User talk:Ruthanneliseschultz/sandbox

Peer Review by Camilla Zecker

The order/flow of your page is great and makes sense as you go through!

Nice job linking to the relevant wikipedia pages, that's something I need to work on for my page.

Your lead is very small and I think it would benefit from being expanded with more information about number of speakers, language family, endangered level, and other interesting details (about the speakers for example), as well as a general overview of the information you provide in the later sections. Hopefully you have some information like that!

I didn't see a citation for your grammar, so you'll definitely want to include that eventually (and Prof. Kalin let us know that we need to cite at the end of each paragraph).

The tone is neutral and gives a good overview (assuming the lead gets filled out).

Overall I think there could be slightly more written explanation/elaboration that explains the charts/examples and provides context (if you have more information).

Great job! --Camilla

Phonology (CZ)

Your explanation of the consonant inventory was really strong. For some reason two of the row headers in the consonant inventory weren't bolded (not sure if that was on purpose).

For the stress and syllable structure sections, I think it would be really helpful to provide examples so that readers can see what you are talking about in action.

Morphology (CZ)

Your morphology section was very thorough and strong. You have a lot of examples but they are mostly in just the translated English version (in the Reduplication section). It would be great to add the Berbic Dutch Creole versions too. You could make it even stronger by bolding relevant parts of the examples so the readers eyes are drawn to what is particularly important (like what is being reduplicated)

Syntax (CZ)

For your Word Order section, I'm confused about the example you give about beating with a paddle. Is paddle really the object of the sentence? It seems like the paddle isn't what's being beaten, it is what is being used to do the beating. Even if it is technically the object, that stuck out as confusing to me, so I think that perhaps you might want to find a different example where it's more clear what the object is.

For the headedness section, the examples are great. I think you could bold the head or find a way to more clearly indicate what the head and complements are in each example and then show that because of their relative order they are head final or head initial. This could make them even clearer and easier to interpret.

Review 2: Sharon Washio

Lead

The lead can be more flushed out, with information such as the history behind BDC’s origin and extinction (e.g. time periods of each, how well documented is it?). The acronym for Berbice Dutch Creole, “BDC”, should be put into the first sentence of the article, “Berbice Dutch Creole (BDC) was spoken in northeastern Guyana.”, since you refer to it as BDC later in the article.

Phonology

In the phonology section, it goes beyond the bare minimum by including information about stress. Examples for possible syllable structures using sample words of the language may be helpful. I think the bullet points in the consonant section can be incorporated into the paragraph, or put into a chart. This sentence in the consonant section, “/ç/ and /x/ exist only in the first person plural form of the Wiruni Creek dialect. [Kouwenberg says that, within the speakers of the Wiruni creek dialect, she considers it an allophone of ʃ.].”, could be worded better. A suggestion: “/ç/ and /x/ exist only in the first person plural form of the Wiruni Creek dialect. According to Kouwenberg, /ç/ and /x/ are allophones of /ʃ/.(citation)”.

Morphology

In the introduction to this section, category conversion should be mentioned before reduplication, since that is the order below (and it is alphabetical). Category conversion and reduplication have fleshed out descriptions, with examples of its use in different contexts (e.g. with adjectives, nouns, verbs). In general, examples may be better represented in tables rather than bullet points.

Syntax

Syntax has components from the practicum: Word Order and Headedness. In the future, case and agreement should be added. The glosses can be aligned using the interlinear template mentioned on Piazza.

Overall

I like that pages are linked for specific terminology. All sections have information from previous grammar works and practicums. Each section leaves me with a broad overview of Berbice Dutch Creole, and examples were provided for different processes. The lead and the syntax should have more content, but the phonology and morphology sections are well balanced. The article’s greatest strengths are the detailed subcategories of Phonology and Morphology. The weaknesses are formatting and the lead in progress.

Swashio (talk) 00:47, 14 April 2019 (UTC)Sharon Washio