This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Function word article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:800F:4CAB:7E04:5D42:E5BB:FDC8 ( talk) 19:40, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
How can the header be changed to "Function word"? Dieter Simon 00:35 Feb 6, 2003 (UTC)
Done. :-) (see "how to move a page" in the FAQ) -- Tarquin 10:11 Feb 6, 2003 (UTC)
Many thanks, Tarquin. Have perused and "digested" the article. -- Dieter Simon 23:26 Feb 6, 2003 (UTC)
Why does Content word redirect here, Particularly considering the first paragraph, stating content word and function word to be opposites? Surely there is more to the definition of content words than simply "not a function word" PRB 11:41, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Changed "Conjunction - uninflected" to "Conjunction - uninflected in English", as conjunctions are inflected in Classical Arabic. 88.212.123.106 17:01, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Editor Tangthm has used an interesting method of showing the difference between function words and content words, using nonsense syllable words to show up the various parts that constitute a sentence. There is, however, one proviso I have to make, namely that of this being an encyclopaedia for readers who want to find out what function/content words are, but might find the method somewhat confusing without at least some introductory definition. You are not entering a discourse with a like-minded peer group of linguists but people who might not have heard of the various specialised terms used in this article, after all that is why they are consulting Wikipedia in first place. I have entered some clues as to what the intention of the examples were. Dieter Simon ( talk) 00:25, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
"Each function word ... may indicate the speaker's mental model as to what is being said." Gobbledygook to me, I'm afraid; could someone who understands the point please reword that sentence? The article's lack of adequate references is both chronic and concerning. Nothing gives ammunition to Wikipedia's critics as much as a dearth of verifiable sources, especially regarding academic material. The style is below par in parts, but rash overhauling of most or all of an article will lead to a spate of reverting by previous editors with a proprietorial bent unless the Talk discussion has adequately paved the way. Nevertheless, an authentic 'encyclopaedic style' imposed by a suitably competent editor, with quoted sources, will be necessary sooner or later if the cautionary flags at the top of the article are finally to go. Humboles ( talk) 14:20, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Lexical words are the words that possess semantic meaning of the sentence in which they occur. Ex: mouse, traffic light,etc. 49.244.197.70 ( talk) 17:00, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Function word article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:800F:4CAB:7E04:5D42:E5BB:FDC8 ( talk) 19:40, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
How can the header be changed to "Function word"? Dieter Simon 00:35 Feb 6, 2003 (UTC)
Done. :-) (see "how to move a page" in the FAQ) -- Tarquin 10:11 Feb 6, 2003 (UTC)
Many thanks, Tarquin. Have perused and "digested" the article. -- Dieter Simon 23:26 Feb 6, 2003 (UTC)
Why does Content word redirect here, Particularly considering the first paragraph, stating content word and function word to be opposites? Surely there is more to the definition of content words than simply "not a function word" PRB 11:41, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Changed "Conjunction - uninflected" to "Conjunction - uninflected in English", as conjunctions are inflected in Classical Arabic. 88.212.123.106 17:01, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Editor Tangthm has used an interesting method of showing the difference between function words and content words, using nonsense syllable words to show up the various parts that constitute a sentence. There is, however, one proviso I have to make, namely that of this being an encyclopaedia for readers who want to find out what function/content words are, but might find the method somewhat confusing without at least some introductory definition. You are not entering a discourse with a like-minded peer group of linguists but people who might not have heard of the various specialised terms used in this article, after all that is why they are consulting Wikipedia in first place. I have entered some clues as to what the intention of the examples were. Dieter Simon ( talk) 00:25, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
"Each function word ... may indicate the speaker's mental model as to what is being said." Gobbledygook to me, I'm afraid; could someone who understands the point please reword that sentence? The article's lack of adequate references is both chronic and concerning. Nothing gives ammunition to Wikipedia's critics as much as a dearth of verifiable sources, especially regarding academic material. The style is below par in parts, but rash overhauling of most or all of an article will lead to a spate of reverting by previous editors with a proprietorial bent unless the Talk discussion has adequately paved the way. Nevertheless, an authentic 'encyclopaedic style' imposed by a suitably competent editor, with quoted sources, will be necessary sooner or later if the cautionary flags at the top of the article are finally to go. Humboles ( talk) 14:20, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Lexical words are the words that possess semantic meaning of the sentence in which they occur. Ex: mouse, traffic light,etc. 49.244.197.70 ( talk) 17:00, 16 January 2023 (UTC)