Talk:Totum pro parte
Latest comment: 3 years ago by Firejuggler86 in topic Liquid and fluid
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Liquid and fluid edit
I believe that liquids are a subset of fluids, so an expression which uses the word "fluid" instead of "liquid" is a totum pro parte. Am I mistaken? A patient who is breathing is (literally) taking a fluid (air is a fluid, but not a liquid). Perhaps a better example would be a hydraulic brake system which has air in it, and is thus not functioning - the problem is not (literally) a "lack of fluid", but a lack of the particular fluid, the oil? TomS TDotO (talk) 13:08, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
- (The glass is half...) —as to these fluids, perhaps not a lack of oil, but rather an excess of air. WurmWoodeT 19:06, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
- Nah, definitely a lack of fluid :P. Excess air alone without any missing fluid wouldn't (I don't think cause problems... ^^. In that case, though, "fluid" is short for a very specific kind of fluid (brake fluid). BUT, TomS was spot on with the medical "take plenty of fluids example" - cos when doctors and nurses say that they LITERALLY mean just "consume plenty of liquids" - generic - not some specific drinks that are named "vitality fluid" or something :D Firejuggler86 (talk) 08:18, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Another Example: Canada & USA = North America edit
Referring to Canada and the USA as "North America" and excluding Mexico and Central America.