0

So say you have a car, which is composed of some seats, which are composed of some fabric

You could say that the Seats are a subcomponent of the Car and the Fabric is a subcomponent of the Seat

But is there a way to describe the relationship in the other direction?

Like "The Car is a supercomponent of a Seat"

Specifically, I am trying to list "Subcomponents" as well as "Supercomponents", and want to describe the lists accurately

Here is an example of the two lists, if I'm looking at a Seat:

Subcomponents:
- Fabric
- Cushion
- Frame

Supercomponents:
- Car
- Desk
- Airplane

I'm just wondering if there is another, better word for "Supercomponents"

Improve this question
2
  • It's worth mentioning that "component" can be defined arbitrarily. If you assemble a bunch of components, you could say the result is an assembly. However, if you then have to combine that assembly with some other components (or assemblies), it is acting as a component of the larger assembly. Essentially, "component" or "assembly" depends on what you need to do. The assembly created by process A could be a component required by process B.
    – mRotten
    Commented Feb 20, 2019 at 4:38
  • The answers posted give some insight into how you might describe such a relationship as asked by the question, but none provide a word that succinctly expresses that relationship. I would hazard to guess that there is no such word in the English language as it is used today.
    – R Mac
    Commented Feb 20, 2019 at 14:29

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
5

In manufacturing, components are combined to create an assembly. You will see this word on parts diagrams and other documentation about how to construct a machine. In fact, a component is an assembly of its subcomponents. For example, most cars have what is called a "tail light assembly" which consists of a light bulb, socket, reflector, and lens. The "seat" in your list would be ordered from a supplier as a "seat assembly" to distinguish it from the "seat frame".

However, there is a conceptual problem with your question: although the tail light is part of a car, a car is a lot more than something that has a tail light. In manufacturing, you might call the car a product or a machine.

For your list, I would use used in or part of

Seat has subcomponents:
- Fabric
- Cushion
- Frame

Seat is used in:
- Car
- Desk
- Airplane

Or just say a seat is a subcomponent of a car.

Edit: On further reflection, I like my second answer better:

Seat has subcomponents:
- Fabric
- Cushion
- Frame

Seat is a subcomponent of:
- Car
- Desk
- Airplane
Improve this answer
2
  • @BoldBen Again, you are repeating my answer. Comments are for asking for clarification or to point out problems in the post. If you just want to voice your agreement, all you need to (or should do) is upvote the question.
    – Old Pro
    Commented Jul 27, 2020 at 17:39
  • Quite right, I shall delete my comments as irrelevant and distracting and upvote. I was working on a tablet with a limited view of the question and thought I was commenting on the question.
    – BoldBen
    Commented Jul 28, 2020 at 13:07
-1

Try construction.

A component is literally a constituent part of something (Merriam-Webster). A subcomponent is a constituent part of a component (M-W). You're right that supercomponent may be odd - logically, if a subcomponent helps form a component, a component helps form, well, anything built from components. So you're looking for a word that signals how something is built from components.

One word for this is a construction:

2a : the process, art, or manner of constructing something ... also : a thing constructed

What does it mean to construct something?

1 : to make or form by combining or arranging parts or elements : build

So the car is a construction made from a seat and other components. Similarly, your three-part breakdown would involve subcomponents, components, and constructions, the last denoting what components can be used to build.

Other words to try include assembly and assemblage.

Improve this answer
2
  • Yes but that doesn't answer the OP's question. If A is a subcomponent of B, B is not a component of A. I believe that's what the OP is asking--what is the opposite relational descriptor.
    – R Mac
    Commented Feb 20, 2019 at 3:07
  • I don't follow the objection. If A is a subcomponent of B, B is a component of C, and C is a construction or assembly of B and other components. Of course B is not a component of A; I'm unaware of making that claim.
    – TaliesinMerlin
    Commented Feb 20, 2019 at 11:48

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .