Originally posted by annpeeples
Interesting, TJ, I did just that.The definition for pizza was much more generic...
The M-W dictionary is not always complete, and is not the definitive authority on subjects. Rather, the dictionary merely gives meaning to words for people who don't know what a word means. It's a reference book, but not nearly complete. The meaning of music for example is:
Main Entry: mu·sic
Usage: often attributive
Etymology: Middle English musik, from Anglo-French musike, from Latin musica, from Greek mousikç any art presided over by the Muses, especially music, from feminine of mousikos of the Muses, from Mousa Muse
Date: 13th century
1 a: the science or art of ordering tones or sounds in succession, in combination, and in temporal relationships to produce a composition having unity and continuity b: vocal, instrumental, or mechanical sounds having rhythm, melody, or harmony
2 a: an agreeable sound : euphony <her voice was music to my ears> b: musical quality <the music of verse>
3: a musical accompaniment <a play set to music>
4: the score of a musical composition set down on paper
5: a distinctive type or category of music <there is a music for everybody — Eric Salzman>
While this entry provides a few meanings for the word, the entry is incomplete and not entirely correct. For example, M-W includes: "to produce a composition having unity and continuity" in its primary meaning. Music theorists would easily dispute this. M-W uses the phrase so as to separate musical sounds from non-musical sounds (such as noise). But as any music theorists can tell you, sounds needn't specifically have unity nor continuity to be music. However, for a disctionary, this phrase is necessary since there is no short and easy way to leave this phrase out but still distinguish the primary meaning of "music" from "noise."
So, anyway, my point is, when one uses the dictionary to provide any sort of conclusion to prove the definition of a subject, one will ultimately come up short.