Skip to main content
Esperanto Language Meta

Return to Question

edited title
Link
avpaderno Mod
avpaderno Mod
  • 1.7k
  • 8
  • 15

Do we need both "history" and "language-evolution"?

added a practical example of why I would use language-evolution as tag
Source Link
avpaderno Mod
avpaderno Mod
  • 1.7k
  • 8
  • 15

There areBefore writing this question, there were 14 questions using and 7 questions using .

Do we need both the tags? To me, it seems that includes , since the history of a language is its evolution in the time. Between the two, I would prefer because itto avoid the tag is less ambiguousused when the question asks about historical reasons, for example.

There are 14 questions using and 7 questions using .

Do we need both the tags? To me, it seems that includes , since the history of a language is its evolution in the time. Between the two, I would prefer because it is less ambiguous.

Before writing this question, there were 14 questions using and 7 questions using .

Do we need both the tags? To me, it seems that includes , since the history of a language is its evolution in the time. Between the two, I would prefer to avoid the tag is used when the question asks about historical reasons, for example.

Source Link
avpaderno Mod
avpaderno Mod
  • 1.7k
  • 8
  • 15

Do we need both "history" and "language-evolution"

There are 14 questions using and 7 questions using .

Do we need both the tags? To me, it seems that includes , since the history of a language is its evolution in the time. Between the two, I would prefer because it is less ambiguous.