This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology 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.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
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
Those columns imply that everyone thinks either everything is innate or nothing is, and that that's all that's worth talking about. Someone please fix.
Agreed, this is misleading and also inaccurate (some people belong in multiple columns, others in neither). That said, not sure there's a perfect way to divide people up. Some options: (1) first/child vs. second language acquisition; (2) theoretical framework (e.g., generative grammar, constructivist, statistical learning); (3) by age of children that they study (infants, young children, older children, adults); (4) don't divide people up at all; just make 'Language Acquisition Researchers' a category, and turn this into a set category page. The latter would be the best solution, I think... Ishkibib (talk) 00:13, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
