Is there a word that describes when a word describes a thing or situation completely?

It is easy to come up with a word which is correct in a particular context, in the sense that the thing fits the definition of the word. But it's much more challenging to come up with a word that when used describes a thing entirely, in the sense that you could rely on that word alone to communicate the idea.

To put another way, what would you call it when there is a word which is sufficient to describe something to some desired level of detail?

Example sentence. "I am looking for a desired single word word for thing/situation/idea."

Ideally, this word would be specific to linguistics, rather than a generic term, like "equivalent" or "sufficient."

For a specific example, consider a definition of deceive:

(of a person) cause (someone) to believe something that is not true, typically in order to gain some personal advantage.

Now consider the definition of gaslight:

manipulate (someone) by psychological means into questioning their own sanity.

Deceive certainly doesn't seem incorrect to apply to the definition gaslight, but clearly it doesn't fully specify what gaslighting is. Another example is from a recent question, asking for a word for a specific kind of bullying, wherein a person never admits wrongdoing and insists that others are always in the wrong despite evidence to the contrary. A commenter suggested "sociopathic," which doesn't fully capture the scenario, despite it probably being an appropriate label for this sort of person.

  • 1
    Even though you're asking for an English word for this concept, you may well get a more accurate response over at linguistics.stackexchange.com or even philosophy.stackexchange.com – Mitch May 6 '17 at 19:14
  • 4
    I was thinking that the Saussurean 'signifier' is in the right direction but informally 'le mot juste' might be just le mot juste. – Mitch May 6 '17 at 19:16
  • 2
    Isn’t that the relationship between a word and its definition? – Jim May 6 '17 at 20:30
  • I don't think you've really thought this through. Even a term as apparently well-defining as 'fructose' refers to a substance that occurs in open-chain and cyclic forms, as well as stereoisomers (and a bottlefull of the stuff would be some complex mixture of these forms, together with traces of impurity). As for 'table', 'radiator', 'girl', 'car', 'hole', 'light', 'faith', 'word', ... I believe all you can hope for is 'sufficiently characterising term' with context pointing to the level of definition aimed at. – Edwin Ashworth May 6 '17 at 21:03
  • Maybe i don't understand well your thought but it makes me think of the quarrel of universals cura.free.fr/23phidec.html Moreover Kant Tells us that de Noumenon or rather the "Thing in itself" is an Unknowable reality. – Baiwir May 6 '17 at 21:22

You might consider definitive

Defined by The American Heritage Dictionary as:

  • Serving to define or identify as distinct from others
  • satisfying all criteria
| improve this answer | |
  • Yes, perfect. Seems obvious now. – Evan May 7 '17 at 0:55

The only thing I think about is "concept" which is already in the mind and speaks for itself :

  1. an idea, esp an abstract idea: the concepts of biology.
  2. (Philosophy) philosophy a general idea or notion that corresponds to some class of entities and that consists of the characteristic or essential features of the class
  3. (Philosophy) philosophy a. the conjunction of all the characteristic features of something
    b. a theoretical construct within some theory
    c. a directly intuited object of thought
    d. the meaning of a predicate
| improve this answer | |

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