Talk:Sentence clause structure

Linguistics: Applied Linguistics Low‑importance

	Linguistics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Applied Linguistics Task Force.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 August 2020 and 9 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Annalieseg33. Peer reviewers: Ashshleigh, Elizimmerman.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:26, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merger Discussion[edit]

Formal request has been received to merge: Run-on sentence into Sentence clause structure; dated: May 2017. Proposer's Rationale: Whatever little content it really needs can fit into the latter article. Discuss here. GenQuest ^{"Talk to Me"} 19:39, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Run-on sentence vandalism[edit]

Let's please not make the run-on sentence section into a run-on sentence. It's cute, but it is vandalism and it does inhibit the usability of the article and site. Thomas Craven (talk) 17:54, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It keeps getting turned back into a run-on sentence. Maybe the page has to be semi-proteced. 78.94.53.130 (talk) 07:30, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Couldn't they make a humour article on this? I found it pretty funny and creative. It's still vandalism nevertheless but it gave me a good laugh. Loganthebogan1272 (talk) 01:49, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

English[edit]

Example sentence clause Anteneh haile (talk) 13:24, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pending Changes/Semi Protection Request 24th june 2020[edit]

Due to constant vandalism by copycat vandals I suggest we upgrade this article's protection level to semi protected or even pending changes protection to prevent constant vandalism. Let me know your thoughts. Loganthebogan1272 (talk) 01:55, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ambiguous definitions[edit]

I have a problem with the difference between "Complex" and "compound-complex sentences". According to this article, the difference is such that these two structures may be indistinguishable.

"a sentence with one or more dependent clauses and at least one independent clause is a complex sentence. A sentence with two or more independent clauses plus one or more dependent clauses is called compound-complex or complex-compound ."

This makes the classification of many sentence structures ambiguous.

A sentence with one of more dependent clauses (which covers both definitions) and two or more independent clauses would be classifiable either way.

A complex-compound sentence would always ALSO be a complex sentence, with no way of making a clear distinction.

I have seen both this and other definitions from various universities. I cannot choose between different universities, but there is a serious problem with the definition used here.

Here is a different definition, https://webapps.towson.edu/ows/sentences.htm It avoids the ambiguity, but is it correct? Star Lord - 星爵 (talk) 01:33, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

actualizar tratamiento de datos para un servidor. 201.175.156.232 (talk) 13:59, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In standard English, sentences are composed of five clause patterns: ...[edit]

A good elementary rule is "Use the singular case unless plural is necessary." What exactly is meant by "sentences are composed of five clause patterns"? What sentence has five clause patterns? Better to state "a sentence has one of five clause patterns:". Any objection to the change. Regards, ... PeterEasthope (talk) 14:28, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your specific revision is reasonble. But I think the whole section needs some kind of citation or clarification that it's just one theory. The idea that there are five clause patterns is not universal. It should be identified who is making that claim and how widely used the theory is. Polm23 (talk) 06:15, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]