Author Topic: The ethimology of the word “Decomposed”  (Read 784 times)

Offline Walidsad22

  • New Linguist
  • *
  • Posts: 1
The ethimology of the word “Decomposed”
« on: February 16, 2018, 06:32:42 PM »
Hi Everyone,

Im Walid and happy to be here, I am French and live in New York

I have this debate with friends over the deference of the word ( Decompose and Deconstruct).

As a case study I am in need of a professional linguistic opinion, the situation is about a drink served with all the components being apart for them to be composed / constructed.

My point is that deconstructed is applicable to a solid matter as in constructing something and decomposing is related to liquids and chemical mixture ( as a drink is a actual chemically mixture of deferent substance/ as in mixing oil and water ( which is none to be none homogeneous).

I do believe that Americans mix common and general knowledge as ultimate truth.

I would like to have a professional expertise from a linguist.

Thank you guys


Offline panini

  • Linguist
  • ***
  • Posts: 138
Re: The ethimology of the word “Decomposed”
« Reply #1 on: February 17, 2018, 09:15:50 AM »
"Deconstruct" is a modern term most generally meaning something in literary studies: ideas and the like are what is most frequently deconstructed. If a thing A is made up of parts but the parts are usually not presented separately, and if you present the assembled bare elements, you could say that you have an A, deconstructed, especially if you are inclined to use the word deconstruct.

Decomposition generally refers to rotting, and I cannot think of any context where it can be cutely used to refer to "not combining the ingredients to form the end product". The distinction doesn't have to do with liquids versus solids. It would be odd to take the ingredients of a drink and say that you're going to "compose" a Harvey Wallbanger from them (unless you're in a group of musicians).