Should we consider going in the other direction with ELU and ELL?

Question

Okay, friends. Here comes the devil's advocate, and he says:

As one who has agonized over the blurred lines between ELU and ELL, I now find myself thinking that maybe, after all, we don't need dividing lines between ELU and ELL. Maybe there's no value in spending so much time and energy building and defending fences. Maybe there is no harm in throwing open the gates and saying, "Come one, come all! Welcome to the new Using the English Language StackExchange site."

Give me a second to duck and cover while you ready your slings and arrows.......

ADDENDUM 9/17/13:

I admit to being mildly surprised that my above "devil's advocate" post left room for interpretation, but I also admit I was not explicit. Allow me, then, to be explicit.

1. I consider it evident that all (certainly most) of us who are so enthusiastically engaged in this debate are enthusiastic users of both sites.

2. Ergo, all (grant me "all," if you will) of us enjoy answering and/or debating questions and subject matter on both sites.

3. Because we love English, top to bottom.

4. We are entirely capable of self-selecting the posts/questions that interest us. Each of us can respond to the ones of his or her choice, and ignore the others. We do this anyway. We simply do it with the added burdens of jumping between sites and carping about whether any given question should or shouldn't be on the site we're visiting. Why bother?

5. Therefore, what actual harm does it/can it do to allow any and all posts pertaining to the English language to wash up on the shores of the proposed Using the English Language StackExchange Site? (Proposed name subject to debate, further suggestions, voting, and so on.)

6. Yes, I do mean and propose one conjoined, ecumenical site for all.

I'll be hiding out in that cave over there if you want me.

Answer 1

As one of the moderators over on ELL, I disagree with the premise that ELL and ELU are fundamentally too similar, although I'll certainly agree that there is a great deal of confusion as to where that dividing line lives.

Personally I think the confusion isn't going away. ELL has been around for about six months and just this week there's been at least three metas on ELU where people were confused about ELL versus ELU, and at least two metas on ELL asking the same thing.

I also think that a lot of the confusion lies with the names of ELU and ELL being too broad, which means that whether a question belongs on ELL or ELU is far too subjective at the moment: practically any interesting question on ELU can be construed as "English Language and Usage", even if it would clearly be a better fit on ELL. And any half-assed badly worded question on ELU can easily be construed as being asked by an "English Language Learner", and hence we see loads of terrible (and often off-topic) questions on ELU being suggested for migration to ELL.

What would be nice is if ELL and ELU agreed on a more concrete and easy-to-understand scope that has less overlap, which would leave less subjectivity in whether a question belongs on ELL or ELU, and which isn't off-putting to questioners when they are politely asked to ask their question on the other site.

I've written in somewhat more detail over here, but in summary, the most concise and clear scope definitions I could come up with are:

• IMO, ELU is about the research of the English Language and analysis of English usage

• IMO, ELL is really about helping people learn to communicate effectively in modern, everyday English

Hopefully those two definitions aren't too controversial and is hopefully also a whole ton clearer than the current definitions which lead to five metas a week of people throwing their hands up in confusion.

Answer 2

I admit that I haven't spent much time on eiter ELL and ELU and I haven't done any systematic research, so this post will be based on anecdotes rather than statistically significant samples.

The difference in terms of official scope between ELL and ELU is minimal. The following topics are listed on both sides:

• Word choice and usage
• Grammar
• Dialect differences
• Spelling and punctuation

ELL adds “Practical problems you encounter while learning English” — whatever that is supposed to cover. (Maybe “practical problems you encounter while teaching English” would have more semantic content.) It's unclear to me how such problems would be off-topic on ELU.

ELU adds “Pronunciation (phonetics and phonology, dialectology)”. I don't see how these topics would be off-topic on ELL (perhaps the intent is that ELL would focus on usage while ELU would tend to veer more into linguistics). ELU also adds “Etymology (history of words’ development)” which is explicitly excluded from ELL. That's a pretty minor difference all things considered.

This leaves the audience as the sole differenciation factor between ELL and ELU. ELL is for “people who are learning or teaching English as a foreign language” while ELU is for “linguists, etymologists, and (serious) English language enthusiasts”. The upshot is that threads on ELL are more likely to veer towards teaching to non-natives (with more formalized grammar, special attention paid to false friends, etc.) while threads on ELU are more likely to veer towards scientific concepts from linguistics.

In summary the two sites accept essentially the same questions but invite different kinds of answers. This is not necessarily a bad thing. There are precedents with Stack Exchange sites whose scope significantly overlaps but that target on different audiences, however in all other cases the ground covered by one of the sites is significantly larger than that covered by the other site.

For example, Unix & Linux is mostly but not exclusively a subset of Super User and is a superset of Ask Ubuntu. AU in particular tends to invite different kinds of answers from U&L for similar questions (one site caters more towards novice Ubuntu users while the other caters more towards advanced users, not unlike ELL vs ELU — however the difference is more subtle than this). U&L vs AU is however a special case in two ways: Ask Ubuntu has official ties with Ubuntu, which would not be possible with a less focused site; and the volume of AU is about 5 times that of U&L and roughly equal to that of SU despite the scope hierarchy.

In the case of ELL and ELU, do the different leanings really matter in practice? In my experience, not really. A majority of posts on ELL involve no pedagogy and a majority of posts on ELU do not involve linguistics, so they would be suitable for either site.

The main difference I've observed between ELL and ELU is what happens when a question can be answered either with a simple answer (“phrase A is better than phrase B”) or with a detailed analysis (showing other possibilities, discussing historical, geographical and sociological trends, providing insights by relating to other expressions, etc.). On ELL, the question either lucks out and gets a good answer, or is poorly received and gets a one-line answer. On ELU, the question either lucks out and gets a good answer, or gets closed. It seems to me that ELL and ELU are on par when it comes to generating good answers, and only differ in how they react to questions that are perceived as uninteresting. (Both sites often fail to capture the interest in questions that could be much more than “should I say A or B?”.)

Matt describes the difference between ELL and ELU in different terms:

• IMO, ELU is about the research of the English Language and analysis of English usage
• IMO, ELL is really about helping people learn to communicate effectively in modern, everyday English

I don't see a dichotomy here. “Communicating effectively in modern, everyday English” is something that can be the subject of research and analysis.

terdon and Bradd Szonye express different points of view, and I think terdon's phrasing covers both answers's main sentiment: ELL is for practical advice, ELU is for pedantry. That is a dichotomy, but a false one. Good ELL answers are not weak. A good ELL answer should say: “textbooks say X, but everybody except the Queen writes Y and pronounces Z”. A bad ELU answer is equally bad on ELL. A good ELU answer may mention nuances relevant only to Shakespeare scholars — but so would an ELL answer if the asker was reading Shakespeare.

I don't often have questions about English, but when I do these days I have no idea where I should ask. Should I ask on ELL since by definition I am a learner, not a native speaker? Or is my English good enough to be accepted in the big boys' site? Should I ask on ELU since I appreciate well-researched and documented answers? Or should I on ask ELL since I would benefit from natives' intuition? I've read quite a few of these “ELL vs ELU” meta threads (though admittedly not all of them by a long shot), and I'm as puzzled as ever.

All in all, I don't see such a major difference between ELL and ELU, neither in the kinds of questions that are well-received, nor in the quality of answers that they generate.

The fact that the difference is endlessly debated and that after months of debate no consensus has been reached is a big hint that the difference doesn't really exist.

Answer 3

Weak questions don't bother me nearly as much as weak answers.

Even very basic questions often offer opportunities to analyze some quirk of the language. There's etymology, there's comparison to related languages that went in a different direction, there's regional differences, there are (sometimes obscure) stylistic options to choose from, there's all kinds of pedantry and trivia to indulge. When it comes to usage, I love answers that address all of the possibilities and when and why you'd use each one. I love answers that explore the history of a word or idiom with OED citations. That sort of thing is overwhelming to an English learner, but it's tons of fun for an English nerd.

Very basic answers bother me though. I'm tired of seeing answers to word requests that are basically just “How about foo?” – or even worse, “How about this list of random words only loosely connected to your request, not even the right part of speech.” I'm tired of seeing answers to usage questions that simply state, “Do it this way!” or “That's incorrect!” without any heed to alternatives or descriptivism, without any explanation of why the answer is correct. I'm tired of answers that use “what I learned in grade school” as a source.

A lot of those basic answers are fine advice, but they're boring for English nerds, and that's roughly where I see the divide between ELU and ELL. I agree with Matt's idea that ELU is for analysis and ELL for communication, although I would state it a little differently: ELU is for pedantry and ELL for advice. With that distinction, we can handle a lot of overlap in questions, simply by taking a different approach to answers. Also, I think it lets us refer people to ELL without being condescending: “Answers here may offer more detail than you need. For more practical advice, ask your question on [ell.se].”

Answer 4

As a non native with what I believe to be a proficient command of the language I visit both EL&U and ELL on occasions. Except on very basic questions that would be closed on ELU I don't really see much of a difference.
Latest examples: this question asked on EL&U is to me very basic, the meaning of "but for" is understood by most English natives, and the explanation is found in any dictionary¹ without much effort. Nevertheless it was not redirected to ELL and answered on EL&U.
StoneyB's answer and following comments to a question that fits ELL requirements is in no way an answer suited for ELL. Obviously I am not objecting to his having given us this example, but I am sure lots of natives with already a great command of English would have been happy to read it, but they won't unless they visit EL&U (for whatever reason).
That was just an example, both ways, over the months I have found others. I strongly believe the line between both sites is very thin and that audiences from both sites can benefit at times from all answers.
So, yes I'm joining John M. Landsberg's proposal.

¹ For example here or here.

Answer 5

I agree with Matt's answer. The main reason I enjoy ELU so much is the high level of detail that some answers give. Take these two for example:

• What's wrong with "I'll open you the door"?

• Shortest correct sentence in English- use of contractions

I find these answers to be very informative and instructive and fun to decipher. I am not a language expert by any measure but I know enough to be able to understand, if not produce, such answers. On the other hand, this level of detail is pretty much useless to someone who is learning the language.

My understanding is that this site was originally conceived as a playground for academics and linguists. While I am neither, as a native speaker and language geek I get a huge kick out of some of the answers here. They make me think, and teach me aspects of the language I had not considered.

So, some observations about merging the sites:

• It will likely result in non-natives getting scary and essentially incomprehensible answers;
• The 'hardcore' ELU users will stop answering because they no longer find the questions interesting (this is already happening, I remember reading a meta thread a while back where some of our highest rep and most knowledgeable users were complaining about not finding it fun anymore).
• I feel a lot of us enjoy 'out-pedanting' each other, that can only be done among people with a certain facility with the language, it is neither fair nor funny and will be perceived as an attack if done to someone trying their best to learn.
• There are many, many sites out there to help English languauge learners and ELL is yet another one built using the SE model we like so much. There really isn't anything like ELU around, where will the language geeks go if we change the scope?
• On a more personal note, I am a native speaker of English who has spent all but 4 years of his life in non-English speaking countries. Coming here is like a breath of fresh air for me, I don't need to limit my own vocabulary and I sometimes have to look up words that other people use. I love it!

I may also participate on ELL (I barely have so far), but I would stop coming here if the sites were merged, it would no longer be fun for me.

---

EDIT: I just found that meta post where the high rep users were expressing their displeasure with the simplification of the site, it was your question! I take it you have changed your mind? :)

Answer 6

I'm going to use an answer box to grab this bag full of cats, swing it around, and toss it in yet another direction.

ELU friends, here's a single-word request: What's that word for continuing to fight on gamely after the battle is already lost?

I detect a substantial amount of sentiment in favor of a merge, but I think the majority still comes down in favor of two distinct sites. But after all this time, and all this debate, look at how confusion reigns. Look how incredibly many ELL questions corruscate through ELU. Think about how many always will.

While we were building walls, they were tunneling underneath. We have met the enemy, and they are us. We have become what we feared most. We are bailing out a sunken ship. Shall I go on? I'm having fun with the metaphors. :)

In other words, it's too late, and there's no point. We can keep arguing about this, or we can realize that no matter what we do, the sites are blended, and always will be blended, and we probably ought to figure out a way to blend them constructively and effectively, rather than wringing our hands and trying to prevent something that has already happened. We're fighting a battle that ended without us.

Remember the knight in the forest in Monty Python and the Holy Grail who kept claiming he would defeat King Arthur even as he continued to lose limb after limb?

My point? We can debate this until we're blue in the face, but I do not believe that there is any way really and truly to keep the sites separate. It's not gonna happen, folks.

So let's welcome the neighbors. :)

Answer 7

Should we perhaps say that any question asked on ELU that is clearly from a foreign learner at beginner or intermediate level wil automatically be transferred to ELL?

Answer 8

For the short version, skip to the last word in this answer.

For the details, please read on ...

For some weeks as a highly interest Noob, I've been watching the ELL versus ELU match. Jumping in the ring, I wrangled with unexpected hubris. Count me now among those throwing their hands up in annoyance, bewildered, wondering if this is the place to be.

There should be no such consternation for any user on any Stack Exchange site. Sorry, you all are no exception.

I also mentioned essentially the same bullet points as Matt elsewhere:

ELU = academic English
ELL = everyday English

... only to watch the downvotes start. (Maybe they didn't like a rank Noob pointing out that the Emperor has only two pairs of shoes, but no clothes. Or perhaps the two shoes just don't fit, constituting poor differentiation.)

Although Matt's answer has merit, I am concerned that it will not suffice. The tumult of discussion stems from what I would call the boundary separation problem. This is a Stack Exchange problem generally, caused partly by the increasing number of sites requiring some division lines be drawn. ELL and ELU are not the first to experience this. (Ask the programmers about StackOverflow vs Code Review vs etc.)

I see the same thing here, only in different clothes. But for ELL vs. ELU, I suspect the boundary issues won't worsen over time, rather the stuff will just get rehashed, the same "move to site X from Y with explainer," wastefully consuming user time and strength, and, as it has already, moderator resources.

To me, even Matt's clearer description earlier of the ELL-ELU boundary seems contrived to make the sites' separation work better (or even work at all).

Many instances come to mind where "analysis of usage" helps me "communicate [more] effectively." Conversely, questions about "everyday English" can lead to academic research - it depends on the how the question is phrased, does it not?

The questioner's writing style might make it clear on what "level" they intend their question to stand, but maybe not. For instance, a non-native speaker might make a usage slip - so it "seems basic and everyday" so off the post trots to ELL, if it were on ELU. But if he or she is very good and asks the same question on ELU, perhaps adding in merely the word "how" or "why," the answer could go deep. And here's a revealing point: if that were posted on ELL (not ELU) it probably would stay on ELL and not be migrated, right?

So to sum up why I think ELU and ELL need to be merged back, and the ELU folks learn happily to help the new learners who also love language, while the ELL people can enjoy more depth, here is the one word that shows why boundaries will remain hard to demarcate. Please think on the ramifications of

Prepositions.