Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Keeping Track of Ambiguity in your Conlang?

From:Roger Mills <romilly@...>
Date:Saturday, August 31, 2002, 3:41
Tom Wier wrote:

>Quoting bnathyuw <bnathyuw@...>: > >> --- Roberto Suarez Soto <ask4it@...> wrote: > On >> Aug/30/2002, Amanda Babcock wrote: >> > >> > >> > And there's also the homonyms that you can't >> > tell the difference >> > out of context: in spanish, "era" (somewhat archaic >> > form to call the >> > land outside a farm or country house) and "era" >> > (singular third or first >> > person of the imperfect past tense of "to be") are >> > exactly pronounced >> > the same, to my knowledge. >> > >> >> of course, english has the wonderful pairing 'cleave' >> and 'cleave'
Isn't the sense cleave = 'stick to' nowadays pretty much restricted to the KJV and formal marriage ceremony? A man shall cleave unto his wife........etc.
>> >> one means 'to cling to, be firmly attached to' >> the other means 'to split, divide' > >In my experience these 'two' words are in fact never >used in opposition to one another. People either use >one or the other, but not both. This would make it >like the difference between American 'to table' >(to remove from consideration) and British 'to table' >(to put into consideration) > >> ( another pairing i've seen mentioned is 'dust' >> meaning to rid of dust and 'dust' meaning to sprinkle >> with dust, but at least these come from the same root ) > >I do think this is used by everyone, although the first >meaning is probably the more common one. >
In my life, at least, 'to dust (sprinkle with....)' is mainly restricted to the kitchen-- "Dust the cutlets with flour......", Dust with powdered sugar" I can't imagine dusting something with real dust-----though given my housekeeping habits it could happen....


Wesley Parish <wes.parish@...>