I would like to ask for "linguistics" tag, because sometimes we need the linguistics point of view on English rules, the question is not for the Linguistics SE, because it's specifically about English language,Meta-linguistics tag doesn't always apply,
and also an "indefinite pronoun" tag.

  • I'm not sure I really understand your proposal. What is the purpose of this tag, and why can't you categorize your question with one of the tags we already have on the site? I believe tags cover enough topics, and there's even a lot of overlap in some tags, so I can't think of a good use for this [linguistics] tag. Would [sentence-structure] or [syntax] do the job for you?
    – M.A.R.
    May 10, 2017 at 12:30
  • I can't organize my question, because I needed a "linguistics" tag, to talk about linguistics applied to the English language. And for the "indefinite pronouns", I think it would be easier to have grammar category, this one: I didn't find it.
    – Quidam
    May 10, 2017 at 14:45
  • 1
    Well, if you mean you want to use a [linguistics] tag because you want to talk about grammar, then you should either use [syntax] or [sentence-structure], because a [linguistics] tag would be pretty useless.
    – M.A.R.
    May 10, 2017 at 14:47
  • No, I want to talk about linguistics theory, not only grammar. Not cross-linguistics, but linguistics theory applied to English. Syntax and sentence-structure doesn't fit in my examples, and doesn't show I want a theoretical approach. I don't think it's useless when you need it, if you don't need it, it's otherwise.
    – Quidam
    May 10, 2017 at 15:19
  • And "indefinite pronouns", because we can browser all the rules for that grammar category.
    – Quidam
    May 10, 2017 at 15:20
  • If you want a linguist's perspective, then the quetion probably belongs on English Language & Usage if not Linguistics.SE.
    – choster
    May 10, 2017 at 17:41
  • And on the Linguistics SE, they will tell me it's not about English language grammar. I want a reply to an English grammar question + knowing the point of view of the linguistics about it, applied to the English language only.
    – Quidam
    May 10, 2017 at 19:27
  • 4
    @Quidam If you want a linguistics perspective on a question about English, then ELU or Linguistics are probably more appropriate anyway.
    – Mitch
    May 11, 2017 at 12:48
  • 1
    I'm really sick of that site where people downvote every question even when "discussion" is mentioned.
    – Quidam
    May 12, 2017 at 19:18
  • 1
    @Quidam I often get downvoted here, but I'm used to it because I believe they downvote my posts for a reason. And I don't think a downvote really hurts you; you are awarded 10 rep for an upvote and only reduced 2 rep for a downvote. And if you feel it still hurts you, you should know the fact that one of the most downvoted answer is from Jeff :) May 13, 2017 at 1:27
  • 3
    @Quidam Downvotes on Meta do not work the same way as downvotes on Main; they indicate disagreement, not quality.
    – choster
    May 16, 2017 at 19:51
  • 1
    @choster: That's only really true on proposals, but, discussion or no, this is in fact a post that makes a proposal. OP: Simply brandishing "discussion" like the sign of the cross doesn't magically prevent people from spotting the fact that you want the site to work a particular way. May 19, 2017 at 17:19

1 Answer 1


Asking for the "linguistics point of view" is ultimately pretty meaningless; there isn't a linguistics point of view but scores of them: traditional, structuralist, generative, transformational, functional, cognitive, constructionist, minimalist, constituency, phonetics, phonology, historical linguistics, comparative linguistics, sociolinguistics, corpus linguistics, &c.

So if there's something specific you're looking for you will have to specify it. But be warned that there's only a handful of Real Linguists active here (and a slightly larger number of amateurs like me who know how to play a linguist on TV), so the chance of finding someone on ELL who subscribes to any particular linguistic confession is pretty thin.

Aside from that, all questions which are on-topic at ELL are questions, and to that extent a tag would be as pointless as the existing tags and .

I suspect that what you really mean is that you want to ask a question about usage X and get back an answer which doesn't just tell you that X is or isn't idiomatic English but provides "theory-based" rules which you can generalize over similar situations. If that's the case, your best bet is to frame your question in a way which calls for generalization. For instance, don't ask this:

Is this sentence grammatical?


Please answer from a linguistics point of view.

Instead, ask it this way:

The rules I have been taught, A, B and C, suggest that this sentence should be grammatical:


But authority Q tells me that it is not grammatical. Why do the rules I have learned not apply in this case?

That tells the reader exactly what you want (and incidentally discourages people who can't provide it from cluttering up your life with things you don't want).

  • 1
    That is a good example of how a question should not written, and how the same question could be better written. I agree that linguistics alone would not make much sense, and the OP should not focus on linguistics.
    – apaderno
    May 14, 2017 at 13:33

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .