![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
This entry will be edited for style and content as part of a linguistics class project at UBC (Ling300, 2017wT1). — Preceding unsigned comment added by RM Dechaine ( talk • contribs) 19:26, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Discussion of vulgar and marginally relevant former content |
---|
It looks like it might be copyrighted, like from the Bulwer-Lytton Fiction Contest or something. -- LDC Do adj. phrases necesarily need to start with an adj? (struggling to think of an example)... -- Tarquin Adjectival phrases, more properly adjective phrases are prepositional phrases that modifies a noun or pronoun. In "tightness of sleep", the "of sleep" is an adjective phrase. I think it's the only one in the passage. The other kinds are participial phrases, gerund phrases, infinitive phrases and apposite phrases, according to the first grammar book at hand. Ortolan88 Every sentence in this example begins with a gerund phrase, but they're all adverbial rather than adjectival. --LDC modifies nouns, and adjectives.. |
"Adjective phrase" is more common on Google Web Search, Google Book Search, and Google Scholar, and nearly always has the same sense; "adjectival phrase" is less common, and often refers to any phrase that modifies a noun (including a noun-modifying prepositional phrase). —
Ruakh
TALK
02:33, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it be moved. Not only is there only weak support, but if this is a British-American difference, then it should not be changed. -- Stemonitis 07:22, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
The article is in conflict with itself. At its current state, it is confusing. -- 114.241.30.19 ( talk) 03:03, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Agreed. More than that, much of it is flat wrong. That includes all the example sentences, none of which contain adjective phrases or manage to demonstrate what adjective phrases are. "without a friend" is a prepositional phrase, "kind" is an adjective in a noun phrase, and "of kindly nature" is another prepositional phrase. -- Gastogh ( talk) 17:54, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
For me this article was very confusing and I could not even pay attention while reading the first sentence. Could someone please simplify this? I woul appreciate it. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pat8707 ( talk • contribs) 23:18, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Kwami,
This article should carry the title "adjective phrase". That is what grammar and syntax textbooks call these phrases. The three sources in footnote 1 use this term (not "adjectival phrase"). Furthermore, the discussion above on this talk page indicates that "adjective phrase" is indeed the more common term. For me, the term "adjectival phrase" can only denote a phrase that functions like an adjective but that strictly speaking does not contain an adjective.
Concerning the three paragraphs that you have reinserted into the article, the information from the first now appears in the introduction. So that first paragraph should be removed entirely to avoid redundancy. The second paragraph and third paragraph are not sourced. For them to remain, they should each receive at least one good citation.
Your claim that Turkish and Japanese do not have adjectives is not backed up by the articles here in Wikipedia on Turkish and Japanese grammar. Both of the articles use the term "adjective" to describe a word class in the respective language. Concerning Japanese, I am checking further with a very knowledgeable source. I will post here what I find out. -- Tjo3ya ( talk) 03:00, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
I'd like to explain what I meant in my edit summary: Turkish and Japanese certainly have adjectives in the sense that they have words that tell something about [a word that functions as] a noun. In any case, what matters to this article is not that they have a separate part of speech that can be called "adjectives", but that they have words that are used to specify something about a noun: These are placed to the right of the noun. -- JorisvS ( talk) 11:04, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
TAM is a morphological criterion. There are at least two other criteria that bear on this issue, semantic content and distribution. Apparently, the semantic criterion supports taking the i- and na-adjectives as adjectives, because these words typically express a property that is assigned to a noun. Concerning the distributional criterion, my guess that it also supports taking them as adjectives. In other words, my guess is that the i- and na-adjectives distribute very much like adjectives do in languages that indisputably have adjectives: they can modify the noun phrase inside of which they appear and thus they function attributively, or they modify another noun phrase inside of which they do not appear, in which case they function predicatively. Note that this distributional criterion is a syntactic consideration. For me, two out of three criteria suffice to grant these words adjective status. You seem to be elevating the one criterion to the detriment of the other two.
I see that you have deleted the relevant statements entirely from the section, and I also discern that you are refusing to back up your stance by pointing to the authorities. I intend to check soon to see what more authorities actually say about adjectives in Japanese - the next time I am in the library. I suspect that I will find that the authorities acknowledge adjectives in Japanese and that your stance is an isolated claim. If my suspicion proves to be correct, I will revisit the issue.
In the meantime, I suggested a compromise above concerning the use of the term "adjectival". I hope you are OK with that compromise and that you will not challenge the changes that I make in the area. -- Tjo3ya ( talk) 00:45, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Move. Cúchullain t/ c 15:30, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
Adjectival phrase → Adjective phrase – This article should carry the title Adjective phrase because that is what most grammar and syntax textbooks call them. The issue is discussed in two spots above, and there is now consensus that Adjective phrase is more appropriate. Tjo3ya ( talk) 06:45, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
This entry will be edited for style and content as part of a linguistics class project at UBC (Ling300, 2017wT1). — Preceding unsigned comment added by RM Dechaine ( talk • contribs) 19:26, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Discussion of vulgar and marginally relevant former content |
---|
It looks like it might be copyrighted, like from the Bulwer-Lytton Fiction Contest or something. -- LDC Do adj. phrases necesarily need to start with an adj? (struggling to think of an example)... -- Tarquin Adjectival phrases, more properly adjective phrases are prepositional phrases that modifies a noun or pronoun. In "tightness of sleep", the "of sleep" is an adjective phrase. I think it's the only one in the passage. The other kinds are participial phrases, gerund phrases, infinitive phrases and apposite phrases, according to the first grammar book at hand. Ortolan88 Every sentence in this example begins with a gerund phrase, but they're all adverbial rather than adjectival. --LDC modifies nouns, and adjectives.. |
"Adjective phrase" is more common on Google Web Search, Google Book Search, and Google Scholar, and nearly always has the same sense; "adjectival phrase" is less common, and often refers to any phrase that modifies a noun (including a noun-modifying prepositional phrase). —
Ruakh
TALK
02:33, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it be moved. Not only is there only weak support, but if this is a British-American difference, then it should not be changed. -- Stemonitis 07:22, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
The article is in conflict with itself. At its current state, it is confusing. -- 114.241.30.19 ( talk) 03:03, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Agreed. More than that, much of it is flat wrong. That includes all the example sentences, none of which contain adjective phrases or manage to demonstrate what adjective phrases are. "without a friend" is a prepositional phrase, "kind" is an adjective in a noun phrase, and "of kindly nature" is another prepositional phrase. -- Gastogh ( talk) 17:54, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
For me this article was very confusing and I could not even pay attention while reading the first sentence. Could someone please simplify this? I woul appreciate it. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pat8707 ( talk • contribs) 23:18, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Kwami,
This article should carry the title "adjective phrase". That is what grammar and syntax textbooks call these phrases. The three sources in footnote 1 use this term (not "adjectival phrase"). Furthermore, the discussion above on this talk page indicates that "adjective phrase" is indeed the more common term. For me, the term "adjectival phrase" can only denote a phrase that functions like an adjective but that strictly speaking does not contain an adjective.
Concerning the three paragraphs that you have reinserted into the article, the information from the first now appears in the introduction. So that first paragraph should be removed entirely to avoid redundancy. The second paragraph and third paragraph are not sourced. For them to remain, they should each receive at least one good citation.
Your claim that Turkish and Japanese do not have adjectives is not backed up by the articles here in Wikipedia on Turkish and Japanese grammar. Both of the articles use the term "adjective" to describe a word class in the respective language. Concerning Japanese, I am checking further with a very knowledgeable source. I will post here what I find out. -- Tjo3ya ( talk) 03:00, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
I'd like to explain what I meant in my edit summary: Turkish and Japanese certainly have adjectives in the sense that they have words that tell something about [a word that functions as] a noun. In any case, what matters to this article is not that they have a separate part of speech that can be called "adjectives", but that they have words that are used to specify something about a noun: These are placed to the right of the noun. -- JorisvS ( talk) 11:04, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
TAM is a morphological criterion. There are at least two other criteria that bear on this issue, semantic content and distribution. Apparently, the semantic criterion supports taking the i- and na-adjectives as adjectives, because these words typically express a property that is assigned to a noun. Concerning the distributional criterion, my guess that it also supports taking them as adjectives. In other words, my guess is that the i- and na-adjectives distribute very much like adjectives do in languages that indisputably have adjectives: they can modify the noun phrase inside of which they appear and thus they function attributively, or they modify another noun phrase inside of which they do not appear, in which case they function predicatively. Note that this distributional criterion is a syntactic consideration. For me, two out of three criteria suffice to grant these words adjective status. You seem to be elevating the one criterion to the detriment of the other two.
I see that you have deleted the relevant statements entirely from the section, and I also discern that you are refusing to back up your stance by pointing to the authorities. I intend to check soon to see what more authorities actually say about adjectives in Japanese - the next time I am in the library. I suspect that I will find that the authorities acknowledge adjectives in Japanese and that your stance is an isolated claim. If my suspicion proves to be correct, I will revisit the issue.
In the meantime, I suggested a compromise above concerning the use of the term "adjectival". I hope you are OK with that compromise and that you will not challenge the changes that I make in the area. -- Tjo3ya ( talk) 00:45, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Move. Cúchullain t/ c 15:30, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
Adjectival phrase → Adjective phrase – This article should carry the title Adjective phrase because that is what most grammar and syntax textbooks call them. The issue is discussed in two spots above, and there is now consensus that Adjective phrase is more appropriate. Tjo3ya ( talk) 06:45, 17 March 2013 (UTC)