Talk:artificial grammar

RFD
rfc hasn't elicited good def in one year. DCDuring TALK 09:09, 30 June 2008 (UTC)


 * The only usage I know of means "bit of made-up language" (a severely reduced, ad hoc construction as opposed to a complete constructed language such as Esperanto or Ido). Made-up language tests are sometimes used to test language-learning ability. The U.S. Government used to use these tests to qualify applicants to the Defense Language Institute. See Artificial grammar learning. —Stephen 14:21, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Looking at th WP stub article and the first 2 pages of the 600+ raw b.g.c. hits, it seems SoP to me, but similar phrases have passed RfD. DCDuring TALK 15:54, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I've replaced the definition and removed rfc, but it still looks SoP to me. DCDuring TALK 16:18, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't see this as SoP any more than artificial intelligence. Since it is used attributively in artificial grammar learning, it should satisfy CFI.  I'll try to find a more thorough explanation, since the current definition seems somehow lacking, but I can't articulate quite why I think that. --EncycloPetey 16:37, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, the current definition simply defines grammar. artificial grammar means "small bit of made-up language, used for testing language-learning ability". —Stephen 17:05, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. With this definition, not cited and not kept. There's potential later for entry, but this discussion is closed. --Jackofclubs 00:08, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

RFC: music copyvio
This term was discussed on RFC because its definition copied information from a copyrighted source. Please see this discussion. — Beobach 23:03, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

RFC discussion: August 2007–December 2010

 * and other Lerdahl copyright definitions


 * (I did not nominate this term, I am commenting years later.) This has since been deleted. — Beobach 22:33, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

grouping structure

 * (I did not nominate this term, I am commenting years later.) I deleted this with the following summary: "opaque term's copyright violation has not been corrected in three years; if term is valid, create new entry with non-copyrighted definition". — Beobach 22:37, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

metrical structure

 * (I did not nominate this term, I am commenting years later.) This has since been cleaned up, but may be SoP. — Beobach 22:33, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

musical grammar

 * (I did not nominate this term, I am commenting years later.) I deleted this with the following summary: "copyright violation has not been corrected in three years; if term is valid, create new entry with non-copyrighted definition". — Beobach 22:37, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

natural grammar

 * (I did not nominate this term, I am commenting years later.) This has since been cleaned up, at least as far as copyrights are concerned. — Beobach 22:33, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

preference rules

 * (I did not nominate this term, I am commenting years later.) I deleted this with the following summary: "opaque term's copyright violation has not been corrected in three years; if term is valid, create new entry with non-copyrighted definition". — Beobach 22:37, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

prolongational reduction
As with permutation. — Beobach 22:36, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

stability conditions
As with permutation. — Beobach 22:36, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

time-span reduction

 * (I did not nominate this term, I am commenting years later.) I deleted this, as noted above. — Beobach 22:33, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

time-span segmentation

 * The copyright violation has been cleaned up, but the entry remains SoP. I will RFD. — Beobach 22:33, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

transformational rules
As with permutation. — Beobach 22:36, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

well-formedness rules
As noted in WT:BP, the music definitions for the above entries contain definitions for which DeLone and Lerdahl hold the copyright. Rod (A. Smith) 05:20, 6 August 2007 (UTC)


 * These have now all been dealt with. When I archive this discussion, I will place a link to the oldid of this page, where all of these can be seen (rather than merely archiving the individual section). — Beobach 22:36, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

RFC discussion: June 2007
The definition makes no sense to me. Needs attention from somebody familiar with this concept. -- WikiPedant 02:41, 1 June 2007 (UTC)