<div dir="ltr">On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 12:39 PM Sergio Manzi <<a href="mailto:smz@smz.it">smz@smz.it</a>> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Eugene, those are "<i>proper names</i>" and as such they are
untranslatable, and that's exactly why to put a category name
within a proper name is "<i>a very bad idea (tm)</i>". But if a
proper name happens to have a category has part of its proper
name, just leave it alone... no problem...</p></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>+99</div><div><br></div><div>Very often the name of an object is also descriptive. Probably because it starts out being</div><div>purely descriptive and ends up being the proper name of the object. There is a bridge in Paris</div><div>which is called "Pont Neuf" (New Bridge) - it's the oldest standing bridge in Paris but, at the</div><div>time it acquired that name, it was the newest. There are a gazillion (rough estimate) farmhouses</div><div>in Wales called "Penrallt" (top of the wood). Etc., etc. Those terms describe those objects but</div><div>they're also the names of those objects.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Don't use an object's description as its name unless that description actually IS the name. Some</div><div>people know only the first eight words of that instruction and are unaware of the last seven words.<br></div><div><br></div><div>-- <br></div><div>Paul</div><div><br></div></div></div>