2.2 Association. A second method of reducing the query set is by taking advantage of the association of different spellings as possible derivations one of the other. As a first illustration of this method consider data from a research problem in Wales. An association is like taking a broader net and assigning a standard to the various related names. Hence, this process also reduces multiple queries on multiple names to one.
| \\ Name Formative \\ | GN1 Rheese | GN2 Reece | GN3 Rice | GN4 Ryce |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| particle1 ap | Preese | Preece | Price | Pryce |
| particle2 ab | Breese | Breece | Brice | Bryce |
The association is preliminary to a more general or a universal standard. Names in different places or cultures become part of a larger group. Data in a second example of association come from the names of localities. In this case the same name may have regional variants that may each be standard in its own context.
| \\ State Type \\ | New York | Pennsylvania | Maryland | Virginia | North Carolina |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| County | Allegheny | Allegany | Allegany | Alleghany | Alleghany |
| Mountain Range | Allegheny | Alleghany | Alleghany | Alleghany | Alleghany |
| River | Allegheny | Allegheny | | | |
In the third example of association the same name is found in multiple cultures having language and various dialect variants.
| \\ State Type \\ | Germany | Pennsylvania | Iowa | Wisconsin | Georgia |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| City | Altona | Altoona | Altoona | Altoona | Alletoona |
The last example of association also comes from the names of localities. It is like the first in that the original name was derived from a Native American language.
| \\ State Type \\ | Utah | Wyoming |
|---|---|---|
| County | Uintah | Uinta |
| Mountain Range | Uinta | Uinta |
| River | Uinta | |
