This is a page where simple tag housekeeping can be requested. If you have an idea for, for example, a tag synonym, this is a good place to record it.

If your simple request turns out to need more discussion than you thought it would (e.g. more than a couple of little comments), then that item should be moved to a separate Meta question of its own.

After some opportunity for discussion and voting on the proposals, moderators will proceed as follows:

  • If consensus has been reached, moderators will carry out any necessary changes and add the tag .
  • otherwise, the tag will be added.

If you see a request is not being handled in a timely way, do flag the post to have moderators check it!

  • 1
    In general: I'd like to see us gradually working on making sure each tag has an English synonym that will be easy for a Spanish learner to understand. – aparente001 Jun 14 '18 at 2:45
  • DONE @fedorqui - could you please make "geography" and "geografia" (without the accent) synonymous with "geografía"? – aparente001 Jun 23 '18 at 2:26
  • DONE @fedorqui - topónimo needs toponimo and place-names. – aparente001 Jun 23 '18 at 2:37
  • @fedorqui - Hi there. Another tiny request. I think "nombre-colectivo" would be better than "nombres-colectivos". Because the point of the whole thing is that it looks singular, but it works for a plural concept (I hope I got that right). – aparente001 Jun 26 '18 at 3:29
  • DONE And one more easy one: could you make "united-states" point to "estados-unidos" please? – aparente001 Jun 26 '18 at 5:26
  • @fedorqui - Question. When I list all the tags, "lo" shows up -- that's okay -- but it shows up with its obsolete definition. But when I click on it, I get the new version, with its new definition. (Old definition: Preguntas sobre el uso del pronombre "lo".) Is that some kind of programming bug? – aparente001 Jun 30 '18 at 5:41
  • DONE @fedorqui - Could you create "lenguaje-técnico" as a synonym of "vocabulario-técnico"? – aparente001 Jul 1 '18 at 12:41
  • DONE @fedorqui - I remember you said our pattern is to use plurals in tag names. Would it make sense for expresion to be plural? – aparente001 Jul 1 '18 at 12:43
  • this is how synonyms work: you get the tooltip with its definition and then it gets mapped to the main one. – fedorqui Jul 2 '18 at 8:39
  • @fedorqui - Yesterday I created "consonants" on the fly; of course the main tag needed to be "consonantes," but I was afraid the English version might get forgotten by accident so I created the English version and figured you'd notice and create the partner tag in Spanish. Does that approach make a headache for you? – aparente001 Jul 6 '18 at 13:16
  • I don't think this goes in the line of what we discussed. I don't think it is a good plan to do something wrong in purpose thinking that a mod will come later on to fix it. We agreed on using this thread to ask for synonym creations, so it'd have been better to create it in Spanish and then ask for the English version. Thanks – fedorqui Jul 9 '18 at 7:29

17 Answers 17


How about having as a synonym to ?

I would like to see an English synonym for (which is currently synonymous with and ).

I read in La Tertulia that there might be a problem with English-speaking Spanish learners thinking that "acento" might be related to pronunciation.

I'm not too worried about that happening, but if it does, well, nobody expects question authors to get the tags exactly right when they're taking their first steps on the site.

My hope is that they will find some tags they feel they understand, so they don't get that deer in the headlights paralysis that prevents them from posting.

But I had an idea that might help assuage concerns about "accent" having two possible meanings.

As @walen pointed out in comments, typing "accent" will result in the suggested tag "accent-mark."

  • 1
    I think accent-mark is perfect for the intended purpose. It shows up if you write "accent", it is an accurate translation of Spanish "acento" as a diacritical mark, and it makes clear that it is not about regional accents. – walen Jun 14 '18 at 7:57
  • @walen - That sounds logical and practical. – aparente001 Jun 14 '18 at 12:53
  • oye aparente, @walen, me fijo en que tilde es sinónima de acentuación (y de acentos también). ¿Os sigue pareciendo bien crear el sinónimo? Es decir, que acentuación y accent-mark sean sinónimas. – fedorqui Jun 15 '18 at 7:24
  • @fedorqui La cosa ahí es que para el tag estamos usando la española tilde, que para nosotros significa antes ´ que ~, al contrario que la inglesa tilde que siempre se refiere a ~. Por tanto me sigue pareciendo bien la creación de accent-mark como ayuda para los angloparlantes que quieran hablar de ´ y no de ~. – walen Jun 15 '18 at 7:38
  • @walen sí, pero mi punto (no sé si se entendió antes) es que ahora mismo la etiqueta tilde apunta a acentuación, por lo que una pregunta que quisiera hablar sobre ´ seguramente estaría mejor etiquetada con símbolos. – fedorqui Jun 15 '18 at 7:48
  • @fedorqui Mmm no termino de estar de acuerdo. En español, la única función de ´ es marcar la acentuación, no se me ocurre qué pregunta se podría hacer sobre ´ que no sea sobre acentuación (salvo "¿se puede usar ´ para algo que no sea acentuación?" :D). El tag símbolos lo veo más para preguntas sobre el apóstrofo ', el dólar $, la raya , o incluso para kg, kWh que también se consideran símbolos — pero no para diéresis, circunflejo y otros: esos serían diacríticos. De todas formas, que tilde apunte a un sitio u otro no creo que afecte a crear accent-mark. – walen Jun 15 '18 at 8:19
  • @walen vale, lo creo. – fedorqui Jun 15 '18 at 9:21

Creation of the tag español rioplatense, for the español rioplatense dialect , which includes regions of Argentina and Uruguay. The tag Argentina or Uruguay alone wouldnt be correct if the word is from the español rioplatense dialect, or both of the tags should always be included.

  • 1
    Hi Pablo! Any user over 150 rep can create new tags. You have more than 1k rep so, whenever you see a question specific to the rioplatense variant of Spanish, feel free to edit its tags and add a new tag called rioplatense or español-rioplatense (just write it like that next to the other tags and it will be created if it doesn't exist) :) – walen Jun 24 at 7:18

Proposal: make a synonym of and also create an additional synonym: .

  • Entiendo que en inglés se usa mucho esto de construction en estos contextos. En castellano me chirría bastante, siempre he oído hablar de oraciones a secas. Construcción impersonal me hace pensar más en un edificio de Dubai que en una frase. – fedorqui Jun 18 '18 at 8:39
  • 1
    Sure, done! – fedorqui Jun 19 '18 at 7:04
  • @fedorqui - I've never been to Dubai, but I have been to East Germany. I see what you mean. – aparente001 Jun 26 '18 at 2:54

Is there a reason we have but no ? Would it make sense to make a "tuteo" that would redirect to "ustedeo" -- or maybe the other way around?

  • I have added it. We may undo it in the future if we detect we have different kind of questions for one tag and for the other. Thanks for suggesting! – fedorqui Jan 19 at 9:32
  • 1
    @fedorqui - thanks. I'd be fine with two separate tags if they seem to fit their questions well. I just thought it was weird that there was a tag for ustedeo but no tag or redirect for tuteo, which is so much more common. – aparente001 Jan 20 at 2:56

El debate se ha movido a pregunta aparte: Is the "deletreo" tag needed?

I noticed in La Tertulia there was some discussion about , and . I understood that deletreo means what letters appear in a word, and ortografía subsumes deletreo, but also includes proper use of symbols such as the accent mark, the diaerisis and punctuation.

Right now we have and as synonyms, which I think is as it should be. Their definition is

Deletreo, puntuación, uso de tildes, etc. Correct spelling, punctuation, use of accent/diacritical marks, etc.

But we also have , which is defined as

Questions about the correct way of spelling a word. Preguntas sobre la forma correcta de escribir una palabra.

I'd like to propose that deletreo be made a synonym of , even though that isn't quite rigorous, since strictly speaking, deletreo <> ortografía. This clarification could be made in the tag info.

Reason for the proposal: The difference between deletreo and ortografía is rather fine. For tagging purposes, I don't think the difference between them matters. Here are two examples of questions tagged deletreo:

¿Cómo escribo el subjuntivo presente de 'adelgazar'?

Is it "élite" or "elite"?

One is also tagged with ortografía; one isn't. I think that tagging both with just ortografía would be fine.

Also, simplifying this tag structure would make it easier to be consistent in our tagging.

  • 1
    If the reason for this proposal is that English speakers use "spelling" to mean "ortography", the spelling tag already is a synonym for ortografía (I just checked). – walen Jun 15 '18 at 7:00
  • @walen - Thanks for reminding me. I remember now what I had in mind when I first brought up the spelling related tags in chat. I think I will delete this question and start fresh. – aparente001 Jun 15 '18 at 14:29
  • I decided to just rewrite this answer instead of writing a new one, because deleted answers clutter up the page. – aparente001 Jun 15 '18 at 14:41
  • Puntuación is a subset of ortografía and we have it as a tag. Acentuación is a subset of ortografía and we have it as a tag. Deletreo is a subset of ortografía and we have it as a tag. Why remove deletreo? Other recent tag actions (pronombres) pointed towards being more specific and following known subcategories. Why make a subcategory synonym of the general tag? – walen Jun 16 '18 at 7:07
  • @walen - What should we do with spelling? What should it be synonymous with? // I have trouble with the following tagging decisions: deletreo? ortografia? both? I don't seem to be the only one, judging from the questions I've looked at, such as the two examples I cited. – aparente001 Jun 16 '18 at 15:13
  • @walen yo es que creo que la etiqueta deletreo no tiene demasiada utilidad, por lo que directamente la eliminaría. La única casuística en que podría tener sentido -a mi parecer- es en preguntas del tipo ¿es croqueta o cocreta? Es decir, cuando hablamos sobre el orden concreto de las letras en una palabra. Pero vaya, deletrear no tiene un peso lingüístico importante en el español escrito, que es del que hablamos aquí. ¿Qué opinas? – fedorqui Jun 18 '18 at 8:36
  • @fedorqui Mi opinión es que la propuesta original era hacer "spelling" un sinónimo en inglés de "ortografía". Lo cual puedo entender que se haga en aras de facilitar el etiquetado a los angloparlantes, y de hecho ya se hizo. Ya son sinónimos. El añadido de hacer sinónimo también al tag deletreo, no estoy de acuerdo con ello puesto que no es lo mismo deletreo que ortografía. Quien etiquete en español sabe cuándo usar deletreo y cuándo no. Quien etiquete en inglés le es indiferente que exista deletreo. – walen Jun 18 '18 at 9:15
  • Ya si nos metemos a debatir si se borra el tag deletreo, o si se crea otro, o... casi que mejor se hace otra "prespuesta" separada. La idea de ir haciendo "prespuestas" para votarlas y marcarlas está genial, pero no me convence lo de ir editando y cambiando el contenido del post según avanza el debate en los comentarios, porque al final ya no se sabe con qué revisión estaba de acuerdo o no cada voto. Pero vamos, que personalmente no creo que tener el tag deletreo moleste, ahora bien si vosotros como mods lo veis irrelevante pues se quita, tampoco se va a perder mucho. Sinónimo no. – walen Jun 18 '18 at 9:20
  • @walen bueno, era para aprovechar el momento de atención sobre este tema. Al fin y al cabo, somos poca gente debatiendo y es relativamente fácil gestionar la llegada de opiniones de unos y otros para que finalmente los moderadores actuemos de acuerdo con lo que más razonable nos haya parecido a todos. – fedorqui Jun 18 '18 at 9:29
  • @fedorqui Sí, lo de aprovechar el momento lo entiendo y por eso te he dado mi opinión sobre el borrado a pesar de todo. Pero habéis tenido la idea de las prespuestas (voy a seguir diciéndolo hasta que os vea empezar a usarlo jajaja), que es buena, porque así la gente puede votar individualmente, debatir cada una por separado en los comentarios, y marcar las que se vayan haciendo... que son precisamente las cosas que no podemos hacer si cambiamos la propuesta en los comentarios y nos quedamos ahí. En serio que me parece una idea genial tener un hilo como éste, aprovechémoslo al máximo :) – walen Jun 18 '18 at 9:38
  • This request/proposal turned out to need more discussion than I thought it would, so I will move it to a separate Meta question of its own. // @walen - If there had been more than one comment I would not have rewritten the post after reading your (helpful) comment -- I would have deleted and started fresh. – aparente001 Jun 19 '18 at 1:31
  • Here it is: spanish.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2969/9385 – aparente001 Jun 19 '18 at 13:35

We have but not the opposite. I propose we have one tag for the whole issue of formal mode of address vs. informal. So, I'm suggesting all of the following be synonyms of each other: tutear

  • Existe formal y formalidad. La primera la eliminaría. – fedorqui Jul 2 '18 at 9:45
  • @fedorqui - We have ser-estar. How about [tu-Usted]? – aparente001 Jul 3 '18 at 1:21
  • suena bien, @aparente001. – fedorqui Jul 3 '18 at 6:35
  • @fedorqui - Here's another idea, taken from spanish.stackexchange.com/questions/13497/…: tuteo-ustedeo. I had never heard "ustedeo" before! – aparente001 Jul 4 '18 at 0:25
  • Me neither! It sounds like a good tag to have. – fedorqui Jul 6 '18 at 6:59
  • @fedorqui - Would you like to query those who participate in La Tertulia to see which version they like better to be the main tag that everything points to? – aparente001 Jul 6 '18 at 13:06
  • feel free to do so – fedorqui Jul 9 '18 at 7:28

En La Tertulia, un participante propuso:

Que los tags y sean sinónimos.

Otro opinó:

Según lo que explica la RAE en Tratamiento de los extranjerismos, yo entendería palabras-extranjeras como el subconjunto extranjerismos crudos.

Ahorita hay tres preguntas etiquetadas con .

  • @walen - Me inclino a votar a favor de la respuesta. A ver si fedorqui me convence que son distintas. – aparente001 Jun 30 '18 at 5:30
  • Yo opino que palabras-extranjeras es un subconjunto de extranjerismos, tal y como indiqué. Es un subconjunto pequeño, pero no veo coherente apostar por los subconjuntos en unos casos y no hacerlo en otros. Sea como fuere, al haber tan pocas preguntas podría juntarse y luego separarse más adelante si crece en cantidad. – fedorqui Jul 2 '18 at 9:51
  • @fedorqui - Creo que un factor importante es típicamente el tamaño del subconjunto. Ha pasado año y medio y el subconjunto sigue pequeñito, así que no veo inconveniente en combinar. Por el otro lado, hay cierta ventaja con combinar -- usando etiquetas, es más fácil encontrar preguntas relacionadas. – aparente001 Feb 27 at 17:28
  • sí, el tiempo da la razón. El sinónimo está propuesto desde hace un año, solo necesita un voto más: spanish.stackexchange.com/tags/extranjerismos/synonyms – fedorqui Feb 27 at 17:38
  • @fedorqui - Desgraciadamente, yo no puedo votar. Me parece que es un defecto inherente del sistema. – aparente001 Feb 27 at 17:39

Is there any reason not to merge and ?

I realize there are some subtle differences between despectivo and peyorativo, but those differences don't strike me as fundamental, and worthy of separate tags.

I can't think of any questions that would need despectivo but peyorativo wouldn't fit, or vice versa.

Note, it's possible I myself created but don't remember. I kind of suspect this is the case, because it has a spelling mistake (lenguage).


We have a bit of a mess with foreign words. There's extranjerismos -- very nice. But we need to define a synonym that incorporates "foreign" -- maybe foreign-words. I think I need help from the moderators for this.

Also, there is another tag that appears to be redundant, palabras-extranjeras. My guess is, this should be made a synonym of extranjerismos.

  • About the first point: not sure why we moderators are needed here, apart from to create the synonym. It is a decision by the community what taxonomy we want, we moderators do not have a superior knowledge to decide which is the good one : ) – fedorqui Feb 27 at 6:40
  • About the second point: dupe of another answer here – fedorqui Feb 27 at 10:34
  • @fedorqui - Mod help with the synonym creation would be much appreciated. // Thanks for the reminder -- believe it or not, this situation does not do justice to the extent of my memory problems. They are just a fact of life that I am trying to resign myself to. Thanks for reminding me. – aparente001 Feb 27 at 17:29
  • 1
    In fact I didn't remember neither, it is just that I searched if this had been discussed before and found... an answer here :) So you are not alone! – fedorqui Feb 27 at 17:30

Do we have a tag for questions about the second person plural, and how in some areas this is expressed with ustedes and in some, vosotros? If not, we need one! But I don't know what to call it. It's a major difference between Old World and New World Spanish, so it's important.

We already have a tag for ustedeo, but it means something else:

Preguntas sobre el uso del pronombre "usted" como segunda persona del singular / Questions about the usage of the pronoun 'usted' to refer to the second person of the singular

(By the way, I'm going to try to modify that definition, to insert the concept of formality.)


I think we need a tag for the concept of the omitted subject. This is a special grammatical concept of Spanish that is interesting and important for Spanish learners, and therefore we have plenty of questions about this. Example: usted and its usage

I'm not sure what to call it.


Could we please have the following synonyms for :

(Has anyone thought about whether these should all be synonyms of ? I'm not sure what I think about that idea....)


Question: why are and not synonymous? When I look at the definitions, they seem to be interchangeable. Is it just me who can't find much of a difference between the two?

  • @fedorqui - My awful memory again. Thanks for the links, I will read them. – aparente001 Jun 25 '18 at 17:11
  • In the first link you sent me to, if I understood right, the separation of expresión and modismo was intended to be temporary. – aparente001 Jun 26 '18 at 4:52
  • aparente: it is not clear how to work with these tags. Since they are not 'little tiny debates' to handle in an answer to this question, let's use ¿Cómo podríamos clasificar las etiquetas por tipos de sentencias? to talk about these. – fedorqui Jun 26 '18 at 6:40
  • @fedorqui - Okay -- unless you'd be willing to have the conversation at spanish.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2531/1674 instead? // Also please note I didn't actually write a proposal here for this, I simply asked a question. In other words, if they're different, I was saying, could someone explain to me how to differentiate. – aparente001 Jun 26 '18 at 6:43
  • I think it is better to start the debate in the newly created question, since the other one already lost its momentum – fedorqui Jun 26 '18 at 6:44
  • I simply asked a question. Well, we intented to have this question as little easy requests, and it is working great so far (I am happy for this!). However, opening debates should go in different questions if we want more people to give their voice. – fedorqui Jun 26 '18 at 6:52
  • @fedorqui - I thought it would have a simple answer when I wrote it. // It's frustrating to have one issue discussed in two separate threads. // Okay, I will try. I do find it confusing to go back and forth between two separate debates. – aparente001 Jun 26 '18 at 13:32
  • Let us continue this discussion in chat. – aparente001 Jun 26 '18 at 14:17
  • We have a severe lack of participation in Meta. If we do not put some order in how we do things, it becomes worse. Extended debates in comments, revisiting old posts and so on do not work well. That's why we either ask for basic things in here or create new debates (that is, questions) when things become less trivial. – fedorqui Jun 26 '18 at 14:24

: es sinónimo de y hablamos de nombres genéricos en .

Proposal: separate from . should = instead. ("Nombres" is a bit ambiguous; we can define it more clearly in our taxonomy, as long as we write good guidance and go back and remove where it doesn't belong.)

  • The consensous was to make nombres refer to nombre propios, while sustantivos holds the meaning of nombres... genéricos. – fedorqui Jun 25 '18 at 8:04
  • @fedorqui - It makes a certain amount of sense to me now, but this question is still bothering me: spanish.stackexchange.com/q/26397/9385. If you have a pet iguana named Harold, then I could see using the tag "nombres-propios." Without naming the iguana Harold (or Theodore or whatever), I don't feel comfortable with that tag. Is the problem with the tag definition, the tagging that was done for that question, or me? – aparente001 Jun 26 '18 at 3:50
  • @fedorqui - Thank you. I will try to follow your lead and limit the use of "nombre-proprio" to people for the most part. There might be some other questions with iguanas named Harold, and the like. I will look around. – aparente001 Jun 26 '18 at 13:34
  • Yep, you are right, sorry. I was rewriting the excerpts of those tags and somehow got confused and left with the doubt: a Latin name like Canis lupus looks like a nombre propio to me, not a generic name. So I did not retag yet, waiting for a mental resolution on the matter – fedorqui Jun 26 '18 at 13:56
  • @fedorqui - Oh, okay, thanks for explaining. Maybe we should open a post about this? (I personally think that if it's your pet iguana and you've named him Harold, then he has a proper name. I think that Latin names of particular varieties of iguana would not fall under proper name.) – aparente001 Jun 26 '18 at 14:04
  • @fedorqui - I left this open to allow comments. // I'm confused. about spanish.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2475/1674. Can we agree that a Latin name of a particular type of iguana doesn't qualify as a nombre-propio, and that nombre-proprio should be reserved for our pet iguana, Harold? Note that in the taxonomy of living organisms, the capitalization of Latin names is already specified (Upper case Genus, lower case species), and common names are not capitalized. // I suggest you post a separate thread about this if you think it's a biggie. – aparente001 Jun 29 '18 at 14:07
  • they are in fact nombres científicos, neither nombres comunes nor nombres propios. More info in Fundéu: nombres científicos de animales y plantas with a link to the Ortografía by RAE. So yes, I am inclined towards considering those part of the nombres-comunes set. Also, I created a new synonym to sustantivos: nombres-comunes. See the list. – fedorqui Jul 2 '18 at 10:15
  • 1
    @fedorqui - I went ahead and fixed the tags on the iguana question. I hope you don't mind. I think this solves the problem. // "Nombres-comunes" sounds like a good idea, as long as it isn't interpreted to mean that scientific names should be given some sort of special treatment. – aparente001 Jul 3 '18 at 1:36

We have a tag called , which is not a synonym of ! Here's the guidance:

Preguntas sobre los significados que las palabras tienen recogidos específicamente en el diccionario.

Note that has the following synonyms:

meanings, definitions, meanings-definitions, meaning

and the following guidance:

Definición o explicación del significado de una palabra/frase/expresión. Definition or explanation of the exact meaning of a word/phrase/idiom.

Proposal: make , and synonyms of .

  • 1
    No estoy de acuerdo. Acepción es Cada uno de los significados de una palabra según los contextos en que aparece, por lo que viene intrínsecamente ligado a las definiciones dadas en un diccionario. Creo que preguntas tipo ¿Hay alguna diferencia sustancial entre las dos primeras acepciones de “barrer”? ya justifican su presencia. Eso sí, seguramente se la pueda considerar subconjunto de definiciones. – fedorqui Jun 18 '18 at 8:38
  • @fedorqui - Your point is interesting. Hmm. When I see "Cada uno de los significados de una palabra según los contextos en que aparece," I think more of acepciones than acepción. But I've always thought of "acepción" meaning the same thing as "meaning." // Unfortunately the tagging system only has two conditions when comparing two tags -- either they're synonyms or they aren't. Subsets are ignored. If A is a subset of B, we have to either make A a synonym of B, or make it not a synonym of B. – aparente001 Jun 19 '18 at 1:59
  • Yes, the taxonomy is quite poor. However, I think it quite suffices for our needs. – fedorqui Jun 19 '18 at 7:07
  • Also, note that definiciones currently has many synonyms. In spanish.stackexchange.com/tags/definiciones/synonyms we see meanings, definitions, meanings-definitions and meaning. Adding definición does not seem necessary, since people starting to type defini... will get definiciones suggested. Same with definitions for those typing definit.... – fedorqui Jun 19 '18 at 11:55
  • @fedorqui - I don't see "Cada uno de los significados de una palabra según los contextos en que aparece" in the tag guidance. // Although it might sound sacrilegious to question the DRAE, I don't see how "cada uno de los significados" fits acepción. To me, acepción refers to one meaning of a word. Often, a word has multiple meanings. In these cases, each meaning is una acepción. I guess I can see where they were headed when they wrote that definition, but to my view it falls short of their normal level of quality. // Maybe it seems weird for me to question acepción, given... – aparente001 Jun 20 '18 at 0:30
  • ... that I proposed "meaning-in-context," but I've noticed that the ELU community has spent a fair amount of time working out their tag structure, and it occurs to me that if we at least consider their tag structure, we may be able to make some constructive changes to ours, a little quicker, without reinventing a lot of wheels. – aparente001 Jun 20 '18 at 0:31
  • Maybe their definition would work better if they took out "cada". Uno de varios significados etc. (I've always found it difficult to write definitions in the right format.) – aparente001 Jun 20 '18 at 0:33
  • To me, the definition of acepción in DLE makes a lot of sense, since it is the way I (and I guess many native Spanish speakers) understand it. I agree cada may generate confusion, because in fact acepción means one of the meanings, not the sum of them. – fedorqui Jun 20 '18 at 6:49
  • In any case, I agree ELU's taxonomy is quite good and we have been checking it often (see other Meta posts). However, we have way less questions, so some subsets are not needed. Also, it is perfectly reasonable to have differences. That to say that blindly importing their taxonomy is not going to be useful. I think we are having a sane debate in these topics, so let's keep it up. – fedorqui Jun 20 '18 at 6:52
  • 1
    @fedorqui - "cada may generate confusion, because in fact acepción means one of the meanings, not the sum of them" -- well put. "Blindly importing ELU's taxonomy is not going to be useful" -- agreed -- of course not. (I don't think you've seen me or anyone trying to bring in a massive list of ELU tags, wholesale.) I believe what I suggested was to consider how "meaning-in-context" fits into their tag structure. Also, I explained, honestly, where I got the idea. The tagging structure at ELU has been an influence on me. I can't pretend otherwise. – aparente001 Jun 20 '18 at 14:06
  • 1
    Of course! I was not accusing you, sorry if I did not express myself properly. Just saying that something that works in ELU may not in Spanish.SE. Thanks for bringing the debate in. – fedorqui Jun 20 '18 at 14:16

You must log in to answer this question.

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