It seems to me that these tags are about the same thing. The dominant tag is with 243 questions and a tag wiki excerpt:

Questions concerning the types of words and phrases which are grouped and ordered meaningfully to express a statement, question, or another type of sentence

The tag has 19 questions and no tag wiki, all of which look like focusing on sentence structure:

The difference between [sentence-structure] and [structure] doesn't seem meaningful enough to me. Are there other entities with structure that are not sentences, and that aren't more appropriately covered by another tag?

The other tag has 7 questions, and no tag wiki:

After further examination, this tag may have its own specific and correct meaning, as in "grammatical constructions":

a group of words that form a constituent of a sentence and are considered as a single unit;

For example ”是~的“,“快~了”, etc. So this tag might be fine, but:

  1. it's almost unused
  2. I wonder if it isn't adequately represented by

Edit: proposed [structure] -> [sentence-structure] synonym

  • I wouldn't do the synonym: there are other forms of "structure" beyond "sentence-structure" (e.g. paragraph structure, like Is this email correct grammatically and structurally?). – Becky 李蓓 Aug 9 '20 at 0:52
  • [constructs] seems adequately covered with [sentence-structure] and [grammar]. Maybe it'd be nice to have this tag, but there's going to be hundreds of questions that need it---too much retagging effort. – Becky 李蓓 Aug 9 '20 at 0:54
  • 1
    @Becky李蓓 the linked question is not tagged [structure] though :) wouldn't it be weird with both [structure] and [sentence-structure]? Anyway, feel free to vote on the synonym, including downvoting ;) – blackgreen Aug 9 '20 at 10:18

For , I edited many of these manually. The was sometimes used for other things, like , or even just used seemingly at random.

After checking, I merged the remaining questions into . I don't intend to create a synonym, as other aspects of Chinese also have structure (e.g. paragraph structure, character structure). [It might be worth blacklisting the tag, since it's rather vague (I haven't done this).]

For , I edited some of these manually (there's still a few which can be edited away). I'm not quite sure what to do with this one:

But generally, if refers to "grammar constructs" then it can be reasonably tagged together with a more specific tag that describes the kind of construct (e.g. , ).

  • 1
    as for the outstanding question, I've removed [constructs] and added: [grammar] (self-explanatory), [topolect] (because it's related to topolect usage) and [synonyms] (as it's requesting smt with similar meaning) – blackgreen Aug 12 '20 at 9:55

You must log in to answer this question.

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