Talk:Head-marking language

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Linguistics: Theoretical Linguistics Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Theoretical Linguistics Task Force.

Is the Hebrew construct form an example of head-marking? —Tamfang (talk) 07:58, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Feel free to add an example to this article. --JWB (talk) 13:46, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know a JWB who's better qualified to do so than I am. —Tamfang (talk) 23:25, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As it currently stands, this article is very abstract. Any examples would be most welcome. By way of an example of a good example :), have a look at how the Ergative-absolutive language page lays out very non-English concepts using the English language.

I'd be happy to have a go at drafting such an example here, only I still have no clear idea what head-marking is. -- Cheers, - Erik Anderson 98.225.16.161 (talk) 03:04, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One of the English examples has him/I rather than him/he. 50.156.93.25 (talk) 00:50, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Although there is some interesting information provided in this article, there are some areas I believe could be adjusted to enhance its efficiency. The lead section does a poor job of introducing what a “head-marking” language is. As the reader of this article, I would have appreciated knowing why this is a significant topic. The lead section also fails to provide a roadmap of what the reader can expect to learn in the upcoming sections. Throughout the article there are multiple instances where no references are being provided which leads me to question the validity of your arguments. I believe the section included about the geographical distribution of this language is much too long in regards to its importance. I think adding more detail to the Head-marking (and dependent-marking) in English section would have been a more appropriate use of your time. I would suggest showing with syntactic structure how these languages differ from one another. I believe adding a section about head-to-head movement within the syntactic phrasal structure would be very effective in adding to your article. (Tdpoulin (talk) 19:15, 18 September 2014 (UTC))[reply]

It appears as though Ling 300 UBC has now received an assignment to post on a talk page. Please be aware that it is really easy to criticize others work; it is much more difficult to produce something oneself. --Tjo3ya (talk) 01:48, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly understand that it's easy to criticize, and difficult to produce. Nevertheless, this article seems to have severe problems. If you don't know what head-marking means, and you've come here to find out, I do not believe that this article will make any sense to you. When you click on this article, you have one question that you want to find out about: what is head-marking? When you start reading the article, your questions only grow: Are modifiers and dependents synonyms or two separate things? What is dependent-marking? What is double-marking? What is dependency grammar? What is phrase structure grammar? Then you reach the graphic, but you still do not know what head-marking is (you don't even know what head means, or what marking refers to). You look at the graphic, yet nothing in it tells you what head-marking is, or even what head or dependency are. Then you come to the Geographical distribution paragraph, and you still have no idea what head-marking means.

The article talks about head-marking and related concepts, but it is addressed to an audience that already knows what head-marking means. If you don't know what head-marking means, you will not learn it from this article. —Stephen (talk) 04:15, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]