Part of what I was trying to express was that stripping the "o" from one word doesn't mean that it should be equally stripped from all words. In my examples "o" serves two different purposes.

o'clock is not the same as open and is not the same as o [half-space] pen (assuming perhaps that "o" is an article, as in Greek) and neither one is the same as a word staring with "o" as a null.


So we might be comparing apples and oranges. It might be tol in one instance and otol in another. In other words, they are only similar if we strip all the leading "o" chars, but we don't know yet if all the "o" chars have the same function. If they don't, then stripping all of them might not tell us anything.

Yes, indeed.

I agree with JKP.

I see it the same way.

Labels can be compound words (сложносокращенные слова) or initial abbreviations (I am a supporter of the latter). Therefore, visually identical words can express different concepts (sentences, phrases).

(05-10-2020, 01:36 PM)Wladimir D Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view....сложносокращенные слова...

syllabic abbreviations ?

(05-10-2020, 02:23 PM)Ruby Novacna Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(05-10-2020, 01:36 PM)Wladimir D Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view....сложносокращенные слова...

syllabic abbreviations ?

Yes, that's the English term.

If we strip 'o' from otol, why do it only once?

I suggest that one strips 'o', 't', 'o' and 'l' from otol