Print

Print


steve rice skrev:
> It's been kind of quiet lately, so I thought I'd bring up a topic that appears to be a no-brainer. The usual cry is for "one word, one concept," but the dividing lines are fuzzy. Besides, without some overlap, the result will be an oversized lexicon filled with trivial distinctions.
>
> On the other hand, probably every language has homophones, and they're usually benign. We recently had the question of whether to distinguish between "foot" as a body part and as a measurement. In Inlis, I generally try to avoid homophones, but since it's more aural than visual anyway, I'm wondering how major the problem really is. I've pretty much decided to change flawa from "flower" to "flour," leaving blosam for the plant. (I could use mil for "flour" and itin or fud for the other sense of "meal.")
>
> How confusing are homonyms? What if flawa meant both "flour" and "flower"? We distinguish the two in spoken English easily enough, though perhaps it's more troublesome for non-natives.
>
>   
Hmm, one could have a language where foot as bodypart is something like 
ped, pied. And the foot of a mountain or a table or a chair could be 
"pedoide". An artificial flower would then be a "floroide"! Like an 
artificial man is an "androide"!

Kjell R