Talk:armchair linguist

RFD discussion: March 2019–April 2020
Also armchair general, armchair generals, armchair hawk, armchair hawks, armchair linguistics. already has the appropriate sense, and there are myriad professions which equally accept the adjective. This is distinct from Monday morning quarterback since is generic to all (public, decision making) professions while Monday morning applies only to Football (and perhaps preaching). - TheDaveRoss  13:29, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Isn't the basis for that figurative use of ? If yes I think that one should be kept. The others can go. Delete. Chignon – Пучок 13:35, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Good question, this n-grams search has arising earlier, but that doesn't prove the case. Here is a cite from 1888 for, the earliest I see for  is in the WWI era. -  TheDaveRoss  13:47, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete, SoP. Equinox ◑ 13:37, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete as SOP (or just redirect them to armchair, if you like), unless we're sure one of them if the source of this use of "armchair", in which case JIFFY would suggest keeping that one. - -sche (discuss) 10:36, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. First, there is a value in having armchair linguist and opposing it to field linguist. Or is the antonym of armchair general a field general as well? Second, armchair linguist is a thing, whereas armchair farmer is not. Therefore, I think we should list it somehow. Allahverdi Verdizade (talk) 15:16, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
 * There are many professions which armchair does not often modify, although farmer isn't one of them. There are many professions which armchair does modify, just as one would probably not use hypersexual to modify cupboard that does not mean that hypersexual person is idiomatic. I wouldn't think that should be included either, since  already contains the relevant sense (noun 4.2.2), and one can be a field scientist of many stripes. -  TheDaveRoss  15:44, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Point taken. However, armchair linguist isn't a linguist who is "remote from actual involvement" with linguistics, or a "linguist retired from previously active involvement", which sense 1 would suggest. Neither does the word designate a linguist who is "unqualified or uninformed but yet giving advice", as suggested by sense two. Armchair linguist is, very specifically, a lightly derogatory term for an adherent of the generative approach within linguistics. Does that follow from the sum of parts? Allahverdi Verdizade (talk) 16:52, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
 * If it is much more specific than the standard usage of armchair, then it might merit inclusion. The current cite does point to your narrower meaning, if you can track down two more which are equally narrow I would be happy to change my vote on that one. - TheDaveRoss  02:49, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't know; armchair linguist sounds like armchair general; they may have a serious position, but they're sitting at a desk and they're making decisions based on paperwork instead of going out into the field and learning first hand. I question whether "armchair linguist" refers to "an adherent of the generative approach" as opposed to, well, an armchair linguist.--Prosfilaes (talk) 03:19, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. There is a sense that generative/Chomskyan linguists as a group, fixated as they are on the ideal speaker irrespective of what goes on in the real world linguistically, are (derogatorially) "armchair" linguists, as opposed to other linguists (e.g. phoneticians, sociolinguists) that are not. Not sure that this is covered in the "armchair" entry. -Sonofcawdrey (talk) 08:41, 28 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete, but tweak the adjective form of armchair to more clearly cover this usage. bd2412 T 18:14, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirected to armchair. - TheDaveRoss  13:59, 17 April 2020 (UTC)