Re: One-To-One Relationships
- From: "David Cressey" <cressey73@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 19:53:36 GMT
"Bob Badour" <bbadour@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:47505d5d$0$5287$9a566e8b@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
David Cressey wrote:is
"paul c" <toledobythesea@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ZTX3j.7775$UQ1.5775@xxxxxxxxxxxx
JOG wrote:
...
Anything that can be described as a noun is an entity in my book,
whether abstract or not. We must be able to describe them by their
attributes, and identify them by one attribute that is consistent over
the lifetime in the universe of discourse. That's my take.
...
Not to brag, but in my haphazard quest to discern only the essential, I
have wondered too about the possible importance of nouns. Can't prove
it but I'm pretty sure any set of domain values can be turned into a
noun, eg., "red" becomes "redness". Same for a "relationship entity".
I'd say "noun" is an improvement over "entity" if that might make it
more obvious that most logical system doesn't need to understand English
grammar. But it also seems like a risky invite for more
mountain-building by the techies with ulterior motives who like to turn
nouns into verbs, eg., "architect".
I don't mean to start yet another meta-discussion, but the term "noun"
more useful in the grammatical analysis of Latin than of English. As
somebody else said, any noun can be verbed in English. In particular,
nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs are distinguished from each other
more by context and function than by differences in form.
When English first began to be studied from a grammatical point of view,
the grammars of Latin and Greek, which had been honed to a fine state,
were applied whole hog to English. Not necessarily a good fit.
If only I were able to find a use for the subjunctive and the reflexive,
I would avail myself of both.
That's a joke, right Bob? This time I'll try not to give it away!
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: One-To-One Relationships
- From: Bob Badour
- Re: One-To-One Relationships
- References:
- Re: One-To-One Relationships
- From: rpost
- Re: One-To-One Relationships
- From: Bob Badour
- Re: One-To-One Relationships
- From: JOG
- Re: One-To-One Relationships
- From: David BL
- Re: One-To-One Relationships
- From: JOG
- Re: One-To-One Relationships
- From: JOG
- Re: One-To-One Relationships
- From: JOG
- Re: One-To-One Relationships
- From: David Cressey
- Re: One-To-One Relationships
- From: Bob Badour
- Re: One-To-One Relationships
- Prev by Date: Re: One-To-One Relationships
- Next by Date: Re: One-To-One Relationships
- Previous by thread: Re: One-To-One Relationships
- Next by thread: Re: One-To-One Relationships
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|