Talk:Resumptive pronoun

	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
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

this example Grammatical for most native English speakers: Who is the girl that your friend said that she is nice? doesn't sound grammatical to me (native english spkr) I would say "who is the girl that your said is nice"Cinnamon colbert (talk) 21:57, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably, you meant to include "friend" between "your" and "said", in which case I agree. The reference's section on resumptive pronouns doesn't mention any exceptions to their ungrammaticality in English. Tomblikebomb (talk) 19:48, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1. Content a) Well written, however some areas are a bit dense, as they assume prior knowledge of certain concepts, such as binding theory. Sometimes has awkward wording, such as in this sentence: “A conceivable way of approaching resumptive pronouns is to say that they are syntactically of the same category as gaps or traces, and that they get the same semantic translation”. The examples that are then produced as a tree structures “This is the girl that I don’t know what she said” and “This is the camel that I think he likes Oscar”, are awkward sentences to me. Though that is perhaps a significant factor of resumptive pronouns. Presumably the individual who created the examples is a native speaker of English, and it is a great indication of critical thinking of the subject at hand, but I think the group should try, if at all possible, to think of and provide less awkwardly phrased sentences; that, or explain in further detail how and why the provided are grammatically correct.

b) This Wikipedia article seems to be quite comprehensive but could go into further detail, by elaborating a bit more on the distribution of resumptive pronouns in other languages.

c) Lacking citations in key places, for example, “There are two views regarding the existence of resumptive pronouns. Some Linguists believe that resumptive pronouns occur as a result of syntactic processing, while others believe they are the result of grammatical structure and are actually the pronunciation of a trace.” Could benefit from more citations throughout article.

d) All positions and statements are conveyed from a neutral perspective.

e) Information presented is stable.

2. Style a) The lead section of this article is not very clear and informative. Examples and further explanation of the topic would help to resolve confusion. The lead section is written in an organized way, it just requires further definition and explanation. It relies heavily on quotes to explain the subject. It is also a bit unclear; are resumptive pronouns only used by english speakers?

b) Subheadings would be appropriate for topics involving distribution.

c) Citations are consistent in style, however, as referenced in (1c), are quite sparse throughout the article.

3. Images The images in this article are very informative and relevant to the topic.The images however do not seem to contain image copyright tags. Evidently the group has created their own examples as evidence, and it is clear on the source page where and who the images came from.

4. Length The article as a whole is a reasonable length as is in a summary style of writing. The lead section is a bit short, and could possible be combined with the overview. Could benefit from a section that went more in depth than the overview. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jleong92 (talk • contribs) 04:43, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]