<p>I'd consider 分合 a single noun. The only reason you might not consider it a word is simply that it's not very frequently used, otherwise 分合 has the exact same composition as 因果、功过、彼此 etc, which are unambiguously words.</p>
<p>Since you start with 分分合合, you may also want to know that most AABB words are also valid in AB form.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-08-07T22:07:56.290Z
Can't think of an equivalent word in English made of two antithetical words like this. Maybe 'love-hate' in "a love-hate relationship" 爱恨交加的关系
Pedroski
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-08-08T01:47:40.293Z
@Pedroski Well it's just easier to make this kind of compound words in Chinese. But tbf, I don't see why you we can't consider them as phrases consist of two atomic words. At this point it's just about the definition of a "word" in Chinese, which really has no bearing on actually understanding the sentence.
EEQ
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-08-08T02:15:37.860Z
You are right! Without all the restrictions imposed on European languages by ideas from PIE, Chinese can do more or less what it likes! That's very interesting for me!
Pedroski
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-08-09T08:46:48.970Z
@Pedroski Such compound of antithetical words really conveys a sense of **To be or not to be**, which contains both constrast ideas and better illustrate the dialetical property of things (事物的辨证性质）and the choices we can make（取舍）/the dilemma we ponder(推敲）(Indeed, two more antithetical words here)
sicheng mao
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-08-09T11:56:15.747Z
哎呦！I never would have thought of Hamlet in this regard! But 生存还是毁灭 is not, I believe,  a word!
Pedroski
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-08-10T08:14:03.137Z
@Pedroski it's the sense of a choice. Not necessary a word.
sicheng mao
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-08-07T02:57:41.740Z
2022-08-07T02:57:41.740Z
EEQ
<p>&quot;分合&quot; means &quot;分開與合并&quot; (splitting or integrating/separation and merging). I consider the word a noun, which is consisted of two characters(字). The characters must be stayed together to offer the complete meaning. 分合 is often used in military terminology, as well as a strategy for composition.</p>
<p>I consider &quot;分分合合&quot; an idiom(惯用语/成语) that describes the phenomenon of repeat separations and re-merging of two objects/persons.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-08-07T04:12:40.620Z
2022-08-08T00:55:35.853Z
2022-08-08T00:55:35.853Z
r13
<p>分分合合 gets translated as, for example &quot;fissions and fusions&quot; or &quot;break-ups and reconciliations&quot;.</p>
<p>在这些历史的分分合合之中，
Amid this flurry of historical fissions and fusions</p>
<p>他们在一起度过了分分合合动荡不定的五六年。
They had been together for five or six turbulent years of break-ups and reconciliations.</p>
<p>The context is this:</p>
<p>周韧说“这种形容词和动词兼类的设置也就破坏了定义动词和形容词的正面标准。”</p>
<p>实际操作起来也很困难，《现代汉语词典》标注词性，最难缠的就使这类词的<strong>分合</strong>。</p>
<p>Do you consider 分合 to be a noun, a single word here?</p>

<meaning-in-context><word>
Is 分合 a word in 最难缠的就使这类词的分合?
# Is 分合 a word in 最难缠的就使这类词的分合?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2022-08-07)

分分合合 gets translated as, for example "fissions and fusions" or "break-ups and reconciliations".

在这些历史的分分合合之中，
Amid this flurry of historical fissions and fusions

他们在一起度过了分分合合动荡不定的五六年。
They had been together for five or six turbulent years of break-ups and reconciliations.

The context is this:

周韧说“这种形容词和动词兼类的设置也就破坏了定义动词和形容词的正面标准。”

实际操作起来也很困难，《现代汉语词典》标注词性，最难缠的就使这类词的**分合**。

Do you consider 分合 to be a noun, a single word here?

**Tags:** meaning-in-context, word


---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2022-08-07. Score: 2

I'd consider 分合 a single noun. The only reason you might not consider it a word is simply that it's not very frequently used, otherwise 分合 has the exact same composition as 因果、功过、彼此 etc, which are unambiguously words.

Since you start with 分分合合, you may also want to know that most AABB words are also valid in AB form.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Can't think of an equivalent word in English made of two antithetical words like this. Maybe 'love-hate' in "a love-hate relationship" 爱恨交加的关系  
> **username_1**: @username_0 Well it's just easier to make this kind of compound words in Chinese. But tbf, I don't see why you we can't consider them as phrases consist of two atomic words. At this point it's just about the definition of a "word" in Chinese, which really has no bearing on actually understanding the sentence.  
> **username_0**: You are right! Without all the restrictions imposed on European languages by ideas from PIE, Chinese can do more or less what it likes! That's very interesting for me!  
> **username_2**: @username_0 Such compound of antithetical words really conveys a sense of **To be or not to be**, which contains both constrast ideas and better illustrate the dialetical property of things (事物的辨证性质）and the choices we can make（取舍）/the dilemma we ponder(推敲）(Indeed, two more antithetical words here)  
> **username_0**: 哎呦！I never would have thought of Hamlet in this regard! But 生存还是毁灭 is not, I believe,  a word!  
> **username_2**: @username_0 it's the sense of a choice. Not necessary a word.  

---

### Answer by username_3 on 2022-08-07. Score: 1

"分合" means "分開與合并" (splitting or integrating/separation and merging). I consider the word a noun, which is consisted of two characters(字). The characters must be stayed together to offer the complete meaning. 分合 is often used in military terminology, as well as a strategy for composition.

I consider "分分合合" an idiom(惯用语/成语) that describes the phenomenon of repeat separations and re-merging of two objects/persons.


---

