Conjoiners vs conjunctions vs articles

I've heard that conjoiners (in terms of grammar) are similar to articles.

According to sources, articles can be words such as the, an, a, some (in unique cases). Conjunctions can be and, but, as well as. Are conjoiners the same as conjunctions? Or are they closer to articles instead?

My question is: Is there a clear difference between each, or can the terms be used interchangeably with one or the other (articles or conjunctions)?

You're missing an article in this sentence.

And:

You're missing a conjoiner in this sentence.

Or:

You're missing an conjunction in this sentence.

And:

You're missing a conjoiner in this sentence.

Or is the term conjoiner archaic and no longer is used, unless for very unique cases?

Answer

The word "conjoiner" is sometimes used in linguistic theory, but rarely in terms of English grammar.

A conjunction in English refers to a specific set of words; "and," "or," "but," "although." A conjunction is a part of speech, like a noun or a verb.

A conjoiner is a linguistics concept that refers to any linguistic construct that plays the same role. In some languages, the role of some conjunctions (especially subordinating conjunctions) are played by units other than independent words, such as verb endings.

Neither has anything to do with articles, which are separate parts of speech.

If your sentence was:

*The river ran down to sea

you would say:

You're missing an article in that sentence.

If your sentence was:

*The river wound its way down the mountain through the forest

you would say:

You're missing a conjunction in that sentence.

You would never tell someone they were missing a conjoiner, unless you were a theoretical linguist talking to another theoretical linguist.