4 ms·

Agreed on the link bait title, pretty sure you misused "synecdochic". Synecdoche is like metaphor, but the former I've only seen used to explicitly refer to fi

Agreed on the link bait title, pretty sure you misused "synecdochic". Synecdoche is like metaphor, but the former I've only seen used to explicitly refer to figures of speech, like a simile, while the latter is used interchangeably with "symbolic", so a thing could be metaphoric, but only written or oral communications could be synecdochic.

tptacek 14y ago
A small instance of a larger concept that does a good job of illustrating the contours of that larger concept; a part for the whole. (Who the hell would downvote your comment? Weird! I fixed that.)
- klochner 14y ago
  Right, I'm with you there, but I would say that referring to "the crown" in place of the King would be synecdochic (the expression is synecdochic), but the crown, in itself, isn't synecdochic of the king.
  - tptacek 14y ago
    When people say "the crown" when referencing a monarch and their administration, that's a textbook synecdoche. Similarly, when people refer to the number of "seats" in an enterprise, as with a "10 seat license", that is also a synecdoche; obviously, the licensor could care less about seats per se; you pay even if you use a standing desk. :) I am unapologetic about introducing this confusing word into the thread, as this discussion is more interesting than the blog post we're commenting on.
    - klochner 14y ago
      Similarly to rhizome, I appreciate your use of a word I hadn't seen in a long while (and that HN spellcheckers flag), and I agree this is much more interesting than the article, but I would have gone with something in {emblematic, symptomatic, representative}. I'm holding firm in claiming that synecdoche should be reserved for referencing oral or written expressions, viz., intentional usages of a part to indicate the whole. Thanks for a little diversion :)
      - tptacek 14y ago
        I think the poor quality of their tech coverage, which quality is indeed a "symptom" of a problem, isn't the whole story. The total fact of their tech coverage --- that they feel the need to do it at all at any level of quality --- is more important to me, and so "symptomatic" didn't seem right. But I wrote unclearly enough that "symptomatic" is a better word in the context of my original comment. I do own the fact that "synecdochic" is never a good word to use in clear writing. :)
    - xianshou 14y ago
      The word "synecdochic" exists and you can use it in this context, but it's a matter of lightning and lightning bug. Isn't the word "emblematic" more appropriate? We're not just using a part to signify the whole; we're stating that the part typifies the whole, and "emblematic" embodies both of those meanings. Besides, it's less likely to confuse, and applying Occam's razor to language, the best word is the simplest one that most closely approximates the intended meaning.
- rhizome 14y ago
  I appreciate the use, but in this context I think the word you're looking for is "emblematic."
  - tptacek 14y ago
    You're obviously right that "emblematic" would be clearer writing.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

tptacek 14y ago

A small instance of a larger concept that does a good job of illustrating the contours of that larger concept; a part for the whole. (Who the hell would downvote your comment? Weird! I fixed that.)

klochner 14y ago
Right, I'm with you there, but I would say that referring to "the crown" in place of the King would be synecdochic (the expression is synecdochic), but the crown, in itself, isn't synecdochic of the king.
- tptacek 14y ago
  When people say "the crown" when referencing a monarch and their administration, that's a textbook synecdoche. Similarly, when people refer to the number of "seats" in an enterprise, as with a "10 seat license", that is also a synecdoche; obviously, the licensor could care less about seats per se; you pay even if you use a standing desk. :) I am unapologetic about introducing this confusing word into the thread, as this discussion is more interesting than the blog post we're commenting on.
  - klochner 14y ago
    Similarly to rhizome, I appreciate your use of a word I hadn't seen in a long while (and that HN spellcheckers flag), and I agree this is much more interesting than the article, but I would have gone with something in {emblematic, symptomatic, representative}. I'm holding firm in claiming that synecdoche should be reserved for referencing oral or written expressions, viz., intentional usages of a part to indicate the whole. Thanks for a little diversion :)
    - tptacek 14y ago
      I think the poor quality of their tech coverage, which quality is indeed a "symptom" of a problem, isn't the whole story. The total fact of their tech coverage --- that they feel the need to do it at all at any level of quality --- is more important to me, and so "symptomatic" didn't seem right. But I wrote unclearly enough that "symptomatic" is a better word in the context of my original comment. I do own the fact that "synecdochic" is never a good word to use in clear writing. :)
  - xianshou 14y ago
    The word "synecdochic" exists and you can use it in this context, but it's a matter of lightning and lightning bug. Isn't the word "emblematic" more appropriate? We're not just using a part to signify the whole; we're stating that the part typifies the whole, and "emblematic" embodies both of those meanings. Besides, it's less likely to confuse, and applying Occam's razor to language, the best word is the simplest one that most closely approximates the intended meaning.
rhizome 14y ago
I appreciate the use, but in this context I think the word you're looking for is "emblematic."
- tptacek 14y ago
  You're obviously right that "emblematic" would be clearer writing.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]