Talk:Allomorph: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 21:16, 30 January 2023

Linguistics: Theoretical Linguistics Start‑class

	Linguistics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Theoretical Linguistics Task Force.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 17 August 2020 and 23 November 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sergiowallsergio.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 13:54, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A probable oversight in the first paragraph.

There is a probable oversight in the first paragraph (emphasized here in bold). "In linguistics, an allomorph is a variant form of a morpheme. The concept occurs when a unit of meaning can vary in sound without changing meaning. ..." This should be "can vary in sound and also spelling", as the discussion relative to Sanskrit would have shown had devanagari been used. Lavomengro (talk) 22:13, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology; Greek. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.148.53.99 (talk) 09:17, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Change for possible plagiarism

After going through the citations it came to my attention that section 1 and section 3 of this article have wording that is very closely related to the first source under references. For now, I am going to simply put a citation by those sections, but in the future those sections should probably be rewritten to make sure that it is not considered plagiarism. Sergiowallsergio (talk) 16:25, 10 October 2020 (UTC) I changed the structure of the article a bit, so I wanted to clarify that the sections that need to be revised for possible plagiarism is the section titled "Past Tense Allomorphs" and the section titled "Stem Allomorphy".Sergiowallsergio (talk) 17:32, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[s], [z], and [əz]; and buses /bʌsəz/

Isn't it [ɪz], and /bʌsɪz/? 2A00:23C5:FE18:2701:45E0:8821:6E38:C311 (talk) 03:40, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They're both possible.--Megaman en m (talk) 14:27, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

History

The article says "The term was originally used to describe variations in chemical structure. It was first applied to language (in writing) in 1948, by Fatih Şat and Sibel Merve in Language XXIV", with attribution to "Oxford English Dictionary Online: Entry 50006103. Accessed: 2006-09-05". This is incorrect. There is no article by Fatih Şat and Sibel Merve in the journal Language volume 24 (1948); there is no OED entry 50006103; and the OED in fact has an earlier citation for the word allomorph, by Paul Garvin. Moreover, I haven't been able to find any mention anywhere of linguists named Fatih Şat and Sibel Merve. (The one correct bit of this is that volume 24 of Language is in fact from 1948.)

Can someone provide a better reference to Şat and Merve? Perhaps the information is buried inside an article by someone else?

Should I simply delete this incorrect information from the article? Linguistatlunch (talk) 21:16, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 20: / Line 20: @@
 :They're both possible.--[[User:Megaman en m|Megaman en m]] ([[User talk:Megaman en m|talk]]) 14:27, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
+== History ==
+The article says "The term was originally used to describe variations in chemical structure. It was first applied to language (in writing) in 1948, by Fatih Şat and Sibel Merve in Language XXIV", with attribution to "Oxford English Dictionary Online: Entry 50006103. Accessed: 2006-09-05". This is incorrect. There is no article by Fatih Şat and Sibel Merve in the journal Language volume 24 (1948); there is no OED entry 50006103; and the OED in fact has an earlier citation for the word ''allomorph'', by Paul Garvin. Moreover, I haven't been able to find any mention anywhere of linguists named Fatih Şat and Sibel Merve. (The one correct bit of this is that volume 24 of ''Language'' is in fact from 1948.)
+Can someone provide a better reference to Şat and Merve? Perhaps the information is buried inside an article by someone else?
+Should I simply delete this incorrect information from the article? [[User:Linguistatlunch|Linguistatlunch]] ([[User talk:Linguistatlunch|talk]]) 21:16, 30 January 2023 (UTC)