Take the 2-minute tour ×
English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I am not a native English speaker and I need a word means modifying a list/set to make it a unique-values list/set eliminating or replacing non-unique values with unique ones. I am also aware of deduplication suggestion, but I can't settle for it. Because, it sounds me that it means eliminating (deleting) duplicate values, but not replacing.

So, the word uniquate meets this meaning or it is completely different thing? And any other suggestion?

Edit: I need a word reflects especially replacement, but it is OK if it also reflects eliminating. I don't search for an answer focusing to only eliminating.

share|improve this question
    
Your question title actually mentions Eliminate ... duplicates, so it's not surprising people addressed that IMO. You're actually trying to replace duplicates with new items to guarantee uniqueness or similar. –  Useless Mar 22 '12 at 13:28
    
Yes, I actually need a word for replacement. But not necessarily fit to only replacement, it can cover also eliminating beside the replacement. –  mmdemirbas Mar 22 '12 at 13:40
    
If you can't explain what the operation is, I'm not sure how much luck you'll have naming it. –  Useless Mar 22 '12 at 13:45
    
OK, edited the question. –  mmdemirbas Mar 22 '12 at 13:56

5 Answers 5

up vote 7 down vote accepted

Your idea 'uniquate' is possible but few would understand its intention without a lot of context.

uniquify

is not an officially recognized term, but uses the very productive and understandable suffix '-ify' meaning 'to make'. However this particular construction sounds too informal as a neologisms to be appropriate.

A single term is not necessary. You can say what is happening:

remove duplicates

share|improve this answer
    
Thanks, uniquify sounds better than uniquate. But "remove duplicates" doesn't reflect the actual operation in my case. As I said, I mean to "change duplicate instances of repeating items into another form, so they all are different from each other." For example: "Dup",Dup","Dup" => "Dup","Dup1","Dup2" –  mmdemirbas Mar 22 '12 at 13:11
    
I've used uniquify with no confusion in the past (and I think it's the right answer here). However, I'd suggest deduplicate as a similarly well-understood replacement for remove duplicates. –  Useless Mar 22 '12 at 13:25
    
I'm not unwilling to accept uniquify as a CS or mathematics coinage, but I can't find it in a dictionary anywhere. I'm also reluctant to trot out Google NGram searches as evidence, but uniquify flatlines there at 0.00%. –  Robusto Mar 22 '12 at 13:55
2  
May increase after this :) –  mmdemirbas Mar 22 '12 at 14:00
    
@Robusto - I'm not sure I've seen uniquify around much either, but it seems to be an easily-understood coinage in IME. –  Useless Mar 22 '12 at 14:08

I'm not aware of a single word, but you could say that you are changing a multiset into a true set.

From Wikipedia:

A set is a gathering together into a whole of definite, distinct objects... every element of a set must be unique; no two members may be identical.

In mathematics, the notion of multiset (or bag) is a generalization of the notion of set in which members are allowed to appear more than once.

Where did you get the word uniquate? I couldn't find it anywhere.

If it's indeed an invented term, and you were writing a paper, you could define uniquate as an operation that changes a bag, or multiset, into a true set, and then use that term in subsequent places in the paper where you want to describe that operation. You could even go further, and specify that the number of elements in the original multiset must remain constant:

We define uniquate as an operation that changes a bag, or multiset, into a true set, by replacing (not removing) any duplicate elements.

Then, later in the paper:

The next step of the process is to uniquate Bag B into Set B.

But I wouldn't use the word outright, without defining it first. (Even if it is a real word, it appears rare enough that a formal definition within the document would be warranted).

share|improve this answer
    
Yes, it is invented to name a method in my code. Thanks for your good approach. –  mmdemirbas Mar 22 '12 at 13:05
    
If it's a method name, then, following the suggestion of @Jay below, you might go with MakeElementsUnique( ). (I assumed you were putting this into a document, not a program.) –  J.R. Mar 22 '12 at 16:01

Uniquate and uniquify have no established currency in any context, but here are hundreds of written instances of deduplicate, nearly all specifically about removing duplicate keys from lists.

It may be that doesn't suit OP if he wants to keep all records, simply altering [a keyfield in] one of each duplicated pair so they are in fact different. When I did that I called it adding a duplicate-buster - by extending [keyfield] to include some meaningless and otherwise unused unique value.

share|improve this answer

If you only need to say this once or twice in whatever document you're preparing, I wouldn't use an obscure word or worse, invent a new word. Just use a short phrase to describe what you mean, like, "make all the values unique" or "replace all non-unique values with unique ones".

If it's something you need to say a million times to even a short phrase gets cumbersome, then: I don't know of any existing word. Mitch's suggestion of "uniquify" is not a bad neologism. Personally, though, I'd just say "make unique" and explain exactly what you mean on first use.

share|improve this answer

How about disambiguate? Webster’s dictionary defines it to be:

to establish a single semantic or grammatical interpretation for.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.