Explanation
A definition determines how an expression or concept is to be understood within a particular context and distinguished from neighbours. It may describe established usage, stipulate a technical use, or state conditions relevant to classification. No form guarantees complete neutrality: the selection of features, superordinate categories, and exclusions structures the domain and may conceal disputed assumptions. Good definitions must suit their purpose, be intelligible, and remain testable through countercases; synonyms or vivid descriptions are not always sufficient. The concept reveals that conceptual boundaries are tools of thought: they order cases and arguments while remaining revisable when borderline instances, new knowledge, or other linguistic communities challenge their reach.
Movement of thought
1. An expression is first used across changing situations while its exact scope or boundary remains unclear or disputed for a particular task. 2. A definition selects features, relations, or rules of use and thereby draws a provisional boundary around relevant cases. 3. Examples and borderline cases are tested against that boundary and reveal the inclusions and exclusions the wording actually produces. 4. A counter-test looks for circularity, excessive breadth or narrowness, hidden evaluation, and mismatch of purpose and separates definition from example, description, and synonym. 5. The concept returns as a controllable tool: its boundary enables shared work while remaining open to justified revision.
Scientific use case
Terminology studies, philosophy of science, and lexicography test purpose, extension, counterexamples, and interdisciplinary transfer. Annotation trials measure whether independent researchers classify the same cases alike.
Example
For a study, “response delay” is defined as the time between the complete end of a question and the start of the next turn; pauses within the question are explicitly excluded.
Counterexample
“Resonance is something that resonates” merely repeats the same lexical root and provides neither distinguishing features nor a testable rule of use; it is not an adequate definition.
Distinction
Distinguish definition from description, example, explication, synonym alone, lexicographic paraphrase, stipulation, classification, claims about essence, and rhetorical redefinition.
Effect on thought and perception
Definitions stabilise shared conceptual work and make inclusion testable; they can enable inquiry but may also naturalise a disputed perspective as an apparently given boundary.
Resonance
A boundary gathers dispersed cases under one name; at every marginal instance it begins to vibrate again and reveals where the order holds or must open.
Etymology
Technical core term; individual etymological review pending
Provenance
Unresolved relation network → core-concept review → Metzler/HWRh cross-check → ATLAS 238
Cite this entry
Reich, Michael (Hrsg./ed.): „Definition“. Atlas der Sprache, AT-CORE-238-035. ATLAS 260, data model 1.6.0. https://atlasoflanguage.com/concept/AT-CORE-238-035The address remains stable; editorial content may evolve. Editorial reading state: 2026-10-15. Include your access date for precise references.
Historical background
In III.iv.4–7 Locke explains definition through several expressions that are not merely synonymous. He denies that names of simple ideas admit this kind of definition, invoking their lack of composition and the risk of an infinite regress. The restriction depends on his theory of ideas; it is not a universal present-day prohibition on explaining simple words. The passage supplies no German lexical history.
How conceptual history changes the analysis
The limit placed on definition is theory-dependent and must be read within that framework.
References for the historical section
- John Locke, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (first published with the date 1690), Books III–IV; Gutenberg transcription identified as based on the second edition · III.iii.10; III.iv.4–11
Selected original-English passages read; not collated against first-edition page images. Modern profile labels are explicitly distinguished from the terminology used by Locke. His account of ideas is a historical philosophical position, not a verified contemporary model of language or cognition.