User talk:Wilburw/sandbox

Ciara's peer review

Great lead! you really pack in the important information clearly and succinctly. Maybe you could expand a little bit with a fun fact about the langauge to give a more complete story of Anong and its background. You mention that you want to add some cultural history and I think that would be a great addition!

Phonology Your phonology section is very clear and informative! I like that your table breaks down the vowels into close-mid and open-mid vowels. I also like that you delineate the ways in which several of the vowels vary slightly from the standard IPA values. You mention in your "to do secion" that you are considering whether you should include all diphtongs and tripthongs. I don't think you need to include all of these complex vowels. I think it's good that you referenced them and mentioned that they occur with low frequency. Perhaps you should start this vowel section by saying that Anong has ten simple vowel phonenemes and 22 complex vowels for a total of 32 vowels, since the large vowel inventory is certainly a unique part of your language, and you might want to highlight that initially.

I didn't have tone in my language, so I am less familiar with tone, and I think you did a great job in delineating your language's use of tone clearly. I think the table is a great way to display the types of tone.

The syllable structure is great! The display of the 14 possible permutations is very thorough.

Morphology

It's clear that you want to add to your parts of speech section, but I don't know if you need a sub-section on every part of speech.

I think the glossing in some of the morphology examples are confusing, especially in the reduplication section. There is a suggested way to do glossing on piazza that helped me, if you were looking to try out other ways to display it. I would just make sure everything lines up for the reader to see.

Syntax

The syntax section looks really great! The examples are clear and the flow between parts is really smooth. I think the only thing you could to improve it is just to work on the spacing to line up the examples better and adding some page numbers for your examples.

Overall, I think your page looks in great shape! I think you are very thorough in describing the unique aspects of your language and in giving many examples to delineate different language processes. I think some formatting will help a long way in providing some extra clarity, particularly in a new glossing format.

Saran's Peer Review

The Lead: So far the lead looks good, and seeing that you intend to flesh it out in later drafts I think it would also be useful to add links in the lead that bring readers to other Wikipedia pages. Additionally, it would also be helpful to readers if there was some sort of map/visual that shows where Anong is spoken.

Phonology Section: Vowels+consonants: Include more about nasalized vowels and explain why they are relatively new to the language since this seems like it is very important to the language itself. Also, I see that you included the abbreviation “nas” to indicate that a vowel in the vowel chart is nasalized, I think that should be made clear in the paragraph that comes before the chart. The consonant chart also looks good, although I think it would be helpful to link concepts like “consonant cluster” to other Wikipedia pages that explain the significance. Overall it looks like you’re really incorporating information from your grammar in the page, and I can’t wait to see how you integrate the full complexity of the vowels.

Tone: The tone section is very clear, and succinct, and the only thing I may add would be including links to another page talking about tones. This would definitely help readers understand the uniqueness of tones Anong.

Syllable: The syllable section was a bit unclear and hard to follow because of the wording. I wonder if it would be possible to include what “C” and “V” correspond to in the little paragraph that comes before the graph. This may help in keeping the information more consistent (since you’re using the same descriptors).

Morphology Section: You fleshed out your morphology section really well, and one way you could perhaps improve it is my making the layout for your examples more consistent (by using tables maybe?), besides that your morphology section was very detailed and although there are some things that you still plan on including, what you have so far is very clear and the format was easy to follow. Great work!

Syntax Section: The section on word order was mostly clear, but I do think it can be improved by making the formatting more consistent so that things are aligned and more easy to follow. Additionally, I think it would be really useful for you to define things like “a/m” in some sort of key at the end. Besides that, I felt like this was a good overview of the word order of Anong. As for the section on headedness, I think it would help to include whether or not all phrases in head-complement pairs are head-final. The wording was a bit unclear.

Overall, awesome work! Your work was well organized and easy to follow for the most part. Besides incorporating more consistent ways to display the data from your grammar and linking to pages that help explain some of the most complex attributes of Anong, the article was great. You did a terrific job really fleshing out each section and getting into the nuances of Anong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SaranToure (talk • contribs) 05:20, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Angela's Peer Review

My Overall Impressions:

I think you do a great job giving weight to each section proportionally to how complex it is. For example, Anong seems to have more complicated phonology and morphology than it does syntax. You also consistently use examples, which is critical to understanding things like syllable structure and morphological processes. Also, you consistently define things like gloss terms. You also include everything from the grammar works and practicums and provide even more examples to flesh out these details. The article also flows well and you avoid redundancy. There are various areas where you talk about the development of Anong and I think it is really cool that you are including how the language is changing over time. Your greatest strengths are probably the logical organization and the abundance of examples. The thing I think you should work on most is clarifying a few sections or examples, which I discuss specifically below.

Lead

The first sentence runs on, likely because of how many locations within locations are included. Maybe. “It has no formal writing system” could be its own sentence. You could also maybe add the language endangerment classification from Ethnology to this section.

Phonology

Vowels: When you say that nasalized vowels are “relatively new,” what does that mean? Were they recently introduced to the language? If so, do you know how?

You might consider explaining why sometimes the nasilized vowel is listed first in the box and sometimes it is second. You could also explain the difference in rounding for i and y. I’m also wondering why /õ/ is the only vowel with the IPA symbol for nasalized, whereas the others have (nas) instead.

In regards to the /e/ vowel being lower than a standard /e/ and close to a diphthong, did your grammar explain if this sound is produced lower or if it changes location like a diphthong.

In response to your question about including all diphthongs and triphthongs, I would say you should if you’re able to. This language clearly has an incredibly interesting phonology and has so many phonemes. If that’s something unique to the language, in my opinion it is worth talking about and fulling presenting.

Consonants: In your table of consonant phonemes, what does it mean when the symbol is in parenthesis?

It’s great that you linked pages for so many sounds. I didn’t know so many sounds had pages of their own.

What do you mean when you say the initial consonant clusters are disappearing? Does this mean the language is evolving to not have any anymore? Did there used to be more? Also, what is an initial consonant cluster?

I would indicated the distinction between voiced and voiceless.

Tones: I’m a little confused by the tone section, but that’s likely because we didn’t learn a lot about tone in class so you might not need to clarify it. Specifically, I didn’t understand how the tone becomes another tone based on its surroundings. Also, you mention that the 33 tone has become contrastive, but based on the table it looks like all 5 tones are contrastive. When used on otherwise the same collection of sounds [lim], each of the 5 tones gives a different meaning. Is it true that all 5 are contrastive?

Syllable Structure: I don’t think the syllable structure “(C)(C)(C)(V)V(V)(C)T” makes it clear that a syllable’s only sound can be a syllabic consonant. I read this series of letters and parenthesis to say that every syllable must have a vowel and a tone and that adding the other phonemes is possible. It might be more clear to just state that there are 14 possible syllable types and give the table. Additionally, you might want to state which of Anong’s consonants are syllabic consonants.

To answer your question about adding mono vs. polysyllabic developments, I think you should decide if this is something unique or important to the phonology of Anong. If it is, include it. To me, it seems the shear number of phonemes is the most complex and unique aspect of Anong’s phonology, but I wouldn’t know as well as you do.

Morphology

Is Tibeto-Burman language family the same as the Sino-Tibetan family mentioned in your lead section? Also, perhaps you should save mentioning the SOV word order for the syntax section. It seems out of place in the second line.

You mention that you’re going to add parts of speech to the morphology section. I’m not sure what you plan to add , but it’s possible that each part of speech won’t need it’s own subheading. Consider whether or no this gives unequal weight to this part of the morphology section over other sections.

Affixation: You may want to clarify what spaces mean in your 3 line gloss. Are these spaces between words or between morphemes? It seems like morphemes because you label them as affixes.

In the Verb-Object matching example, I’m confused by the 2Pl. Which morphemes is the object. Because it’s second personal plural, does it translate to “you all”? I can't see how this fits in with “to blow out a fire” because in “You all blow out a fire,” the subject is second person plural not the object. I think a translation of each morphemes would help in this case.

Compounding: You say, “Compounding is the primary way through which new words are formed in Anong.” However, earlier you stated, “The primary morphological process through which meaning is communicated is through affixation.” My first thought is that these contradict each other, but that depends on what you mean by “new words.” Does this mean as Anong develops over time, novel words are created via compounding?

Modified-Modifying and Modifying-Modified Compounds: I don’t see how either of these two roots are modified when combined. They both stay exactly the same, as they do in the Co-ordiinate compounds example. Is it that the Anong roots change form, or is it that the meaning isn’t a direct/intuitive meaning? By that I mean that “mother” plus “father” clearly equals “parents,” but that “tea” plus “circular” does not clearly equal “bowel shaped tea leaves.” It seems there are no examples of compound where the roots change at all. They always combine as they are, never with a tone shift or a linker phoneme. Is this true/representative of most Anong compounds?

Reduplication: I’m not sure what you mean when you say reduplication isn’t productive. It seems it is used to convey meaning. Is the same meaning converted when the morpheme is not repeated?

Syntax

Word Order: In your last example, what does (a/m) mean?

Developments in Anong

If possible, I would expand this section. It seems like it is very relevant to accurately presenting the language.

Angelapaoletta (talk) 16:33, 12 April 2019 (UTC)