Talk:bifurcate

Provision of explicit definition for transitive form

Dear Sirs and Madams: The definition for the transitive verbal form of "bifurcate: 2.(transitive) To cause to bifurcate. does not help one to get a precise definition of "bifurcate." You need to use another word: 2.(transitive) To cause to[divide?] orTo cause to[separate?] It causes confusion. It's somewhat like saying that to "solidify" is to cause "solidification" HUH? I look forward to hearing from you. Gary K. Taylor. Passau, Germany

Hi. It seems okay because it's immediately below the primary (intransitive) definition. You can't really read verb sense 2 without reading verb sense 1, which makes it clear. Equinox ◑ 08:36, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

It may seem OK at present, but be careful about future developments. Let's say that a new intransitive meaning is either developed or identified. Hypothetically as in the following.

1. (intransitive) To divide or fork into two channels or branches.
2. (intransitive) To provide two forks for each person's place setting. Example usage: "We always bifurcate in our restaurant."
3. (transitive) To cause to bifurcate.

In such an event the intended meaning of the transitive form may be unclear/misconstrued.

—DIV (137.111.13.4 01:32, 13 October 2021 (UTC))

In such an event, we could change the definition to "To cause to bifurcate (sense 1)". Compare thimble, sign language which do the "sense 1" thing. Alternatively, "To cause to divide into two" would work. Until another sense arises, I don't see a problem, however. 70.175.192.217 01:41, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Good idea, and good examples. I think we agree that the current definitions of bifurcate are fine for now; I was just noting a need to be cautious if new definitions are added. —DIV (137.111.13.4 00:42, 14 October 2021 (UTC))

Consistency of "---furcate" words

The consistency of "---furcate" words from their etymology seems unclear to me, according to Wikipedia's notes on numeral prefixes.

The following appear to be the most common forms for two-, three- and four-way division:

• bifurcate, using the Latin prefix "bi-" for two as a Multiple;
• trifurcate, using the Greek/Latin prefix "tri-" for three as a Cardinal, or possibly using the Sanskrit prefix "tri-" for three (in general);
• quadrifurcate, using the Latin prefix "quadri-" for four as a Cardinal.

So while I realise that language doesn't have to be logical, if it were wouldn't we either be using *dufurcate instead of bifurcate, or else *terfurcate and *quaterfurcate instead of trifurcate and quadrifurcate?

As a further note, I observe that so far there seems to be no entry in English Wiktionary for five-way splitting.

—DIV (137.111.13.4 01:49, 13 October 2021 (UTC))

The prefix du- is pretty rare, even if it is the "official" Latin cardinal prefix for two. Off the top of my head, I can't even think of any words that use it. I've heard duo-, of course, but I guess that's a separate thing according to that table. I think that in sequences with Latin cardinals, bi- usually replaces du-, e.g. unicycle, bicycle, tricycle, quadricycle; uniped, biped, *triped, quadruped; unipolar, bipolar, tripolar, quadripolar. So "bifurcate" is not really an unexpected form. 70.175.192.217 08:15, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Semantically, one and two seem to be in a different class than higher numbers in this kind of formulation: once and twice are basic terms, but thrice is rare and archaic. The same with first and second vs. third and higher. Quarter in terms of parts is an interesting exception, but even there, it's half of a half. I would relate it to binary divisions being part of our basic conceptual architecture: left/right, up/down, front/back, hot/cold, light/dark, etc. More complex structures require counting to keep track. When we talk about splitting or dividing without giving a number, two is always the default assumption- "split in two" is almost redundant. As for "du-" (which is really just a positional variant of duo-), there's duplex/duplicate, but, as you say, it's not common: compare Category:English words prefixed with bi- with Category:English words prefixed with duo- Chuck Entz (talk) 17:28, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

This. I note that in Latin itself ter- and tri- are of about equal meaning and distribution (not necessarily frequency) at least in later technical language, when we have ternitās as well as trīnitās, so then we have quadri- and only then it goes regular. Fay Freak (talk) 18:38, 16 October 2021 (UTC)