This is a statement .
The above is almost correct, but what about the question mark at the end begging an answer, It means that the name of things does not matter, only what they are. Comes from Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet
Actually Juliet says "That which we call a rose by any other word would smell as sweet." She (Juliet is speaking, not Shakespeare) means that someone's name doesn't matter; that they could have another name but their personality is still the same. If a rose has a different name, it will smell the same.
The meaning of this is that the name of the rose isn't important to the essence of the rose. If you called a rose, for instance, a chair, it doesn't mean that it becomes less soft, less sweet-smelling.
Juliet is saying this to Romeo, highlighting the unimportance of a name in the essence of a thing (since it's their names that are keeping them apart).
---
Seeing as Shakespeare was an Elisabethan and in his jokes and innuendos, definitely a child of his times, this quote also has a double meaning. Which rose is Shakespeare talking about? The flower in the yard or the rose that needs be stemmed? Call that rose by its real name and you know why Elisabethans were constantly roaring with laughter at Shakespearean plays.
It's basically saying that a rose will smell just as sweet, even if it wasn't called a rose. It could be called by any word and it will still obtain the same characteristics. "Rose" is just the title given to it. Juliet compares this to Romeo because he would be the same person even if weren't a Montague. Montague is just a title given, not anything significant.
From Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, 1594. Here is part of the original text:- Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!
What's in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;
I think you mean "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet." - William Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet.
A rose by any other name is still a rose is a well known quote. This quote is a metaphor that's means now matter what something beautiful is called, it will always be beautiful.
The smell of a flower has nothing to do with its name. A rose would smell the same no matter what it was called.
"That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet" are words spoken by Juliet in William Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet.
"That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet" are words spoken by Juliet in William Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet.
Yes. It is in Romeo and Juliet: "What's in a name? that which we call a rose By any other name would smell as sweet."
Juliet uses an analogy when she says, "a rose by any other name would smell as sweet" (2.2.43-44); her point is that Romeo's surname,"Montague," shouldn't matter. If a rose were called a "cabbage," it would still smell sweet; and even though Romeo's name is the name of her family enemy, he's still wonderful.
Whats in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet? (act 2, scene 2, 46-47) Wisely and slow. They stumble that run fast. (act 2, scene 3, 102-103)
The full quotation is "What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other word would smell as sweet." Juliet says this in the Balcony Scene of Romeo and Juliet. What she is getting at is that even if you called a rose a scranjedip, it would still look and smell just as pretty. What you call things doesn't change what they are--it's just another name for the same thing. The reason she is pondering this is made clear in the next line "So Romeo would, were he not Romeo called, retain that dear perfection which he owes without that title." Unscrambled a little, this comes out as "If Romeo were not called Romeo, he would still retain that dear perfection he owns without that name." Juliet is working through the problem that she loves Romeo but has been told that all the Montagues are her enemy. She says that if Romeo were called Bob Smith, he'd still be just as perfect, the same way as the rose would smell sweet even if you called it a scranjedip.
"That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet" are words spoken by Juliet in William Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet.
In my opinion, that which we call arose by any other name would smell as sweet.
This quote is from William Shakespeare's play "Romeo and Juliet." It is spoken by Juliet in a famous passage where she argues that a name is an artificial and irrelevant label, and that the essence of a person or thing is more important than their name.
What would be the point of having it otherwise? However, as you know, "that which we call a rose, by any other word would smell as sweet."
"What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other word would smell as sweet."
Juliet is basically talking about how names mean nothing in a person. She says "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet" meaning that Romeo would still be as sweet if or if he wasn't a montegue. (since their families are enemies)
And that which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet, yes.
Yes. It is in Romeo and Juliet: "What's in a name? that which we call a rose By any other name would smell as sweet."
Juliet says "What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet" in Act 2, Scene 2 of William Shakespeare's play "Romeo and Juliet." She is expressing her belief that a person's identity is not defined by their name.
Juliet uses an analogy when she says, "a rose by any other name would smell as sweet" (2.2.43-44); her point is that Romeo's surname,"Montague," shouldn't matter. If a rose were called a "cabbage," it would still smell sweet; and even though Romeo's name is the name of her family enemy, he's still wonderful.
This is most likely an elongated paraphrase of Juliet's statement, "What's in a name? That which we call a rose/ By any other name would smell as sweet;" If so, then Shakespeare would have been the first to coin it.
This is most likely an elongated paraphrase of Juliet's statement, "What's in a name? That which we call a rose/ By any other name would smell as sweet;" If so, then Shakespeare would have been the first to coin it.