Project

Hey all, me and 2 other users are working on this page until mid-april, so please don't make any large edits, or notify us if you do! Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eredics (talk • contribs) 19:58, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I just want to remind everyone that we are still working on it! Eredics (talk) 19:47, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again! I'm in this project too and it would be greatly appreciated if people could not revert/delete our edits even if they are unfinished right now. I promise we are working on making this a great article but if our changes keep getting deleted we won't be able to do that. After April 22nd though (when our project is due), feel free to change anything! Autumnw18 (talk) 20:25, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Copied threads

THREADS BELOW WERE ORIGINALLY AT Talk:Negation (linguistics)

Chicken?

I'm wondering what the point of this edit was. Certainly, the page makes as much sense with chicken as walrus, but why bother to change it? --Rpresser 15:44, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Walrus much cooler, if you ask me. --Ioscius ^∞ 13:23, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We should change it back to walrus. All in favor? --Abelhawk (talk) 00:30, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More Chickens

If you're going to use chickens rather than walruses (which remains a crying shame), at least use a chicken-related sentence for Ancient Greek as well. 151.163.2.8 (talk) 13:14, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Worst Linguistics Article

This is the worst linguistics article I have ever been on. Why? Because it is entirely concerned with English. Could someone either add more languages, or rename this article to Negation in English, or something similar? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.166.150.53 (talk) 10:11, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Improved article

I've expanded this article, removed some fluff, and merged in some information from Grammatical polarity. The result is at Affirmative and negative. I'm going to redirect this title to there for now; if someone wants to move the article back to this title, I don't object, though the intro would need to be rejigged slightly to make it fit this title. Victor Yus (talk) 10:43, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Copied threads 2

THREADS BELOW WERE ORIGINALLY AT Talk:Grammatical polarity

Reference to 'negative mood' in Welsh

May I just point out that the whole point being made about verbal moods in Welsh is highly suspect. The superficially apparent differences between affirmative, negative & interrogative 'moods' within Welsh are the result of preverbal, adverbial particles/modifyers; yr/mi/fe (affirmative), ni/nid (negative) & a (interrogative) impacting either a mutation or of colloquially vestigial fragments of these particles agglutinating onto the verb in question in speech and in informal (colloquially based) written Welsh. (e.g. yr + oeddwn i = roeddwn i (affirmative - I was) / nid + oeddwn i (ddim) = doeddwn i ddim (negative - I wasn't) / a oeddwn i? = [interrogative particle 'a' dropped colloquially, leaving simply] oeddwn i? (interrogative - was I?)

The agglutination of these particles onto verbs, or the mutations on the initial consonants of verbs imparted by particles dropped in the colloquial language, creating apparent forms such as; Roeddwn i (I was) / Doeddwn i ddim (I wasn't) / Oeddwn i? (Was I?) shouldn't be enterpreted as evidence of distinct affirmative, negative or interrogative moods, but should be recognised for what it is; particle + verb agglutination. Homoproteus (talk) 01:08, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merged article

This article is really only a brief definition of polarity followed by some information about negation, which is covered anyway at Negation (linguistics). I've merged all the information together and improved the presentation etc. at Affirmative and negative. I'm going to redirect this title to there; I'll also start a thread on that discussion page regarding what the best title of the article should be. If we still want to have a separate article on "polarity", I suggest it should incorporate the information from Polarity item, so as to be more than just a definition. Victor Yus (talk) 10:14, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New article

Information in this article comes from Negation (linguistics) and Grammatical polarity. I've now redirected both of those titles to this one; I leave it open what the final title should be (though the intro is currently written to match the title I've currently given it). Victor Yus (talk) 10:49, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Affirmative and negative are not opposites

I'm not going to change anything on the article because I know someone is going to revert my edits, but, just for the record, I think it's very important to mention that the opposite of "affirmative" is "interrogative". One can only form a sentence that is affirmative or that is interrogative. Both kinds of sentences are subdivided into two other kinds: the positive and the negative ones. Examples: - Positive Affirmative: I've got a house; - Negative Affirmative: I haven't got a house; - Positive Interrogative: Have I got a house ?; - Negative Interrogative: Haven't I got a house ?. Therefore, the opposite of "negative" is "positive". Based on that, this article is, in theory, thoroughly wrong. Clausgroi (talk) 01:01, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]