A whole of primary predicates may solely be called "a
(predicate) catena" if it has been demonstrated or postulated
that it comprises a predicate which is neutral between a
predicate or set of predicates which are positive and a
predicate or set of predicates which are negative. It depends on
the language spoken, among others, how easily or plausibly this
can be done. If the ordinary variant of that language has
already an expression for the positivity and for the negativity,
and ideally also one for the neutrality, the tripartite structure
of the complex system of secondary predicates can often be immediately
ascertained. Such is particularly obvious for triads like the one of
electropositivity, electroneutrality and electronegativity.
But also happiness, cheapness, quickness, honor(-ing), more
and acid with their concatenate, limiting and
opposite, predicates may be considered examples of more or less
explicit triads. In the case of all these and similar catenas
the two monopolarities have their own names in ordinary language,
and are recognized, too, as opposites in this language (even when
the neutrality is taken notice of, and the opposites are not
alone). The expression for the one monopolarity is thus often
formed by adding a prefix like un- or dis- to the term for
the other; unhappiness and dishonor are but two examples.
In the event that the neutrality of the catena in question does not have
its own name (like equal or neutral in the sense of
not electrically charged or neither acid nor basic) it is
either disregarded or described in a rather circumlocutory
and/or inadequate way (usually in terms of (neutrally) neither
.. nor ..).
The phenomenon that there is a compact atomic expression for
a predicate in ordinary or colloquial language one time, and
that one needs to have recourse to circumlocutions another time,
is of course a subjective, reflectional criterion of subdivision
for predicates or predicate catenas. Whatever the reasons may
have been, or still are, it is the positivity and the negativity
which are or have been judged of enough weight to deserve a
simple name in the case of explicit triads, and not the neutrality
and bipolarity, for instance. The reason to speak of "triad"
even if no neutrality is recognized in addition to the two
monopolarities is that this recognition of neutrality is a
prerequisite for speaking of a catena at all; the duad of two
'inseparably connected' predicates just is not a catena per se.
Insofar as the language which is our present means of communication does
not have a general expression for explicit triads or their predicates,
we will call these catenas after their positivity. Conversely,
the positivity of an explicit triad is the predicate after which
it is called. Thus electropositivity is the positivity of the
electropositivity catena; happiness the positivity of the happiness
catena; more or moreness the positivity of the moreness
catena; and so on. Unless there are nonlinguistic, systematic
reasons not to do so, we shall conceive of predicates denoted by
terms prefixed with un-, dis- or similar prefixes as
negativities. Hence, unhappiness, dishonor, inelasticity, and so
on, 'are' negativities.
Love is the positivity of the love catena of which hate is
the negativity. Should one believe that hate is the positivity,
then love is the negativity of the hate catena. Since explicit
triads are called after their positivities, they may also be
referred to as "positivity catenas".