Wikipedia talk:Wiki Ed/CSU Northridge/Linguistics 403 MORPHOLOGY (Fall)

--Pkh9220 (talk) 23:40, 9 November 2017 (UTC)Homonym a. 	What is the level of importance assigned to the topic? What is the class-level of the article, and what reason(s) did you find for that “grade?” - The level of importance assigned to the article is Mid-importance meaning subject fills out more minor details in linguistics and non-experts may not have heard of it. The class-level of the article is substantial, but is still missing important content or contains much irrelevant material. The article also should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant problems or required substantial edit. b.	Is there a focus for the comments, or are there several? What are the issues that the comments address? - There are several issues that comments addressed regarding the article. There were a few comments saying that the article require more references other than dictionaries explaining important terms. Many comments were talking about the mistakes made on the venn diagram; one of the comments stated that there should be a distinction between homophone and homonym. Some other comments suggested more examples on homonyms. c.	Select two of the issues, and summarize the discussions. How does the discussion relate to what you have learned, or feel you know about the issue? Is there resolution? How does the language on the actual page relate to the talk about it? The first issue was making correct name of homonyms, homophone, and homographs. The comment stated that the definition in the article is wrong and the correct definition of homonym should be “a word pronounced the same as another but differing in meaning, whether spelled the same way or not” and should provide distinctive definitions for each terms. There is resolution is to clarity each terms; homonyms: words with different meaning but identical in writing or pronunciation; homophones: words which are pronounced the same; homographs: words which are written the same. The second issue was that the “dessert/desert” should not be given as a example of homonym stating that one could argue that the name for a waterless region is derived from the fact that a region that is deserted meaning everything has left. Other comment stated that they are homophones and not homonym. The other stated that the example is neither homographs nor homophones, since both spelling and pronunciation differ. I read over the article and this example has already been removed. d.	How do the article and discussion relate to our treatment of the topic—in our reading and in our discussion? Did we address it at all? If so, did we do so in ways consistent with the understanding in the article or the talk page? You may find agreement with some of the discussants and disagreement with others - We haven’t talked about homonyms in depths in class. I agree with one of the discussants that the definition of homonym in the article was repetitive and should have been brief. I disagree with some discussants who stated that the article was too brief and unclear on making distinction between homonyms, homophones, and homographs. The introductory paragraph of the article in fact was concise and had sufficient definition of all of the terms. e.	What is your sense of the discussion? In other words, what do you conclude is most convincing or explanatory? Why? (i.e., what reasoning led you to draw the conclusion you have drawn?) - I think that the amount of examples provided in the article may be insufficient and the article only had seven references. The number of references should be expanded and I wish it would provide more explanation on the significance of homonyms, homophones, and homographs in relation to linguistics field. Also, the venn diagram provided in the article could have been more clearer. Other than that the article managed to provide key information regarding the concept and the references were legitimate.