That's what Juliet said: "'Tis but thy name that is my enemy;/ Thou art thyself, though not a Montague./What's Montague? it is nor hand, nor foot,/Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part/ Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!/What's in a name? that which we call a rose/By any other name would smell as sweet;/So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call'd,/Retain that dear perfection which he owes/Without that title. Romeo, doff thy name,/And for that name which is no part of thee/Take all myself.
Of course, she is a legendary "star-crossed lover," so you really can't depend on the reliability of anything she says, can you?
2006-06-29 06:11:45
·
answer #1
·
answered by Tad Dubious 7
·
7⤊
3⤋
Yes - the smell of a rose is independant of what name we call it. This is an important thing to remember when learning science. It's impressive to know the correct name of a plant or animal, or some physical property.
But understanding how that plant affects the envirornment, how the animal fits in the food chain, or knowing the reason why something happens the way it does, is the heart of science.
2006-06-29 14:00:36
·
answer #2
·
answered by Polymath 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I believe it would. The smell can be the same as we close our eyes not knowing the newest name of the flower.
Would a bees sting still hurt if it were called a lady bug, of course. The name means nothing it is the reality of the objects true nature that makes it so great.
2006-06-29 13:08:24
·
answer #3
·
answered by WDubsW 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, it would smell the same.
If a rose had another name we would know no difference. We would have been brought up the believe that a rose was called a nother name.
Who desides what to call what? what if i wanted to call a bird a fish?
2006-06-29 13:23:33
·
answer #4
·
answered by dido45dido 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Call a rose by any other name and it will still smell the same as that which we currently call a rose. Though I personally don't care for roses...
2006-06-29 13:09:38
·
answer #5
·
answered by Erin 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I do think it would smell as sweet no matter what you'd call a rose...much like "poop" would continue to smell just as foul even if you called it a rose.
2006-06-29 13:16:50
·
answer #6
·
answered by GILeibnitz 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Perhaps, but would we take notice as much?
I definitely think language has an effect on perception. If we began calling roses "thorned cane pimples," I imagine many of us would be that much less tempted to get our noses close enough to enjoy its tempting aroma.
2006-06-29 13:09:19
·
answer #7
·
answered by magistra_linguae 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Given that the plant is the same, changing the nomenclature will not effect the quality of the plant's aromatic signature.
2006-06-29 13:27:36
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
no, a little known fact is that flowers actually aquire 50% of their smell from the names given them.
2006-06-29 13:09:53
·
answer #9
·
answered by Dan 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
roses really smell like bo, bo, bo, bo, Yea
Andre 3000 didnt lie when he said that, roses stank
2006-06-29 13:27:45
·
answer #10
·
answered by Derrick 3
·
0⤊
0⤋