| Author |
Message |
Nik Coughin
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2004 9:53 am
Post subject: Nouns for merging |
|
|
When two things are merged, and only one remains, having absorbed the other,
what two nouns best describe those things? All I can come up with is
absorber and absorbee, which is terrible, and absorbee is not a real word.
--
"Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million
typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare!" - Blair Houghton
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
http://www.nrkn.com/
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
John O'Flaherty
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2004 11:48 am
Post subject: Re: Nouns for merging |
|
|
Nik Coughin wrote:
| Quote: | When two things are merged, and only one remains, having absorbed the other,
what two nouns best describe those things? All I can come up with is
absorber and absorbee, which is terrible, and absorbee is not a real word.
|
Food and fed.
--
john |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nik Coughlin
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2004 12:15 pm
Post subject: Re: Nouns for merging |
|
|
John O'Flaherty wrote:
| Quote: | Nik Coughin wrote:
When two things are merged, and only one remains, having absorbed
the other, what two nouns best describe those things? All I can
come up with is absorber and absorbee, which is terrible, and
absorbee is not a real word.
Food and fed.
|
Hmmm. Perhaps. I am thinking more along the lines of two named sets of
things (the things could be anything). One set absorbs the members of the
other set. The "fed" set retains its attributes (name etc.), which are
seperate to its data, or things, and gains the data of the "food" set, which
loses its attributes.
Some examples:
A company merger. Company "Fed" absorbs company "Food". Company "Fed"
retains its own name and takes on the assets of company "Food". Fed is the
mergerer and food the mergeree (yuck -- this is why I am having such trouble
finding nouns!).
A person dies and leaves their estate to another person. Estate "Food"
becomes part of estate "Fed".
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arcadian Rises
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2004 12:29 pm
Post subject: Re: Nouns for merging |
|
|
| Quote: | From: "Nik Coughin" nrkn!no-spam!@woosh.co.nz
When two things are merged, and only one remains, having absorbed the other,
what two nouns best describe those things?
|
Entities, or their particular former names, e.g. "corporation A" and
corporation B, "estate A" or "tomato". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John O'Flaherty
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2004 8:31 pm
Post subject: Re: Nouns for merging |
|
|
Nik Coughlin wrote:
| Quote: | John O'Flaherty wrote:
Nik Coughin wrote:
When two things are merged, and only one remains, having absorbed
the other, what two nouns best describe those things? All I can
come up with is absorber and absorbee, which is terrible, and
absorbee is not a real word.
Food and fed.
Hmmm. Perhaps. I am thinking more along the lines of two named sets of
things (the things could be anything). One set absorbs the members of the
other set. The "fed" set retains its attributes (name etc.), which are
seperate to its data, or things, and gains the data of the "food" set, which
loses its attributes.
Some examples:
A company merger. Company "Fed" absorbs company "Food". Company "Fed"
retains its own name and takes on the assets of company "Food". Fed is the
mergerer and food the mergeree (yuck -- this is why I am having such trouble
finding nouns!).
|
In that context, 'acquirer' and 'target' or 'acquisition', maybe.
| Quote: | A person dies and leaves their estate to another person. Estate "Food"
becomes part of estate "Fed".
|
I can't think of serious general terms for what you want. Destination
set and source set. Engulfer and engulfed. Amoeber and amoebee. Digester
and digested. It sounds like a general term would be useful.
--
john |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark Barratt
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 06, 2004 3:53 am
Post subject: Re: Nouns for merging |
|
|
Nik Coughlin wrote:
| Quote: | John O'Flaherty wrote:
Nik Coughin wrote:
When two things are merged, and only one remains, having
absorbed >> the other, what two nouns best describe those
things? All I can >> come up with is absorber and absorbee,
which is terrible, and >> absorbee is not a real word.
Food and fed.
Hmmm. Perhaps. I am thinking more along the lines of two
named sets of things (the things could be anything). One set
absorbs the members of the other set. The "fed" set retains
its attributes (name etc.), which are seperate to its data, or
things, and gains the data of the "food" set, which loses its
attributes.
Some examples:
A company merger. Company "Fed" absorbs company "Food".
Company "Fed" retains its own name and takes on the assets of
company "Food". Fed is the mergerer and food the mergeree
(yuck -- this is why I am having such trouble finding nouns!).
A person dies and leaves their estate to another person.
Estate "Food" becomes part of estate "Fed".
|
The verb "subsume" comes to mind, but I wonder why you're looking
for a term in the abstract - you must surely have some particular
application in mind; why not tell us about it?
--
Mark Barratt
Budapest |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nik Coughlin
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 06, 2004 7:13 am
Post subject: Re: Nouns for merging |
|
|
Mark Barratt wrote:
| Quote: | Nik Coughlin wrote:
John O'Flaherty wrote:
Nik Coughin wrote:
When two things are merged, and only one remains, having
absorbed >> the other, what two nouns best describe those
things? All I can >> come up with is absorber and absorbee,
which is terrible, and >> absorbee is not a real word.
Food and fed.
Hmmm. Perhaps. I am thinking more along the lines of two
named sets of things (the things could be anything). One set
absorbs the members of the other set. The "fed" set retains
its attributes (name etc.), which are seperate to its data, or
things, and gains the data of the "food" set, which loses its
attributes.
Some examples:
A company merger. Company "Fed" absorbs company "Food".
Company "Fed" retains its own name and takes on the assets of
company "Food". Fed is the mergerer and food the mergeree
(yuck -- this is why I am having such trouble finding nouns!).
A person dies and leaves their estate to another person.
Estate "Food" becomes part of estate "Fed".
The verb "subsume" comes to mind, but I wonder why you're looking
for a term in the abstract - you must surely have some particular
application in mind; why not tell us about it?
|
That is a very good idea. I am taking part in the development of a software
application. Internal naming conventions are very important. We have a
merge function that combines two classes of the same type (Person) into one,
retaining the properties etc. of the first but absorbing the data belonging
to the second. I need names for the class instances used by the merge
function. At the moment we are using Absorber and Absorbee, which we all
hate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul Wolff
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 07, 2004 1:03 am
Post subject: Re: Nouns for merging |
|
|
In message <2v2j9vF2fj58hU1@uni-berlin.de>, Nik Coughlin
<nrkn!hopefully@no.spam!.invalid> writes
| Quote: | Mark Barratt wrote:
The verb "subsume" comes to mind, but I wonder why you're looking
for a term in the abstract - you must surely have some particular
application in mind; why not tell us about it?
That is a very good idea. I am taking part in the development of a software
application. Internal naming conventions are very important. We have a
merge function that combines two classes of the same type (Person) into one,
retaining the properties etc. of the first but absorbing the data belonging
to the second. I need names for the class instances used by the merge
function. At the moment we are using Absorber and Absorbee, which we all
hate.
Fancier versions could be Absorbent and Absorbate (the latter not being |
in my dictionary, but see adsorbent and adsorbate for analogous forms).
--
Paul
In bocca al Lupo! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nik Coughin
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 08, 2004 2:28 am
Post subject: Re: Nouns for merging |
|
|
Paul Wolff wrote:
| Quote: | In message <2v2j9vF2fj58hU1@uni-berlin.de>, Nik Coughlin
nrkn!hopefully@no.spam!.invalid> writes
Mark Barratt wrote:
The verb "subsume" comes to mind, but I wonder why you're looking
for a term in the abstract - you must surely have some particular
application in mind; why not tell us about it?
That is a very good idea. I am taking part in the development of a
software application. Internal naming conventions are very
important. We have a merge function that combines two classes of
the same type (Person) into one, retaining the properties etc. of
the first but absorbing the data belonging to the second. I need
names for the class instances used by the merge function. At the
moment we are using Absorber and Absorbee, which we all hate.
Fancier versions could be Absorbent and Absorbate (the latter not
being in my dictionary, but see adsorbent and adsorbate for analogous
forms).
|
I like those, thank you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in