Jeffrey Brown wrote: > Do you have homonyms in your conlang? > I noticed that I was avoiding creating a new word that was homonymous to an > existing one in my conlang. > Then, I realized: Natlangs have homonyms. Why not conlangs? So, I stopped > avoiding them. > Except for auxlangs, I cannot see any reason to avoid homonyms, especially > as it may increase the naturalism of an artlang. > What do all y'all think? I do have a few. In Tirëlat the most notable pair is "łašpa" (n) "scimitar" vs. "łašpa" (v) "to squeeze". I also noticed when translating "Barracuda" that "łekinukaj" (if it's not enough) can be interpreted as "let's not be opaque". łeki-nu-ka-j enough-COND-NEG-IRR łe-kinu-ka-j 1PL-opaque-NEG-IRR But in speech, these are distinguished by the initial stress on "łeki" vs. the lack of stress on the 1st person plural prefix "łe". This suggests that stress in Tirëlat may be phonemic after all. Jarda has "zur" (n) "flower" vs. "zur" (v) "to connect", "śtên" (n) "history" vs. "śtên" (v) "to retrieve". Besides these, there are a bunch of near-homonyms which become homophonous when voiced and voiceless consonants at the end of a word lose their distinction (before certain suffixes or at the end of a phrase before a pause).