Author Topic: The Lexicon of Knotology  (Read 54139 times)

DaveRoot

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 141
    • The Most Useful Rope Knots....
Re: The Lexicon of Knotology
« Reply #45 on: February 01, 2010, 02:39:41 PM »
Hi Derek,

I'm sorry to hear about Gillian, and I'll be praying for her.

Later today I'll post the ideas that we've gathered to this point, so that people can begin voting and keep up the momentum.  No matter what the ultimate structure of Nodology looks like, it will need to include definitions of the parts of knots and types of knots and so on.  Therefore, it doesn't strike me as being premature to begin the selection process for these things.

Dave

DaveRoot

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 141
    • The Most Useful Rope Knots....
Re: The Lexicon of Knotology
« Reply #46 on: February 01, 2010, 02:41:10 PM »
Thanks Brian, I see what you mean.  The Braider uses terms which are specific to braiding, and in the PDF file I didn't see any definitions of the terms which we're attempting to define.

Dave

DaveRoot

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 141
    • The Most Useful Rope Knots....
Re: The Lexicon of Knotology
« Reply #47 on: February 01, 2010, 06:33:38 PM »
edit (2/18/2010):  The ideas below are out-of-date.  The new proposed terms are listed and defined in the Nodeology wiki at http://nodeology.pbworks.com/Bindings-Terms.


The lists below contain the ideas which have been put forth to this point, so that we can vote on them (or suggest alternatives).  By voting on what we've gathered so far, this helps maintain momentum, and we can make adjustments along the way as we come across any deficiencies in the growing terminology.  No matter what the ultimate structure of Nodology looks like, it will need to include definitions of the parts of knots and types of knots (below).

In case the Nodology terms are used in computing someday (e.g. XML as Derek suggested), I have removed the blank spaces in the suggested terms because blank spaces are treated as special characters in XML and other areas of computing.


These are the suggested subdivisions which have been put forth so far (the terms are defined in earlier posts).  I haven't cast a vote for either of these because I'm waiting for some discussion about the benefits of having separate subdivisions for Weavings and Bindings and so on:

1.  Nodology
        Cordage
        Binding
            Splice
            Whipping
            Stitching
            Weaving
            Netting
            Lashing
            Knot

2.  Nodology
        Cordage
        Tyings
            Knot
            Hitch
            Bend
            Loop
        Weavings
            Flatmat
            Splice
            Ball
            Cylinder
        Bindings
            Finishing
            Covering
            Lashing



The following list contains some suggested terms (in blue) for the parts of a knot or actions on a knot (see the reasoning for some of these terms in an earlier post).  To start the voting I'll mark my votes in bold, although I haven't decided on all of them yet:

To replace Standing Part: Entry_Part, Standing_Part, Main_Part

To replace Tail (as in "When you tie a Bowline, leave a long Tail for safety"): Exit_Part, Tail

To replace Working End and Running End and Bitter End: Tying_End, Exit_End, Tail_End, Working_End, Running_End, Bitter_End {Note: if we choose "Exit_Part" above, then perhaps "Exit_End" is a better choice here.  This way we can have an "Entry_End" to go with "Entry_Part", and an "Exit_End" to go with "Exit_Part."}

To replace Loop and Eye (as in "The Spanish Bowline has two loops"): Loop, Eye

To replace Bight: Doubled_End, Bight

To replace Loop (as in "Make an Underhand Loop") and Turn and Wrap and Underhand Loop and Overhand Loop: Revolution(number, crossing), Turn(amount of turn, object included, double end formed), Loop

To replace Sling: Closed_Loop, Annular_Cord, Sling

To replace Collar: Collar

To replace Nub: {Is this term useful?}

To replace Nip: Nip

To replace Lead (as in "Ashley says that knot 494 has a good Lead"): Lead, {Is there a more descriptive term?}

To replace Capsize: Deform, Capsize

To replace Jam: Jam, Hard_Lock

To replace Slipped: Slipped, Unlocked, {Is there a more descriptive term?}

To replace Noose (i.e. an Overhand slip knot but loaded the opposite way): Noose, {Is there a more descriptive term?}

To replace Half Hitch: Half_Hitch, {Is there a more descriptive term?}



The following list contains some suggested terms (in blue) for certain types of knots (see the reasoning for these terms in an earlier post).  To start the voting, I'll mark my votes in bold:

To replace Bend: Join_Knot, Union_Knot, Bend

To replace Single-Loop Knot (as in "The Bowline is a single-loop knot"): Loop_Knot(1), Single_Loop_Knot

To replace Double-Loop Knot (as in "The Spanish Bowline is a double-loop knot"): Loop_Knot(2), Double_Loop_Knot

To replace Hitch: Tether_Knot, Attachment_Knot, Hitch






Please post your votes or alternate suggestions.  To make it easy, you can copy/paste this template into your post:

To replace Standing Part:

To replace Tail (as in "When you tie a Bowline, leave a long Tail for safety"):

To replace Working End and Running End and Bitter End:

To replace Loop and Eye (as in "The Spanish Bowline has two loops"):

To replace Bight:

To replace Loop (as in "Make an Underhand Loop") and Turn and Wrap and Underhand Loop and Overhand Loop:

To replace Sling:

To replace Collar:

To replace Nub:

To replace Nip:

To replace Lead (as in "Ashley says that knot 494 has a good Lead"):

To replace Capsize:

To replace Jam:

To replace Slipped:

To replace Noose (i.e. an Overhand slip knot but loaded the opposite way):

To replace Half Hitch:

To replace Bend:

To replace Single-Loop Knot (as in "The Bowline is a single-loop knot"):

To replace Double-Loop Knot (as in "The Spanish Bowline is a double-loop knot"):

To replace Hitch:


Thanks!

Dave


edit: Made the suggested terms blue for clarity, and added Barry's suggested terms.


edit (2/18/2010):  The ideas above are out-of-date.  The new proposed terms are listed and defined in the Nodeology wiki at http://nodeology.pbworks.com/Bindings-Terms.

« Last Edit: February 18, 2010, 04:45:05 PM by DaveRoot »

Knot Head

  • Knot Head
  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 194
  • A knot is not just a knot...
Re: The Lexicon of Knotology
« Reply #48 on: February 02, 2010, 08:46:01 PM »
Thanks Brian, I see what you mean.  The Braider uses terms which are specific to braiding, and in the PDF file I didn't see any definitions of the terms which we're attempting to define.

Dave


I thought that maybe that would help give you some sort of idea on continuity with the naming and verb usage within this project. If it does help out, awsome. If it don't, I guess we keep at it till something works out with it.

Brian...
Regards,
Brian Kidd

Sweeney

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 975
Re: The Lexicon of Knotology
« Reply #49 on: February 02, 2010, 09:23:33 PM »
A few thoughts:

Bend - Union_knot  (join_knot could be describing a hitch?)

Sling - Annular_cord

Hitch - Attachment_knot

Slipped - Unlocked

Jam(med) - Hard_Lock(ed) which means that eg a bowline is only "Locked" usually.

Barry






DaveRoot

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 141
    • The Most Useful Rope Knots....
Re: The Lexicon of Knotology
« Reply #50 on: February 03, 2010, 02:44:21 PM »
Thanks Barry, I added your suggestions to the list.

I also made the suggested terms blue so that they stand out better.

Dave

DaveRoot

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 141
    • The Most Useful Rope Knots....
Re: The Lexicon of Knotology
« Reply #51 on: February 03, 2010, 10:04:58 PM »
In the world of string figures, they refer to a "sling" as a "string loop."  In the mathematics of knots, they sometimes refer to a "sling" as a "closed loop" or an "unknot."

Therefore, I have added "Closed_Loop" to the list of suggested terms for "sling," which hopefully is clear enough that it doesn't cause confusion with "Loop."

Dave


Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3932
Re: The Lexicon of Knotology
« Reply #52 on: February 05, 2010, 08:48:10 PM »
Quote
The following list contains some suggested terms (in blue) for the parts of a knot or actions on a knot (see the reasoning for some of these terms in an earlier post).  To start the voting I'll mark my votes in bold, although I haven't decided on all of them yet:

Quote
To replace Standing Part: Entry_Part, Standing_Part, Main_Part
As I 've said elsewhere, one needs to see where the replaced term is used
and whether the replacement makes sense.  My sense is that S.P. is used
mostly in tying instructions and implicitly connotes some part of the material
existing independent of the (yet-to-be-tied) knot -- so "entry point" is hard
to fit into that slot.

As for knots, "entry part" suggests something singular:  does a mesh knot
have four such parts, and eye knot one (but what of the other two loaded
parts?) ?!  (Oddly, it might seem, in all cases, one will see --in loading--
material exiting not "entering" at this part.

Quote
To replace Tail (as in "When you tie a Bowline, leave a long Tail for safety"): Exit_Part, Tail
Don't pull on sleeping dogs' tails, I say.

Quote
To replace Working End and Running End and Bitter End:
Tying_End, Exit_End, Tail_End, Working_End, Running_End, Bitter_End
{Note: if we choose "Exit_Part" above, then perhaps "Exit_End" is a better choice here.
This way we can have an "Entry_End" to go with "Entry_Part", and an "Exit_End" to go with "Exit_Part."}

Firstly, let's give "bitter end" its original and proper meaning/use:
it is that part of a line at the bitts (no bitts, no bitter end --end discussion).
One can see the inconsistency between senses implied for "s.part" if adopting
"running end", for post-tying, there is no traditional sense of running
in the end (compare with "Running Bowline" & "running rigging"); "working"
is also but more obviously/directly a term for the tying process.

Quote
To replace Loop and Eye (as in "The Spanish Bowline has two loops"): Loop, Eye

I have begun using "eye", on the basis that its meaning will be clear
and esp. without the overloadings of meaning that "loop" has.
(I suppose one can contrast Dave's qualifying "Spanish Bowline has two loops"
with "Dbl.Bowline has two loops" for another sense of "loop"l, which use occurs
in tying instructions.)

Quote
To replace Bight: Doubled_End, Bight

I believe the "bight" should be retained to mean a U-shaped part,
with the emphasis on the shape --somewhat elongated vs. round--
and de-emphasis on whether the legs "cross,"
and that the "in the bight/on the bight" sense be forgotten
("with a bight" connoting the first sense).  That takes the knotting
use well distant from the obscure nautical-geographical sense (of
a shallow concavity in a shore), but that obscurity has never fit
the knotting uses in either sense.

Quote
To replace Loop (as in "Make an Underhand Loop") and Turn and Wrap and Underhand Loop and Overhand Loop: Revolution(number, crossing), Turn(amount of turn, object included, double end formed), Loop

No replacement needed here, as I ceded this sense to "loop", having
used "eye" and "bight" adequately elsewhere.  But I'm not terribly keen
about instructions that employ these terms.  "Overhand loop" will come
up against "overhand" (knot) with a bit of rub.  The need for keeping
a frame of reference for implied direction can be tricky, too
(a given "loop" is "overhand" one direction, "underhand" the reverse).

Quote
To replace Sling: Closed_Loop, Annular_Cord, Sling

"Sling" is tough, for its common use is for any of various shaped short
(relatively) attachment structures -- basket, choker, continuous!?  Rock
climbers I think will understand it as a circle; but not industrial lifters.

Might non-English languages have a good term for just the closed
circle of material?

To replace Collar:
Quote
Collar

Yep, that works well enough as is.

Quote
To replace Nub: {Is this term useful?}

Well, citing uses has been my battle cry all along!
Dick Chisholm introduced this term.  Initially, I thought "the nub of
a knot is the knot -- what's left?"  But one can see the eye of eye knots
and the in-between of a Sheepshank as parts of those knots and yet
obviously unknotted parts of them!?  When a climber ties in with some
eye knot, she does so with this unknotted part, more directly
than with the "nub", eh?

It raises the question of how one wants to define "knot" -- which I've
touched on in some old threads.  My challenging example is of a "bowline"
in a tow line connected to cleats on each corner of a barch, where the
line is wrapped or cleat-hitched so to prevent the eye from slipping around
the cleats on changes in direction:  is it a "bowline"?  One can chop the
line between cleats (on the barge) -- now is it a bowline, this knot joining
(in a way) two distinct lines?  The "nub" has been unaffected in these
hypothesized changes, NB!  Is there a "bowline" and something happening
beyond it, or is that beyond part part of the "knot" such that one might
distinguish then a "nub" ?

Quote
To replace Nip: Nip

Currently, the weather is turning a bit nippy here in the States
on the Right Coast, expecting a BIG snowfall (our 4th !).  We'll
be tightly bound.

CLDay doesn't define "nip", unfortunately; Ashley has a seemingly
(IMO) conflicting definition of both transitive and intransitive senses
of holding !?  I understand it as akin to pinching -- i.e., that
one part of a knot might "nip" another (and, yes, here I've a verb not
a noun -- and I am more liberal than the singular "the nip" implies).

Quote
To replace Lead (as in "Ashley says that knot 494 has a good Lead"):
 Lead, {Is there a more descriptive term?}

I confess to not really understanding what "lead" means.  (I used to take it
--as I think Harry Asher did-- to mean my "SPart", "entry part".)  Another of
his uses comes in #1017, the Angler's (Perfection) Loop, which he claims
"has the best lead of any loop" (<- nb:  "loop" only, not "loop knot" !).
(How is 1017 better than #1043/5, or a collared Slip-knot?)

Perhaps "lead" can be lost -- where is it used, productively?

Quote
To replace Capsize: Deform, Capsize

I see deformation as a most general condition,
of which capsizing is more particular, involving some significant
alteration of structure/geometry,
and flyping even more particular --a turning inside-out, inversion.

E.g., a Bowline capsizes if its nipping loop opens into a broad spiral,
but doesn't flype.  A Klemheist hitch can capsize around its rope object
at the load end if that object lacks tension there.  Some other friction
knots can deform by cascading turns around others -- where the SPart
reaches to the away end of the coil and turns back towards loading,
this away end can *peel* off turns to wrap around the others.

Quote
To replace Jam: Jam, Hard_Lock

Looking for substitutes?  I see no need here:  "jam" is sweet.

Quote
To replace Slipped: Slipped, Unlocked, {Is there a more descriptive term?}

"Slipped" works find; "unlocked" is more misleading (IMO more
implying a behavioral state than a geometric one).

Quote
To replace Noose (i.e. [e.g] an Overhand slip knot but loaded the opposite way):
 Noose, {Is there a more descriptive term?}

Ashley is a bit confused -- defining "noose" to be a running eye knot,
but then allowing it to be a Slip-knot or Hangman's Noose sort of knot.
CLDay (in AKS) seems to echo this duality.

My desire is to go somewhat differently from tradition, in using the
term with a structural/geometric sense of rope hitching to itself
-- e.g., Two Half-hitches => "Clove noose-hitch".  My point is that
there can be variance as to whether the behavioral *noosing* even
obtains depending upon material & force, and I prefer NOT to have
such consideration muck about with knots classification.  (E.g., the
Midshipman's knot might form a temporary eye knot in natural-fibre
rope, but certainly in hi-mod ropes (Vectran, e.g.) it will be a noose,
as load becomes significant (we have seen even a Dbl.Bowline work
qua noose in HMPE line!!).  So, looking towards classification, I'm
pushing towards this re-definition of "noose".
Hmmm, "noose-hitch" & "noose-eye" (e.g. Running Bowline as latter)!?

Of course, this spits into the wind of common parlance.

Quote
To replace Half Hitch: Half_Hitch, {Is there a more descriptive term?}

What I find confusing re HH is the differing orientations of load
on the knot.  I don't see the minimal-timber-hitch-like structure as a HH;
I think that, generally, a HH should entail some bite, some nip
-- which the succeeding HHs of a 2-/3-/... structure surely show, and
the initial turn can be seen to approximate, at least.

Quote
The following list contains some suggested terms (in blue) for certain types of knots
(see the reasoning for these terms in an earlier post).  To start the voting, I'll mark my votes in bold:

To replace Bend: Join_Knot, Union_Knot, Bend

So many suggested terms seen to work equally well for tying to <anything>
-- vs. to another piece of cordage.  But "union" might connote strongly
enough a likeness of the two pieces AND contribution to the knotting of both!?

Quote
To replace Single-Loop Knot (as in "The Bowline is a single-loop knot"): Loop_Knot(1), Single_Loop_Knot
To replace Double-Loop Knot (as in "The Spanish Bowline is a double-loop knot"): Loop_Knot(2), Double_Loop_Knot

I favor "eye knot".

Quote
To replace Hitch: Tether_Knot, Attachment_Knot, Hitch

"Hitch" works, why replace?

Quote
Please post your votes or alternate suggestions.

Definitely "alternative" -- do away with highway-dept. simplicity!

--dl*
====

DerekSmith

  • IGKT Member
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1520
  • Knot Botherer
    • ALbion Alliance
Re: The Lexicon of Knotology
« Reply #53 on: February 06, 2010, 05:40:13 PM »
I made a mistake when I started to introduce what I saw as 'sensible' terminology into the thread "Re: Knotting Nomenclature -- How/What are we talking about?!".  As Dan defined the thread, it was to review and rationalise terminology in existing use - i.e. it was to optimise day to day language.

I realised that there was a need for a new clean and sensible language that was not bound by history or folk lore and which would perhaps help us take the next steps forward in developing our field into a science.  In many respects, while each approach has its own logical purpose, they are in essence diametrically opposite.

To that extent, it is worth reiterating what I believe are still the guidelines towards establishing this Lexicon.

The Lexicon should be structured so as to enable the development of the science of Nodology.
The language will be used by people involved in the study of Nodology.
The language is NOT concerned with being understood by users in any of the existing fields of knot use, and therefore does not have to reflect any extant terminology unless to do so adds to a logical and rational terminology.

To that end, our present anachronistic terminology will almost certainly be discarded in favour of terms featuring rational clarity.  Inevitably, this means that the 'Knotspeak' tyers presently use will hopefully be largely discarded, built as it is upon almost medieval terminology based on trade and use rather than structure or functionality .

I am certain that we will make mistakes and will have to backtrack to the foundations over several iterations in order to refine a viable lexicon, and I would not doubt that it will take us a number of years to undertake these iterations as we start to use the lexicon and discover its limitations.

However we get to a functional Lexicon of Nodology, I am confident that the smoothest path is to be found by casting off the past and not to be bound or influenced by any of its terminology.

Derek
« Last Edit: February 06, 2010, 05:44:26 PM by DerekSmith »

DerekSmith

  • IGKT Member
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1520
  • Knot Botherer
    • ALbion Alliance
Re: The Lexicon of Knotology
« Reply #54 on: February 06, 2010, 08:17:29 PM »
This post is a digression into the chessboard that may one day serve to be our workench of Nodology, and as such it has no direct reason to be posted here, other than that to be able to talk about it, we will need first to have created the necessary terminology to visualise and reference it.

So here goes with a first stab at creating the workspace of Nodology.

First, I would like to introduce an axis of 'knottiness' or 'entanglement' or 'interference'.  

At its origin is a straight piece of cord exhibiting zero 'knottiness'.  

As we move away from zero, we might come across the cord wound snake like, but never touching, then wound up into a tidy coil or laid out snake like, then overlaid snake like at right angles to the first layer - the complexity is getting greater but we are still describing a family without enforced entanglement.

Moving yet further, we might come across numerous cords interwoven as a flat weave.  We could pull any single cord out of the weave, but the weave now acts as a coherent whole and can take and distribute force through its structure.

Next along might be the closed weave where the 'weft' cord traverses back and forth between the many 'warp' yarns, and following closely are the plaits, braids and then the circular Turks Head arrangements wherin the entanglement essentially amounts to nothing more than interweaving, yet entanglement is extreme through the extent of the interweaving - we can no longer simply pull cords out of these structures.

Yet further along would be simpler constructions, yet they would now be exhibiting intrinsic entanglement, such that despite their simplicity, they could not be pulled out - for example a cord containing a simple overhand knot.

From here on, the entanglement / interference simply get more and more complex and in theory passing on to the mythical Gordian Knot (and beyond ?).


The second axis describes the degree of 'penetration' or 'involvement'

All of the structures described so far on the knottiness axis involve zero 'penetration' and so are strung out in a line on one side of the workspace.  However, this second axis is complex and subject to recursion, i.e. a braid can form a cord which finishes up back on the zero penetration axis being used to make the structures we have already seen on the 'knottiness' axis.

Ignoring the recursive nature of this axis for the moment, the first encounter we might meet would be a splice in three strand laid rope, where the structure involves entering the structure of the cordage by one level of structural complexity.  The splice though, being essentially a braid like structure would sit out in the board, lined up with braid on the 'knottiness' axis and with primary component on the penetration axis.

Penetration into cords with more complex structures would sit further along this axis as indeed would the construction of the thread, strings, ropes etc, themselves.

Sewing through a cord penetrates to the finest structures, so will sit far out along this axis as will glueing which penetrates yet further, right to the molecular level.

So you see we need some words.  A good term to use for 'knottiness' and a term to use when talking about 'penetration' and then some words for varying degrees of these parameters (I don't think numbers are particularly good for perception).

Any offers?

Derek
« Last Edit: February 07, 2010, 12:55:49 PM by DerekSmith »

DerekSmith

  • IGKT Member
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1520
  • Knot Botherer
    • ALbion Alliance
Re: The Lexicon of Knotology
« Reply #55 on: February 07, 2010, 09:20:27 AM »
Call to all you academics out there...

While the term Nodology will keep me firmly grounded with the vision of that little yellow coupe, I have a fear that practitioners of Nodology will become known as 'Big Ears' because of both that association and the general extended age of its male followers.

So I have to ask those who might know - should the term in fact be Nodeology (with an 'e').  I have to admit, I feel considerably better at the inclusion of an 'e'.  Perhaps also, if this field ever touches the heady heights of University study, students might have an easier time if we drop the little yellow coupe association as quickly as possible.

Note - Lasse uses the tag line of 'Nodeo, ergo sum' which he tells me is his version of 'I knot, therefore I am'.  Although light hearted, I can't think of a more appropriate sentiment.

Derek

Sweeney

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 975
Re: The Lexicon of Knotology
« Reply #56 on: February 07, 2010, 09:45:54 AM »
The Guild motto maybe?

Barry

DerekSmith

  • IGKT Member
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1520
  • Knot Botherer
    • ALbion Alliance
Re: The Lexicon of Knotology
« Reply #57 on: February 07, 2010, 12:12:32 PM »
The Guild motto maybe?

Barry

I couldn't agree more Barry.

Derek

DerekSmith

  • IGKT Member
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1520
  • Knot Botherer
    • ALbion Alliance
Re: The Lexicon of Knotology
« Reply #58 on: February 07, 2010, 12:23:02 PM »
Terms are starting to accumulate and the breadth of the topic is beginning to stretch the abilities of a forum topic.

Time perhaps to open up a place to collect the stuff that is starting to make sense and meet with general agreement, while keeping all the idea creation and discussion here on the forum.

Yes, you guessed, I am going to suggest a wiki, in fact http://nodeology.pbworks.com/FrontPage

I have made it completely open, so anyone can start a PBWorks account and start editing / contributing to it without needing to be given permission for access.  If total openness creates anarchy, we can always lock it later, but I hope the topic will not attract nutters other than knotters.

Derek

DaveRoot

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 141
    • The Most Useful Rope Knots....
Re: The Lexicon of Knotology
« Reply #59 on: February 08, 2010, 03:33:37 AM »
Call to all you academics out there...

While the term Nodology will keep me firmly grounded with the vision of that little yellow coupe, I have a fear that practitioners of Nodology will become known as 'Big Ears' because of both that association and the general extended age of its male followers.

So I have to ask those who might know - should the term in fact be Nodeology (with an 'e').  I have to admit, I feel considerably better at the inclusion of an 'e'.  Perhaps also, if this field ever touches the heady heights of University study, students might have an easier time if we drop the little yellow coupe association as quickly as possible.

Note - Lasse uses the tag line of 'Nodeo, ergo sum' which he tells me is his version of 'I knot, therefore I am'.  Although light hearted, I can't think of a more appropriate sentiment.

Derek

Here's a quote from the knottyers Yahoo group (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/knottyers/message/7035):

      "According to University of Notre Dame on-line dictionary:
      http://www.archives.nd.edu/latgramm.htm

      nodus -i m. [a knot; a girdle; any tie , bond, connection, obligation;
      a knotty point, difficulty].
      nodo -are [to knot , tie in a knot].

      nodosus -a -um [full of knots , knotty].

      Neither "nodi" nor "nodology" are listed in their book

      According to "Collins Pocket Latin Dictionary:

      nodo - (verb transitive) "to knot, tie"

      nodosus (adjective) "knotty"

      nodus (masculine) figurative "knot, knob, girdle, knotty point"

      In addition the suffix "ology" is an informal Greek noun, so whether
      it could be added to a Latin word is debatable."



So Nodology and Nodeology might both be incorrect (mixing a Latin prefix with a Greek suffix).  It looks like "kombos" is the Greek word for knot: http://www.greekkomboloi.com/.

Personally, I prefer Knotology because it's clear and unambiguous, and therefore it avoids confusion.

I'll post some thoughts on the Wiki soon.

Dave
« Last Edit: February 08, 2010, 03:38:49 AM by DaveRoot »