Hi Thane,

You have posed quite a profound question and the answer to same is probably dependant on the scale of the intervention required together with the period of time over which these small changes are made.

If a small localised problem exists e.g. a leaking roof, then one might simply take the view that any intervention that takes place should simply be classed as ongoing "maintainence". A new word for the list. Maintainence is attending to all of those routine little tasks that need to be done from time to time to help keep things ticking over. However, when an underlying problem is neglected then this will at some stage likely end up requiring an intervention that might well require elements of repair, replacement, prevention to arrest any future deterioration and ensure ongoing functionality and so should this not be viewed more as conservation rather than preservation.

I understand that the Japanese have over centuries routinely taken their buildings apart to repair and replace defective parts then reassemble the building thereby ensuring the perceived continued prescence and hence preservation of that building as part of the landscape. From a distance it probably appears to be the same building but closer inspection might reveal otherwise e.g. evidence of circular saw marks where previously a hewn surface might have been seen and so the intervention might be viewed locally more as conservation or maybe even restoration than preservation. The answer might quite literally depend upon your viewpoint.

So the list is now updated to include :-

Conservation, Preservation, Restoration, Refurbishment, Maintenance, Repair (Fix), Replacement, Delapidate, Demolish, Salvage, Reuse, Conversion (Adaptive Reuse), Change, Alter.

Please be my guest and introduce us to new words and arguments that might fit into this chain of thought.

Regards

Ken Hume