18-04-2016, 12:00 AM
Helmut, I confess I lose your logic a bit, maybe that's misunderstanding due to language barrier (English is not my native and I guess yours neither), but nonetheless.
Let's continue the example with 89 (or de, or ds). I say it stands for "deus". In that case it represents a word. You confirm that it may stand for "deus" (hence, it would represent a word, as supposed). But you continue that 89 may well not stand for "deus", but also may stand for something else, depending on the context. That's fine, but that does not deprive the thing that 89 stands for of its property of being a word. It does not become a sentence or a syllable. We only have a one-to-many mapping instead of one-to-one mapping.
Let's continue the example with 89 (or de, or ds). I say it stands for "deus". In that case it represents a word. You confirm that it may stand for "deus" (hence, it would represent a word, as supposed). But you continue that 89 may well not stand for "deus", but also may stand for something else, depending on the context. That's fine, but that does not deprive the thing that 89 stands for of its property of being a word. It does not become a sentence or a syllable. We only have a one-to-many mapping instead of one-to-one mapping.