|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1
stranger
|
OP
stranger
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1 |
All dictionaries seem to define eponyms as words named after people or a person.
If selenography is an eponym, are gods people?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400 |
is Santa Claus (aka Kris Kringle, father chrismas,etc) a person?
is a person only someone that we have proof once lived and died?(so do Adam and Eve (or other mythical/traditional 'first people") lose personhood?
We might not believe in Zeus, or Jupitor, or Jove or Mars, but at one point people did. they considered their gods real.
Now, if we discussed religion, we could discus did they consider their gods "people" (but we don't discuss religion, not even ancient ones) but, for the purposes of language, i think we can accept ancient gods as people!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 120
member
|
|
member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 120 |
Many eponyms are based on characters of fiction. Why should characters of myth or religion be excluded from being 'people'?
tempus edax rerum
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 13
stranger
|
|
stranger
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 13 |
Perhaps the dictionary is wrong. After all, it never talks with anyone! It's just a list of words, and it doesn't know how to use them, just define them. Hence: Perhaps an eponym is a word derived from the name of a . . . Personality, rather than a person. Since there is obviously room for disagreement over what a person is (factual or fiction, veracious or mythic), then with "Personality", why that takes us a step away, and possibly "above" mere persons, to an ultimate (or more ultimate, possibly even most ultimate) Source, at which there ought be no quibbling over actuality or potentiality, just - absolute - Personality.
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,328
Members9,182
| |
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
|
0 members (),
783
guests, and
0
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
|
|
