|WikiProject Linguistics / Applied Linguistics||(Rated Start-class)|
Proposed Portal or the like
One of the biggest problems with approaching any new book, study or realm of inquiry is that the writers of that field invariably use their own terminology.
I in particular would like to see some kind of section on Wikipedia that talks about philosophical terminology.
The portal should divide up words by author and definitions should be given in a dictionary like way for each author. For example ataraxia has a different meaning if you are talking about Nietszche than if you were to talk about Epicurus.
Does anyone know how to set this up, or have the time to start documenting words philosopher by philosopher?
Of course of wouldn't want to limit this to philosophy.
- That's, perhaps, what I want to do for the rest of my life, yes!!--Correogsk or Gustavo (Editrocito or Heme aquí) 18:33, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
Does "terminologies" exist?
Just a small clarification about the plural form of terminology. Does the term terminologies exist? If so, it must be similar to the "peoples" type of plural since terminology, by itself is a collective noun. But many of us seem to be using terminologies where terminology would suffice. Thanks!
Terminology as a science is really unique, there are no more terminologies. However a terminology - a given system of terms of a given domain - is something different, and there are different terminologies even for one single domain, and of course for different domians people use different terminologies. G.Surján 22:53, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
I removed merge template for merging terminology with technical terminology, becuase terminology has many spheres, the technical terminology is just one of them, at the same time most people are interested mainly in technical terminology and there a lot is going on, so it needs an issue alone. No merge is needed. --Aleksd (talk) 18:31, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
Def of "terms" in this article
I propose that Terminology (artifact) be merged into Terminology. I think that the content in the Terminology (artifact) article can easily be explained in the context of Terminology, and the Terminology article is of a reasonable size that the merging of Terminology (artifact) will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned. Andrewaskew (talk) 23:06, 25 November 2012 (UTC)