments on the talk page but those two comments bring up the issue that the article is lacking information regarding important word formation processes. One comment mentions the lack of information on derivation and the other is a reply to the first commenter and mentions affixation. There is also a comment about a wrong hyperlink which is part of the reason the notification on the top of the page mentions bad links in the reference section.

c. The primary issues brought up in the comments about the content of the article focus on the article not providing sufficient information on word formation processes. They specifically mention a lack of information on derivation and specifically affixation. As we’ve read and discussed in class derivational affixes is an important process in the formation of new words so the commenters have a reason to raise issue with its omission. The most obvious solution to this issue would be to include a section on derivation and derivational affixation into the Wikipedia article as well the inclusion of a proper reference section, citations, and in text citation.

d. The article itself contains information on calques, neologisms, and blends. Of these three topics, blends and neologism are the only two written about in our book but our book. As a class, we have discussed blend words such as smog and brunch. With neologism, we referred to it as just coinage and had examples such as the snack Dr. Klein brings in called ‘Dunkers’ as well as the word ‘popnology’. As a, class we’ve discussed derivational affixes and their role in the formation of new lexemes. In regard to what commenters say is important and needs to be added, we as class have covered more information about word formation than the article currently provides. We’ve also gone more in-depth with coinage and its role in word formation.

e. From what little information that is already provided in the article it seems the article is lacking information. Given what information I do know of calques I don’t feel the information they’ve provided is a good example of calques producing new lexemes. Despite learning it as coining words, I agree neologism should be part of this article for word formation. Similarly, I agree with the inclusion of blends as a source for new lexemes.