Category talk:Marked language - Revision history

Lquilter: ah

2007-04-30T05:07:10Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:07, 29 April 2007
Line 4:		Line 4:

	The question was a tad theatrical. :-> --[[User:Ide Cyan\|Ide Cyan]] 21:09, 29 April 2007 (PDT)		The question was a tad theatrical. :-> --[[User:Ide Cyan\|Ide Cyan]] 21:09, 29 April 2007 (PDT)

			: So hard to tell with words, words, words ... cheers --[[User:Lquilter\|LQ]] 22:07, 29 April 2007 (PDT)

Ide Cyan: reply

2007-04-30T04:09:39Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:09, 29 April 2007
Line 2:		Line 2:

	: Am I happy? In life, sort of. Are you being hostile or is that just how I'm reading this comment? Are ''you'' happy? ... Of course, all this stuff I do on FSFwiki (as is everything everyone else does on FSFwiki) is one big experiment, Ide Cyan, so maybe this category will work-- I haven't thought about it particularly. Intuitively it's descriptive and makes more sense that "linguistics" if that's what you're getting at. ... In general on categories, I'm just feeling very dissatisfied with the categories capability of the software. Do please bring up your thoughts and opinions about categorization in general on [[FSFwiki talk:Categorization]] if you haven't already. --[[User:Lquilter\|LQ]] 18:45, 29 April 2007 (PDT)		: Am I happy? In life, sort of. Are you being hostile or is that just how I'm reading this comment? Are ''you'' happy? ... Of course, all this stuff I do on FSFwiki (as is everything everyone else does on FSFwiki) is one big experiment, Ide Cyan, so maybe this category will work-- I haven't thought about it particularly. Intuitively it's descriptive and makes more sense that "linguistics" if that's what you're getting at. ... In general on categories, I'm just feeling very dissatisfied with the categories capability of the software. Do please bring up your thoughts and opinions about categorization in general on [[FSFwiki talk:Categorization]] if you haven't already. --[[User:Lquilter\|LQ]] 18:45, 29 April 2007 (PDT)

			The question was a tad theatrical. :-> --[[User:Ide Cyan\|Ide Cyan]] 21:09, 29 April 2007 (PDT)

Lquilter: huh?

2007-04-30T01:45:09Z

huh?

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:45, 29 April 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Created this category to replace the use of [[:Category:Linguistics]] in some instances where the subject isn't linguistics as such, but a particular example of language marked by [[gender]]. Are you happy, Laura? Still need to find a new category for particular terms, like [[exceptionalism]], that do require classification under some sort of linguistic-related umbrella. And don't talk to me about putting those on lists instead of in categories. It's not as if they're going to belong to a dozen conflicting redundant categories. --[[User:Ide Cyan\|Ide Cyan]] 18:21, 29 April 2007 (PDT)		Created this category to replace the use of [[:Category:Linguistics]] in some instances where the subject isn't linguistics as such, but a particular example of language marked by [[gender]]. Are you happy, Laura? Still need to find a new category for particular terms, like [[exceptionalism]], that do require classification under some sort of linguistic-related umbrella. And don't talk to me about putting those on lists instead of in categories. It's not as if they're going to belong to a dozen conflicting redundant categories. --[[User:Ide Cyan\|Ide Cyan]] 18:21, 29 April 2007 (PDT)

			: Am I happy? In life, sort of. Are you being hostile or is that just how I'm reading this comment? Are ''you'' happy? ... Of course, all this stuff I do on FSFwiki (as is everything everyone else does on FSFwiki) is one big experiment, Ide Cyan, so maybe this category will work-- I haven't thought about it particularly. Intuitively it's descriptive and makes more sense that "linguistics" if that's what you're getting at. ... In general on categories, I'm just feeling very dissatisfied with the categories capability of the software. Do please bring up your thoughts and opinions about categorization in general on [[FSFwiki talk:Categorization]] if you haven't already. --[[User:Lquilter\|LQ]] 18:45, 29 April 2007 (PDT)

Ide Cyan: Why this category.

2007-04-30T01:21:15Z

Why this category.

New page

Created this category to replace the use of [[:Category:Linguistics]] in some instances where the subject isn't linguistics as such, but a particular example of language marked by [[gender]]. Are you happy, Laura? Still need to find a new category for particular terms, like [[exceptionalism]], that *do* require classification under some sort of linguistic-related umbrella. And don't talk to me about putting those on lists instead of in categories. It's not as if they're going to belong to a dozen conflicting redundant categories. --[[User:Ide Cyan|Ide Cyan]] 18:21, 29 April 2007 (PDT)