In passing to more complex combinations of relative terms and the extensional relations they denote, as we began to do in Comments 10.6 and 10.7, I used words like composite and composition along with the usual composition sign to describe their structures.  That amounts to loose speech on my part and I may have to reform my Sprach at a later stage of the Spiel.

At any rate, we need to distinguish the more complex forms of combination encountered here from the ordinary composition of dyadic relations symbolized by whose result must stay within the class of dyadic relations.  We can draw that distinction by means of an adjective or a substantive term — so long as we see it we can parse the words later.

Resources

• Peirce’s 1870 “Logic of Relatives” • Overview
• Peirce’s 1870 Logic of Relatives • Part 1 • Part 2 • Part 3 • References

cc: Conceptual Graphs • Cybernetics • Ontolog Forum
cc: Peirce (1) (2) • Structural Modeling • Systems Science
cc: FB | Peirce Matters • Laws of Form