Timeline for Difference between "ability" and "capability"
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
19 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 4, 2015 at 14:38 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| Feb 4, 2015 at 15:39 | |||||
| Jul 29, 2014 at 18:42 | comment | added | kwah | I'm a little late to the game here but I came across this question via Google. I suggest that "capability" is along the same lines of the "cap-of-ability". By this I mean that 'John has the capability to do x' suggests that the "cap" (limit) on John's ability allows him to do x. Whether John is ABLE to do it right now (ie, current 'ability') is left unstated, as is whether John may have the 'ability' to go above/beyond this, thus is unknown. To reiterate/summarise - IMO, capability refers to potential ability while ability refers to what is able to be done now. | |
| Aug 27, 2013 at 20:00 | comment | added | broc.seib | I don't feel that capability should necessarily indicate a limitation in a person. Might a person be equally capable of two challenging pursuits and choose one versus the other? E.g., "She was capable of traversing either the river or the mountain, but chose the mountain." | |
| Oct 27, 2010 at 21:34 | comment | added | Anonymous Type | I think people that are saying that capable implies that the entity has a inherent capability that they do not possess "right now" and missing the point. There is no implication either way. It is left unsaid and unexplored. That's the beauty of the word. | |
| Aug 18, 2010 at 22:59 | comment | added | Alan Hogue | But it does not follow that "capable" implies the lack of present ability. Rather that "able" does imply this, whereas "capable" does not. This is not the same thing as saying that "capable" actually means "not presently able". | |
| Aug 8, 2010 at 2:30 | comment | added | Sarhanis | And I would say number 2 is contradictory. | |
| Aug 6, 2010 at 9:52 | comment | added | Alan Hogue | Let's try something like this. (1) John is capable of reading, but he is currently illiterate. (2) John is able to read, but he is currently illiterate How do those sound to people? I think the distinction is very subtle and not a matter of denotation... | |
| Aug 6, 2010 at 9:48 | comment | added | Alan Hogue | I think the problem here is that we need to distinguish between denotation and connotation. Yes, there probably is sometimes a rather subtle connotation for "capable" which suggests that it is less strong in some sense than "able". But I think even this is highly variable. This is one of the things which makes lexical semantics so "fun". :) | |
| Aug 6, 2010 at 6:41 | comment | added | Sarhanis | And Alan, I've realised the wording in the original definition I put up wasn't accurate. Now edited. | |
| Aug 6, 2010 at 6:40 | history | edited | Sarhanis | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
edited for less ambiguity.
|
| Aug 6, 2010 at 6:38 | comment | added | Sarhanis | Alan, I'm saying that if someone, John for instance, is capable of doing x, that does not imply that John can do x right now. Whether John can or cannot do x right now is left unsaid. | |
| Aug 6, 2010 at 6:35 | vote | accept | igor | ||
| Aug 6, 2010 at 6:16 | comment | added | Alan Hogue | From the OED entry for able, note the last word used in the definition: "b. In predicative use, with infinitive or without complement: having the means, capacity, or qualifications to do something; having sufficient power; in such a position that a particular action is possible; worthy, qualified, competent, capable." | |
| Aug 6, 2010 at 3:35 | comment | added | Sarhanis | Another good example might be: all nations at the World Cup are able to win (in the sense that it's possible), while only a few are realistically capable of winning (i.e. have the necessary skills to do so). Alternatively: Kobe Bryant is able to slam dunk a basketball, while John, my very tall friend, is capable of slam dunking a basketball (which implies he can't slam dunk a basketball at the moment). | |
| Aug 6, 2010 at 0:49 | comment | added | Alan Hogue | The etymology of a word does not necessarily have anything to do with its modern meaning. Again, saying that someone is capable of x does not imply that they cannot do x right now. That is simply false. | |
| Aug 6, 2010 at 0:25 | comment | added | kitukwfyer | The "cap-" on "capable" comes from the latin "capere," to grasp or take. So "John is capable of reading" does mean more accurately "John is able to learn to read" or rather "John is able to grasp the skill of reading," not, however, that he IS able to read. | |
| Aug 6, 2010 at 0:25 | comment | added | igor | So, "capability" means a talent that someone was born with to do something and "ability" means that some one got some skill to do something, right? | |
| Aug 6, 2010 at 0:05 | comment | added | Alan Hogue | I disagree. "John is capable of reading" does not imply that John can't read at the moment. | |
| Aug 5, 2010 at 23:54 | history | answered | Sarhanis | CC BY-SA 2.5 |