46. Homonym clashes

Because of sameness of shape there is a danger of homonymy conflict in the sense that two homonyms with totally different meanings may both make sense in the same utterance.

However, there are at least two differences: the difference in the word-class and the difference in spelling. Besides the difference in the overall context. Many homonyms exist only in theory since in practice there is no risk of any confusion, because they belong to different word classes. Consider the pairs of homonyms “knows” as n. and “knows” as a v. Apart from difference in meaning it’s difficult to imagine a context in which both memories of a given pair might occur interchangeability. They are uncomplimentary distribution in the sense that the one occurs the other, cannot occur however it might me specified that sinse the member of each pair differ in word class, the choice of one homonym instead of the other is determined mainly by the rule of syntax, not those of the lexicology. Similar types of restriction also applies to pairs of homonyms which are identically in spelling and pronunciation. Ex.: grave (adj, n.) stick (n., v.)

47. Types of homonyms

“Lead” (metal) and “lead” (dog’s lead) are spelt the same but pronounced differently. And “right”, “rite”, “write” spelt differently but pronounced the same. For the first case “lead – lead” the term homograph should be used (same spelling). For the second – homophone is the appropriate term.

48. Hyponymy

The relation of hyponymy serves to structure large parts of vocabulary. It is perhaps an all-pervasive structuring relation. It is almost evident in the taxonomies of natural phenomena.

Plant

fungus tree

mushroom toadstool conifer deciduous

pine

The term at the top of the hierarchy (plant) has the most general meaning, and it can be used to refer to all the objects denoted by tern below it. It is a ‘superordinate’ term. Those immediately below it, the directly “subordinate” terms (fungus, lichen, shrub, etc.), are its “hyponyms”. So, tree is a hyponym of plant, but is in turn a superordinate to its hyponyms conifer, deciduous; conifer is in turn a superordinate to its hyponyms pine, spruce, etc. Reading up from the bottom of the hierarchy, pine is a “kind of” conifer, which is a kind of tree, which is a kind of plant.

Hyponymy relations are not restricted to the classification system of natural phenomena. They are found also, for example, in taxonomies of natural human artifacts.

49. Meronymy

The “part of” relation can similarly be represented by a hierarchy of superordinate and subordinate (meronym) terms.

The superordinate term is not merely a more general way of talking about its meronyms, as in the hyponymy relation, though there is a sense in which the use of a superordinate term includes reference to the meronyms. Flower refer to the entity in its totality, including its petals, stamen, stalk, and so on; but these are not more specific kinds of flower, but rather different parts of it that together make up the whole.

Such part / whole relations exist between many words in the vocabulary. Most human artifacts are made up of parts, which we usually want to label with their own terms (A knife consists of a blade and a handle).