databases (was: Re: [Buddha-l] Tibetan for...?)

[Stephen Hodge]

Joanna wrote:

> However, any such '-base' item would itself be a singular noun, an item 
> that aggregates multiple units within itself but remains singular as a 
> discrete item per se. Thus, it's not incorrect to write 'the database,' or 
> 'a database.'
[snip]
> Perhaps this 'railroad' usage got going because 'rail' in this instance is 
> an abstraction, referring to a type of transportation means, as in the 
> phrase, 'shipped by rail.'

This speculation is not really necessary.  It's just the way such compound 
nouns are regularly formed in English.  The first member is expressed in the 
singular if it is a count noun, otherwise it's a mass noun.  Thus, at 
random, we have a "bird-table" = a table for the use of birds, a "CD rack" = 
a rack for CDs, a "keyboard" = a board of keys, a "bicyle-shop" = a shop for 
bicycles, a "lunatic-asylum" = an asylum for lunatics (aka Buddha-L), 
"graveyard" = a yard of/for graves, a "road-map" = a map of roads, a 
"window-box" = a box for windows etc etc.  Interestingly, the parallel 
Sanskrit tat-puru.sa compounds are formed the same way.   With mass nouns, 
we have "bread-basket", "water-pot", "coffee-shop".   Thus, I conclude that 
"data" in "database" is now understood as a mass noun in some quarters --  
though probably the people who coined "database" were unaware that the 
singular of "data" is "datum".

Best wishes,
Stephen Hodge