User talk:LynwoodF/Archive 8

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

Sections dormant by 31 December 2018

Happy New Year

I send all my Wikipedia friends belated best wishes for 2018.

All discussions from last year have now been archived.

LynwoodF (talk) 19:00, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Suffixes which mark the plural are not suffixed articles

I guess it was only the edit about the English language that you didn't agree upon? (since -s is both a marker for indefiniteness and definiteness). But in other languages where suffixes solely marks plural definiteness, as in the scandinavian languages, they could be considered articles. Do we agree? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stusseligbruker (talk • contribs) 21:03, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Stusseligbruker. Well certainly, the -s in English has nothing to do with definiteness. I am aware that definiteness is handled differently in the Scandinavian languages, but never before have I seen it suggested that there are suffixed indefinite articles in any of them. It is not suggested in the main text of the article Article (grammar), nor is it suggested by the map included in the article. I have taken a look at some English-language grammars of Danish, Norwegian and Swedish. None of these suggests that there is a plural form of the indefinite article.

If you can find references to support your contention, please use these as a basis for a series of edits to the article. Is there perhaps a change occurring in the way Scandinavian linguists are thinking about this?

LynwoodF (talk) 23:47, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

I have been looking at a few more grammars. Some fudge the issue by rolling up number and definiteness in a single table, but none explicitly describes the ending of the indefinite plural as a suffixed article. Others seem to regard the indefinite singular and plural as the basic forms of nouns.

The fact is that the Scandinavian languages do not fit well into the general pattern of inflection of nouns. This discussion is rather like the controversy about the use of "some" in English. There are people who say that it is the plural indefinite article, others that it is a partitive article. Oxford describes it as a determiner. Actually it serves all these purposes and it also functions as a pronoun.

LynwoodF (talk) 10:03, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Why not article 'the' before mountain peaks..

Dear Sir/Madam, In matter of Grammar there are several self-ideologies applied in the English Language. There is no reason for not applying article 'the' before the names of mountain peaks.

      Here ' Mount Everest ' is a proper noun indicating a certain mountain peak. It must be followed by article 'the'. If no other person has previously applied it, it doesn't mean that we must accept only what has previously been given. Language is always dynamic. Even the new knowledge is worth following.

You will have no reason to justify why article 'the' shouldn't be applied before the mountain peaks. Birbal Kumawat (talk) 16:19, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

In English it is not customary to use the definite article with the names of mountains, unless of course the article forms part of the name, e.g. the Matterhorn. Please be aware that I am a native speaker of English. I was born and raised in that part of southern England where standard English arose. It is clear to me that you are not a native speaker of English. Incidentally, I do not understand what you mean by "It must be followed by article 'the'." As it stands, this is most certainly not true, but I suspect that you are not saying what you think you mean.

Please also be aware that in Wikipedia we are describing what is currently normal. If you wish to put forward an alternative view, you must provide credible references.

LynwoodF (talk) 17:22, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, LynwoodF. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)