Talk:List of linguists
|
|
Could be worse. But not perfect. For example, Eco and Hayakawa do not belong on a list of linguists. Historical converage is weak. How about Dionysios Thrax for classical antiquity? How about Brugmann for the Neo-grammarians (and there were a lot more)?
- Could we have a definition of "linguist", please? It may mean "someone who speaks a lot of languages" or "someone who studies language". The list contains both - was that the intention? Deb 20:46 Apr 29, 2003 (UTC)
- Perhaps, a suitable definition is any person who contributed significantly to the field of language, that would include all academic linguists, and those that performed significant works of translation, Sol Plaatje for example. In my opinion, those people who simply knew / know many languages should be excluded.
- I started looking in to this area because Stephen Krashen isn't on the list. I wonder who else is missing. Dduck 16:51, 9 Nov 2003 (UTC)
I see that Clement Martyn Doke is in with the "M"s. Is this correct? Was "Martyn Doke" his surname? Google throws up lots of references to him as "Doke, CM", but that's not very strong evidence of anything, of course. -- Oliver P. 03:05 15 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Divide the page...
Perhaps a happy medium would be to divide the page into three: one section for traditional grammarians and lexicographers(Panini, etc.), one for modern structural linguists (Hale, Kratzer, Chomsky), and one for people like Eco, who have contributed much insight, but aren't linguists.