The Lexicon of Knotology

[DaveRoot]

When describing how to tie a knot, another useful term might be:

N.STARTING_ORIENTATION(orientation, location of the N.TAIL_END) = Describes the orientation of the N.CORDAGE (from the perspective of the knot-tyer) before the N.KNOT is tied.  For the parameters, the valid combinations are:


        Orientation   Location of the N.TAIL_END
        -----------   --------------------------
        VERTICAL      END_DOWN (i.e. the N.TAIL_END is at the bottom) or END_UP
        HORIZONTAL    END_LEFT or END_RIGHT
        DIAGONAL      END_NW or END_NE or END_SW or END_SE



So N.STARTING_ORIENTATION(VERTICAL, END_DOWN) means that before you begin tying the knot, you would hold the rope so that it's vertical with the TAIL_END at the bottom.  This helps ensure that your actions are properly in sync with the knot-tying instructions.

Perhaps this is jumping too far ahead, but I wanted to get some thoughts down before I forget them.

Dave

[DaveRoot]

More ideas for consideration:

N.JOIN_KNOT = The category of N.KNOTS which are used for tying two or more N.TAIL_ENDS of N.CORDAGE together (whether from the same N.CORDAGE or from different N.CORDAGES).  Traditionally referred to as a Bend.

N.LOOP_KNOT = The category of N.KNOTS which result in one or more N.LOOPS.  If two N.LOOPS are formed (e.g. the Spanish Bowline) then the N.KNOT is an N.LOOP_KNOT(2), and so on.

N.TETHER_KNOT = The category of N.KNOTS which are used for tying around an object and which conform to the shape of the object.  "Tether" means "To fasten to a fixed object."  Traditionally referred to as a Hitch.  An animal can be tethered to a post using a Bowline, for example, but the Bowline would still be referred to as an N.LOOP_KNOT because it is not conforming to the shape of the post.


Dave

[DaveRoot]

edit (2/18/2010):  The ideas below are out-of-date.  The new proposed terms are listed and defined in the Nodeology wiki at http://nodeology.pbworks.com/Bindings-Terms.


Attempting to compile all of the ideas so far...

Nodology -- The field and study of bindings made in cordage.

  N.Cordage -- Any material capable of being manipulated into N.Bindings.  Includes rope, chain, cable, cord, string, thread, braid, plait, wool, leather thong, ribbon, and so on.

  N.Binding -- The result of manipulating cordage components into shapes that are capable of translating forces from one part to another.  Includes knots, splices, whippings, and so on.
    
    N.B.Splice -- Creating a force transferring connection by knotting the cordage and/or sub parts of the cordage on and through itself.

    N.B.Whipping -- Effecting the transfer of force by wrapping a smaller diameter cord tightly around the outside of the cordage being bound.

    N.B.Stitching -- N.B.Whipping but involving both the inside and the outside of the cordage being bound.

    N.B.Weaving -- Creating sheets of flexible fabric by interweaving or plaiting numerous strands of cordage.

    N.B.Netting -- Creating sheets of widely spaced cords by knotting strands of cordage.

    N.B.Knot -- Creating a force transferring connection by creating 3 dimensional contact structures on the surface of the cord only.


      Parts of an N.B.Knot (see the reasoning for these terms in an earlier post):

        N.B.K.Tail_End -- The end of the N.Cordage which is used in tying an N.B.Knot.  Traditionally referred to as the Working End, Bitter End, or Running End.

        N.B.K.Exit_Part -- The part of the N.Cordage which exits the N.B.Knot and ends at the N.B.K.Tail_End.

        N.B.K.Entry_Part -- The part of the N.Cordage which enters the N.B.Knot at the opposite end from the N.B.K.Exit_Part ("opposite" in the sense that one part of a rope enters into a knot, and another part of the rope exits from the knot).  Traditionally referred to as the Standing Part.

        N.B.K.Loop -- The oval-shaped length of N.Cordage which remains after certain N.B.Knots are tied (e.g. Bowlines).  Useful for throwing over a post, or for clipping onto with an attachment such as a carabiner, and so on.  Traditionally referred to as a Loop or an Eye.

        N.B.K.Doubled_End -- When a length of N.Cordage is folded over ("doubled") so that a new "end" is created, this is an N.B.K.Doubled_End.  Traditionally referred to as a Bight.

        N.B.K.Turn(amount of turn, object included, double end formed) -- Taking a length of N.Cordage around an object (or simply around the air).  "Amount of turn" specifies how many times around, in half-revolutions (e.g. 1hR).  "Object included" specifies whether or not the N.Cordage goes around an object.  Valid values are: " " (anything), "0" (nothing), "s" (self), or "f" (fixture, i.e. an anchor or other solid object).  "Double end formed" specifies whether or not an N.B.K.Doubled_End is formed.  N.B.K.Turn(1, 0, 1) is traditionally referred to as a Bight.  N.B.K.Turn(1,  , 0) is traditionally referred to as a Loop.

        N.B.K.Revolution(number, crossing) -- Alternative idea for N.B.K.Turn.  Taking a length of N.Cordage around an object (or simply around the air).  "Number" specifies how many times around.  "Crossing" specifies whether the N.Cordage crosses over or under itself.  Valid values are:  "Cross_Over" or "Cross_Under" or "None."  When tied in the air, N.B.K.Revolution(0.5, None) is traditionally referred to as a Bight.  When tied in the air, N.B.K.Revolution(1, Cross_Under) is traditionally referred to as an Underhand Loop.  When tied around an object, N.B.K.Revolution(1.5, None) is traditionally referred to as a Round Turn.


      Types of N.B.Knots:

        N.B.K.Join_Knot -- An N.B.Knot which is used for tying two or more N.B.K.Tail_Ends together (whether from the same N.Cordage or from different N.Cordages).  Traditionally referred to as a Bend.

        N.B.K.Loop_Knot(optional number of loops) -- An N.B.Knot which results in one or more N.B.K.Loops.  If two N.B.K.Loops are formed (e.g. the Spanish Bowline) then the N.B.Knot is an N.B.K.Loop_Knot(2), and so on.

        N.B.K.Tether_Knot -- An N.B.Knot which is used for tying a length of N.Cordage around an object and which conforms to the shape of the object.  "Tether" means "To fasten to a fixed object."  Traditionally referred to as a Hitch.  An animal can be tethered to a post using a Bowline, for example, but the Bowline would still be referred to as an N.B.K.Loop_Knot because it doesn't conform to the shape of the post.

        N.B.K.Hitch_Knot -- An alternative idea for N.B.K.Tether_Knot.



Looking over this list, "N.B.K." seems a bit cumbersome.  Perhaps all of the above terms should simply be prefixed with "N." to indicate that they are Nodology terms?

As Derek pointed out, this is a start for a new and clearer and unambiguous set of knotting terms.  So how do these terms (and their definitions) sound so far?  What improvements can be made?


Some more terms which have been used in this forum, to perhaps incorporate into Nodology somehow:

sling
collar
nub
nip
lead
capsize
jam
slipped
noose (i.e. an Overhand slip knot but loaded the opposite way)
half hitch
lashing
"front view" and "back view" of a knot (I don't know if it's possible to come up with a useful definition of these two terms)


Dave


edit (2/18/2010):  The ideas above are out-of-date.  The new proposed terms are listed and defined in the Nodeology wiki at http://nodeology.pbworks.com/Bindings-Terms.

[squarerigger]

Dave,

I really like the ideas you have been expressing and I must say that you have been delightfully prolific so far.  I would like to suggest, however, that we should go back a pace or two and ask ourselves - what is nodology?  What are the component parts of nodology?  How could we rationally divide and then sub-divide if necessary to have a reasonable shot at getting to grip with some defining terms?  I suggest the following:

Nodology:  The field and study of structures made in N.cordage
N.Cordage:  Any material capable of being manipulated by hand or machine into N.tyings, N.weavings or N.bindings
N.tyings:  the resulting transfer of force(s) from one place to another using N.cordage when joining it to something else, whether N.cordage or a solid object,
N.weavings:  the resulting fabric formed when passing N.cordage over or under one or more N.cordages, whether those N.cordages are the same or a different piece,
N.bindings:  the resulting covering of another N.cordage(s) or object(s) using friction

Then, we could go on to subdivide thus:
N.T.Knot:
N.T.Hitch:
N.T.Bend:
N.T.Loop:
N.W.Flatmat:
N.W.Splice:
N.W.Ball:
N.W.Cylinder:
N.B.Finishing (Whipping):
N.B.Covering (Serving):
N.B.Lashing (Seizing):

I feel sure that there are more but what do you think of those potential sub-divisions?

SR

[DaveRoot]

Hi SR,

I agree with you about the importance of finding good subdivisions for classifying the terms in Nodology.

In Derek's model, everything that can be made by manipulating cordage would fall under the Binding subdivision.  Your model has Tyings, Weavings, and Bindings as separate subdivisions (at the same level).  As we work with these ideas then we'll be able to determine which model is a better fit, or perhaps a different model will emerge as the best fit.

Some questions for you:

1. Under the Tyings subdivision you have Knot, Hitch, Bend, and Loop.  Is there a reason for saying that Hitches, Bends, and Loops are not Knots?

2. "Hitch" is a traditional term which might be descriptive enough to be a good fit in the new Nodology lexicon, but "Bend" is a traditional term which isn't very descriptive.  Also, if "Loop" is the name for the category of knots which include Bowlines, Alpine Butterflys, etc., then what would be the term for the part of those knots which forms a "loop"?  Are there better and more descriptive terms for the categories of "Bend" and "Loop"?

Dave

[Sweeney]

I find this discussion fascinating - it must be what the developers of esperanto went through and I have a feeling that this will go the same way. Great idea but ignores the simple fact that language, no matter how imprecise or even bizaarre, develops at its own speed through common usage. I will always use salt on food never sodium chloride so as long as Nodologists see themselves in a similar way to other specialist groups eg scientists this stands a chance but only amongst the cognoscenti of  consenting adults. I reckon 6 weeks to 3 months and the next novelty will surface but we can all enjoy watching while it lasts.

Barry
 

[Knot Head]

I have been looking over The Braider & some of the other publications by AG Schakkee and John Turner. Yes, a bit on the complicated side for the average person. But I do like how the authors proceed in the publications in the actual design and mathematical processes, and the terms they use pretty much consistently throughout all of their publications. I am not quite sure if this would be a way to go, or not. But I think that using the terms they have used would be a great start. For example, to describe the term Turns, instead they use Half Cycle. I realize that they use that term in the building of a grid for the final outcome of a knot. Of course these terms would most likely be more associated with the scientific and mathematical nomenclature. But I feel that this would be a grounded start for all of us to be on the same page so that it would become much easier to share amongst colleagues. Well just a thought and it may not be of any use, but just another idea to play with. I figure if we don't have to reinvent the wheel, the more time we can save.

Brian... 

[DaveRoot]

I will always use salt on food never sodium chloride

True, most of us say "salt" instead of "sodium chloride."  Yet "sodium chloride" is a useful term among certain groups of people (e.g. chemists).  In the same way, most knotters will probably continue to use traditional terms, but the Nodology terminology will allow us to use more precise and unambiguous language when needed.

so as long as Nodologists see themselves in a similar way to other specialist groups eg scientists this stands a chance but only amongst the cognoscenti of  consenting adults.

Quite true, although there's always the possibility that a wider audience might begin using the new terminology if it's useful.  But as Derek stated in the original post, "For the sake of starting somewhere, I am going to propose that the audience is those who frequent the Knot Theory and Computing (KT&C) board of the IGKT Forum - i.e. English speaking with an interest focussed on knot form and function."

I reckon 6 weeks to 3 months and the next novelty will surface but we can all enjoy watching while it lasts.

Maybe so, but we'll never know if we don't make the effort!  In the topic called "Knotting Nomenclature -- How/What are we talking about?!" (http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1616.0), a number of people have acknowledged the deficiencies in the traditional knotting terminology.  Everyone is free to contribute to a new lexicon which they can be comfortable using.

I have been looking over The Braider & some of the other publications by AG Schakkee and John Turner. Yes, a bit on the complicated side for the average person. But I do like how the authors proceed in the publications in the actual design and mathematical processes, and the terms they use pretty much consistently throughout all of their publications. I am not quite sure if this would be a way to go, or not. But I think that using the terms they have used would be a great start. For example, to describe the term Turns, instead they use Half Cycle. I realize that they use that term in the building of a grid for the final outcome of a knot. Of course these terms would most likely be more associated with the scientific and mathematical nomenclature. But I feel that this would be a grounded start for all of us to be on the same page so that it would become much easier to share amongst colleagues. Well just a thought and it may not be of any use, but just another idea to play with. I figure if we don't have to reinvent the wheel, the more time we can save.

Great!  Where can we find their nomenclature in order to evaluate it?


Dave

[Wed]

Great!  Where can we find their nomenclature in order to evaluate it?

Mail the chap at this site.
http://jcturner.fortunecity.com/The Braide.htm

I recieved my copy yesterday.

[Knot Head]

I could probably post a PDF file that would be a little on the large size for download. High banders wont have to much of a problem downloading them, but dialup it would take a few days. Let me see what I can come up with for you all over the weekend here. I'll get back to you all on Monday.

Brian...

[DerekSmith]

I find this discussion fascinating - it must be what the developers of esperanto went through and I have a feeling that this will go the same way. Great idea but ignores the simple fact that language, no matter how imprecise or even bizaarre, develops at its own speed through common usage. I will always use salt on food never sodium chloride so as long as Nodologists see themselves in a similar way to other specialist groups eg scientists this stands a chance but only amongst the cognoscenti of  consenting adults. I reckon 6 weeks to 3 months and the next novelty will surface but we can all enjoy watching while it lasts.

Barry
 

Thanks for the vote of limited confidence; or was it a piece of well aimed psychology goading further action when the impetus naturally starts to tail off ?

Actually, if our past track record is anything to go by, your prediction will be correct.  But even if the project does hit a brick wall after all the 'low hanging fruit' have been picked, we will still have made a start and every action has its consequences.  It might be that it just sets people thinking and triggers a totally fresh approach in the future, it might be that the value and richness of the existing lexicon becomes to be appreciated more and is used with greater precision, or it might simply become a foundation that we go on to build into the language of our field (however, for that to be the case we probably need to entice a few 'academicals' (thank you Terry Pratchet for the word) into the process so the lexicon can find its way into our teaching establishments).

As for finding its way into 'dinner table parlance', I am sure that you appreciate that is not the intended usage, any more than we would expect chemical nomenclature to invade established usage terms such as 'table salt' or 'Acetone'.  However, the rigour of a scientific nomenclature in any field has been fundamental in allowing those fields to develop beyond layperson usage and thereby allowing the development of fundamental advances in those fields.

I have no idea where a structured lexicon will allow us to explore, but I am fairly confident that it will be into aspects of Nodology that would be beyond the scope of bends and bights and bitters.  After all, if it were not for a developing lexicon of atomic structure allowing us to conceive electron shells and band gap energies, then 'sand' would still be the stuff of the Sahara and you would not now be reading this post.

And if we fail, then at least along the way we will have brought a little entertainment to readers of the forum, and exercised our little grey cells along the way.

Derek

[DaveRoot]

Brian and Wed,

If you can post the terminology that The Braider folks use for the parts of a knot and the types of knots (bends, hitches, loops, etc.), then I'll compile a simple list which shows the traditional terms plus the proposed new terms so that we can all cast our votes (or propose different terms).  As we get a good consensus on new terms, we'll be advancing the new lexicon to find out how useful it will be.

Thanks!

Dave

[Wed]

Brian and Wed,

If you can post the terminology that The Braider folks use for the parts of a knot and the types of knots (bends, hitches, loops, etc.),

You ought not rely too much on my input, as I direly need to apply myself for elsethings at this time. But there is actually no reason not to acquire "The Braider". That goes for one and all, it's $3 and Dr Turner is a joy to deal with. It contains quite a bit for the fancy knotter regarding casa and gaucho coding. Mind you, I have merely glanced through half of the first volume so far.

Being a mathematician, Dr Turners input would probably be very interesting.

Only drawback is the shipping time. In my case it was sent dec 27 and arrived jan 27 ... (yes i said yesterday, yesterday, it was obviously not correct)

[Knot Head]

Brian and Wed,

If you can post the terminology that The Braider folks use for the parts of a knot and the types of knots (bends, hitches, loops, etc.), then I'll compile a simple list which shows the traditional terms plus the proposed new terms so that we can all cast our votes (or propose different terms).  As we get a good consensus on new terms, we'll be advancing the new lexicon to find out how useful it will be.

Thanks!

Dave

It would be very difficult to go through all that process like they have. But here's a sample of a little bit of material that I have been reading and getting to know.
Here's a sample of The Braider http://khww.net/thebraider/TheBraider1No1.zip 1.4 megs... Inside the zip file is a pdf file called No1.pdf

Let me know what you think.
Brian...

[DerekSmith]

A friend of mine, Gillian, has been fighting for her life in hospital for the last 9 months.  Three days ago she sobbed that she did not want to die, then she slipped into a coma and we fear that she is close to loosing that fight as my DH and I spend most of our time by her bedside talking to her, in the hope that she can still hear us, so she will know her friends are by her.

Gillians plight reminds me yet again how short our tenure on life is, and that if we want to leave a mark to be remembered by, we had better get out there and start carving initials into the worlds 'tree trunk' pretty quickly.

So please excuse my lack of contribution  as I have a greater commitment at the moment.

Derek