From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Spelling?

de-contestualized sentences or de-contextualized sentences? RJFJR ( talk) 13:26, 24 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Rewrite

I arrived at this page via the copy editing flag, and thought it needed a complete rewrite. The main goal was to correct the misconception that they were grammarians in the modern sense. They were not -- they were philologists. I looked at the existing references and footnotes, but they were only mentions of the Alexandrine grammarians, not discussions. Roy Harris's ideas about context in linguistics belong in the article about Harris, not in an article about Hellenistic textual critics. So I left that out completely. -- Margin1522 ( talk) 23:47, 1 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Well done for the philologist-ancient grammarian disambiguation. Not so for removing references, which is disruptive; please preserve them whenever possible. Those sources, even as talking only incidentally about Alexandrine grammarians, nonetheless provided refs for statements that were left unreferenced in the new revision. Thogmartin (1984) in particular is a tertiary source that gave a valuable observation on the working approaches of the grammarians.-- Sum ( talk) 11:20, 11 September 2010 (UTC) reply

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Spelling?

de-contestualized sentences or de-contextualized sentences? RJFJR ( talk) 13:26, 24 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Rewrite

I arrived at this page via the copy editing flag, and thought it needed a complete rewrite. The main goal was to correct the misconception that they were grammarians in the modern sense. They were not -- they were philologists. I looked at the existing references and footnotes, but they were only mentions of the Alexandrine grammarians, not discussions. Roy Harris's ideas about context in linguistics belong in the article about Harris, not in an article about Hellenistic textual critics. So I left that out completely. -- Margin1522 ( talk) 23:47, 1 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Well done for the philologist-ancient grammarian disambiguation. Not so for removing references, which is disruptive; please preserve them whenever possible. Those sources, even as talking only incidentally about Alexandrine grammarians, nonetheless provided refs for statements that were left unreferenced in the new revision. Thogmartin (1984) in particular is a tertiary source that gave a valuable observation on the working approaches of the grammarians.-- Sum ( talk) 11:20, 11 September 2010 (UTC) reply


Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook