Definition of "relationship"?

[Shadowbird]

It seems for the most part that when people talk about "relationships", socially, it often refers to that of the romantic or sexual types (and if it's platonic, it's called "friendship"?) I'm just wondering is this true and if so then why? From my understanding, the word "relationship" (in terms of human interaction) generally has to do with the (interpersonal) connections or relations between people, and a "relation" is the way in which two or more people are connected (i.e. - what goes beyond just romance or sex).

 

Given that, "friendship" (fellowship, mateship, companionship, etc.) sounds to be a *type* of relationship, as though a simplified synonym for "platonic relationship", and there's also "kinship" (specific to familial kind of relationships), and "acquaintanceship" (for those less intimate than in friendship), so by such the shared sort of setup, why doesn't the romantic, and/or sexual types have their own "-ship" terms? Or do they..?

 

I understand context can be key, but it doesn't omit the fact that the word is popularly referred in romantic or sexual means. Consider, for instance, the phrase "in a relationship" -- does that exclusively have to do with romantic/sexual (because a person can literally be "in a relationship" as in with friends or family, since those are types of relationships, just as the romantic or sexual ones are only types)  Another example, what of the whole "relationship status" component on social media websites? Those also seem to be exclusive to romantic and sexual types, not of others. Realistically, a person's "relationship status" can involve if they have friends or not, if they have family or not, as in addition to whether or not they have romantic or sexual interests or partners, so then why aren't those others included? Or else it should say something like "romantic relationship status".

 

Any thoughts on this entire word analysis?

[Snao Cone]

I swear I will provide an actual response, but upon reading the thread title this is the first thing that came to mind. 

 

 

I think we generically call romantic/sexual relationships "relationships" because we are culturally very uptight about being openly specific when it comes to romantic/sexual things. These relationships are like official status indicators, so we need to have the words to acknowledge them in daily life, but we don't like imposing on the intimate elements of it. If someone asks me if I'm in a relationship I can say I'm in many relationships - platonic, familial, professional, hostile, fictitious - but they don't want to know those. Either they're too lazy or too embarrassed to specify "committed sexual and/or romantic relationship within the cultural norms of monogamy and domestic integration".

[erichamion]

Yes, relationship has a very broad denotation. And yes, it very often carries a very specific connotation. That's just how some words work.

 

When you're supposed to have one big, special relationship that's more important than any others, the word "relationship" without qualifiers will generally be assumed as referring to that one.