On: Mars has a layer of molten rock inside

[tomrod]

Quake is sufficient, no need to apply designations.

[adolph → tomrod]

Many things may quake, friends.

[tomrod → adolph]

Indeed. Such as planets, love handles during aerobics, and Jello.

[NooneAtAll3 → tomrod]

...or Quake 2

or even 3

[dekhn → tomrod]

and bowels.

[ribosometronome → adolph]

Yes... and? Do you think that's problematic here? Why?

Language is pretty robust and we're able to deduce a ton of meaning from context. The term by itself is already used to refer to earthquakes. For all the other things that quake, we don't need to prefix them with the quaking entity to understand the meaning. You aren't going to say that someone was humanquaking in their boots so that people understand that the person wasn't actually experiencing anything on the Richter scale. Similarly, if I mention a quake on Mars, it's pretty apparent I'm not referring to Mars trembling in fear.

[adolph → ribosometronome]

Yes, context can provide what an abstract term cannot.

As a suggestion, using the term "seismic" to refer to subsurface vibrations would be more specific than "quake."

[tomrod → ribosometronome]

Aye, kenning is a well understood linguistic principle, hence why quake is sufficient in English.