Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Specialization (linguistics)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge‎ to Grammaticalization. RL0919 (talk) 12:29, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Specialization (linguistics)[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This topic is not notable; it has not received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Delete per WP:GNG. The principles of grammaticalization came up by Paul J. Hopper aren't paid much attention in the field of linguistics as a whole and there are other linguistic topics with the same name that are much more notable. – Treetoes023 (talk) 13:58, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related pages because they were all created by the same editor and they are the other 4 principles of grammaticalization came up by Paul J. Hopper, so the reasons for deletion apply to these articles too:

– Treetoes023 (talk) 14:03, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:06, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge all to grammaticalization. It is not true that Hopper's work is not studied in linguistics. It is arguably true, though, that these principles are too specific to warrant entire articles. Cnilep (talk) 23:27, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If "persistence" is kept (and I had trouble finding sufficient sources), it would need a rename as this concept is not the only or primary use of "persistence" as a technical term in linguistics, eg. see [1] (t · c) buidhe 19:54, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @Buidhe: This would also apply to "divergence", since the primary use of "divergence" in linguistics is the process whereby languages change in different ways in different places (leading to the creation of new dialects and languages). I assume that the other 3 articles I've nominated are also not the primary usages of their respective terms either. – Treetoes023 (talk) 01:37, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:42, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 17:22, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Some opinions on this bundled nomination would be appreciated.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:01, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge all - With no prejudice toward future expansion if additional sources are found. Seems harmless, since they're all clear sub-concepts of grammaticalization. Suriname0 (talk) 01:30, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge all per above. // Timothy :: talk 08:15, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.