Talk:Stratum (in neurocognitive linguistics)

From Glottopedia
Revision as of 19:18, 28 June 2008 by PaulSank (talk | contribs) (→‎change made)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

In the text, the expression "the theory" occurs once. Which theory is meant?--Haspelmath 11:29, 16 June 2008 (CEST)

I would guess it means Lamb's stratificational grammar.
Could this page be moved to "Stratum (in subfield X)"? There should eventually also be entries for "stratum" as it's used in lexical phonology and in creole linguistics and probably more. I just can't think what "X" should be in this case. Kevin Russell 10:15, 19 June 2008 (CEST)

re: your comments

Thank you for your comments. Next time I get to work on this stuff, I see no problem with making adjustments that reflect what you've said. --PaulSank 08:33, 23 June 2008 (CEST)

change made

Getting back to work here in Glottopedia, I noticed a disambiguation page re: stratum. I'm glad I saw it, because it gave me, a Wiki newbie, some clues about how to effect the change noted above in this discussion.

The page referred to "Stratum (in Sydney Lamb's approach"), so the first thing I did was replace the possessive NP with the formal name of the theory (neurocognitive linguistics).

Then I proceeded to change all the related internal links from "stratum" to "stratum (in neurocognitive linguistics)". And let me tell you I'm so glad I had gotten myself organized before I started composing entries! I had made an index which lists all the entries and the cross-references pointing out of each, and I added symbols for whether an entry had actually been posted, or whether I was working on one, or whether it didn't yet exist at all. This index made it easier for me to perform the task of changing all those links, a job which was also made easier by the fact that I haven't posted a large number of entries yet.

I'm grateful that I had the chance to address the disambiguation issue while the list of my entries is still small!

--PaulSank 21:18, 28 June 2008 (CEST)