Talk:Q12767945
Autodescription — language device (Q12767945)
- Useful links:
- View it! – Images depicting the item on Commons
- Report on constraint conformation of “language device” claims and statements. Constraints report for items data
- See also
- This documentation is generated using
{{Item documentation}}.
Essence of "language device"[edit]
I don't find this term (or "device"; "linguistic device") in the sources I have at hand, specifically David Crystal: The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language (1987); An Encyclopedic Dictionary of Language and Languages (1992). Significant subclasses seem to be stylistic device (Q182545), rhetorical device (Q1762471), phraseme (Q5551966). One direct instance is colloquial expression (Q63315203).
@Dan Polansky: Therefore I don't consider this to be a subclass of linguistic unit (Q11953984) (which is the current claim). I would rather categorize it as mode of expression (can't find an item for it), having it relate to expression in much the same way as art genre relates to work of art.
@MisterSynergy: Neither do I understand why this item was selected for semi-protection in 2021 as a "highly used item"; is it really that important? It's not a problem to me as semi-protection only affects non-autoconfirmed editors; I'm merely curious about the reason for this designation. --SM5POR (talk) 09:54, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
- However, I would consider the inclusion of phraseme (Q5551966) as a subclass to be open for dispute; that's more like a form rather than mode of expression, a form which may put it closer to linguistic unit (Q11953984) (of which it is now an instance). In the comparison with art, phraseme might relate to art form or medium of art. --SM5POR (talk) 10:30, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
- The item is used a lot (on more than 500 pages, particularly in frwiki), and the community has decided that such item should be semi-protected in order to limit damage in case of vandalism. That's why it is protected. See also: Wikidata:Protection policy#Highly used items where the corresponding RfC is linked. —MisterSynergy (talk) 11:11, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
- @SM5POR: I searched Google for "language device" and "linguistic unit" to find a source to support the subclass statement, but to no avail. This lead me to remove the subclass statement. It is the duty of those who want to use the "language device" entity to give us authoritative sources from which we may build the structural definition using statements. Until that happens, the identity of the "language device" entity has not been established, control has not been established, and its use in statements is probably creative invention not backed up by sources. --Dan Polansky (talk) 11:22, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
- I now unlinked this entity from the several few entities that linked to it, except one: artistic language device (Q11878285). I see no loss. Let those who want to use this entity establish control. At a minimum, at least one language, a word or phrase in that language for the entity, and at least one authoritative source with a definition in that language. --Dan Polansky (talk) 11:43, 4 January 2023 (UTC)