--Dbabbage 20:24, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC) Added Alzheimer's Disease example.
I checked the full OED today. The sense we use for the eponyms category, a generic word which includes a proper name, has been added as meaning 1c in the "Addittions" book in 1993. The earliest cite they have dates back to 1885 for this sense. — Hippietrail 03:37, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
I've removed the reference to "archetype" in the usage notes; this sort of analogy tends to confuse rather than clarify the issue. My personal observation has been that "archetype" tends to be more often used "correctly" than "eponym".
I know that calling something an correct usage is tantamount to prescriptivism, but it still needs to be pointed out that an evolved usage can lead to confusion even if it has become very common, and is considered now correct. Eclecticology 19:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
Thing named for another thing.
If Rheinstadt is named after the Rhein river then is the eponym Rein or Reinstadt? --Gbleem 15:32, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
- The Rheinstadt would be eponymous (an eponym) of Rhein. If a foo inherits it's name from fu, foo is the eponym. - TheDaveRoss 01:43, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
- Commonly you would refer to Rheinstadt as the eponym. To go to the narrower, more prescribed form, you wouldn't be able to apply the term at all, since it is not derived from a person. An example that does work would be: "Fellini is the eponym of felliniesque". But this narrow definition is rare, and it seems to be primarily used in the form a is the eponym of/for b. Sadly, this is much clearer from the dictionary.com definitions for eponym and eponymous than it is here. Jun-Dai 01:53, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
As far as I can tell, the only use this word has anymore is for music reviewers to talk about bands releasing eponymous albums. Jun-Dai 22:08, 27 October 2006 (UTC)