Re: Polysemy

Quoting Benct Philip Jonsson <bpj@...>:

> At 16:26 16.11.2003, Ray Brown wrote:
> >  Would it be tolerable if, say, we
> >had BrScB* _dm_ = 'lord, master' and _dm_ =  'house',
> >disambiguated by "cements" so that, e.g.
> >dm't  /'tEmEti/ = your master
> >dm-t  /'tOmOtu/ = your house
> >
> >*This does _not_ mean that _dm_ will actually have either
> >of these meanings, not that _t_ will mean 'you, your' in the
> >final version of the language.
> >
> >Is this modest degree of polysemy tolerable?
>
> The problem is that most people would begin
> to think of the cement as part of the root.
Given the other unusual properties of BrScB's spelling system, I find it hard
to think that's much of a problem.

                                                                    Andreas