On the transitivity of the part-whole relation

The expression is part of can be used in a number of different senses. One might cite as examples:A sheep is part of a flock. A priest is part of the clergy. Changing nappies is part of being a mother.A petal is part of a flower. But one does not ask What are the parts of the clergy? or What are the...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of linguistics 1979-03, Vol.15 (1), p.29-38
Main Author: Cruse, D. A.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Arm
Fingernails
Fingers
Hands
Head
Inference
Knees
Mathematical functions
Sleeves
Words
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The expression is part of can be used in a number of different senses. One might cite as examples:A sheep is part of a flock. A priest is part of the clergy. Changing nappies is part of being a mother.A petal is part of a flower. But one does not ask What are the parts of the clergy? or What are the parts of being a mother? as one might ask What are the parts of a flower? or What are the parts of the human body? I shall refer to the latter as ‘structural parts’, to distinguish them from the rest; it is with the relation between structural parts and their wholes that the present paper will be concerned. This relation can also be expressed by sentences of the form A flower has petals, The human body has arms , etc. (The verb have can, of course, also be used in senses irrelevant to the present discussion.) The part-whole relation, thus conceived, is generally recognized as being one of the fundamental sense-relations structuring the vocabulary of a language.
ISSN:0022-2267
1469-7742
DOI:10.1017/S0022226700013086