Take the 2-minute tour ×
English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Is there a term for e.g. the lexical symbol "duck"? It is both a verb and a noun, in contemporary use having no apparent connection, and so would appear to be represent two words.

Then, is the a better term than 'lexical symbol' to describe any grouping of letters having some meaning? I just made up lexical symbol because it seemed convenient.

share|improve this question
    
Good question for the linguisticsSE. –  Kris Feb 19 '12 at 14:16
4  
On the contrary, I would myself appreciate a name for a word that can be only a single POS. Get the idea? –  Kris Feb 19 '12 at 14:19
    
@Kris, yes, your point will probably keep me awake tonight. –  ProfK Feb 19 '12 at 14:30
1  
Because words don't have letters. Words have sounds. Letters are only for writing, but illiterate people still have words. And even if it were true, it begs the question of "having some meaning". Meaning is not quantifiable like gasoline. –  John Lawler Feb 19 '12 at 17:42
1  
Kris would like a term for a word that can be only a single part of speech - unlike "like," "term," "word," "can," or "single." Hmmm... I try to pen a sentence / Free from homonyms / But when I count, it's just too wild / How many I've left in... (I'd like to know that term for "unhomophonic" as well) –  J.R. Feb 19 '12 at 22:50
show 3 more comments

4 Answers

At http://www.thefreedictionary.com/duck, both the AHDEL and Collins claim that there are four English words 'duck'. They distinguish them by right-superscripts (which device is restricted to such analyses, of course).

The one they both choose to label duck {superscript3} is obviously not related to the other three - this is a case of convergent evolution, from different sources.

Although words 1, 2 and 4 are obviously etymologically related to each other (word 4 in a punning way), they are still considered to have diverged sufficiently to be classed as three further isoformal words (same spelling and pronunciation) - homonyms (strict definition).

However, if we delve deeper, and look, for instance, at AHDEL's treatment of duck {superscript3}, we see that it lists two (closely related) senses (admittedly one existing only in the plural form and the other almost invariably in the singular) - ONE the material and TWO clothing (usually trousers) made from that material. These senses are classed as not being separate words. Different senses of the same word are known as polysemes. An obvious example: to play football, you need a football.

Sadly, I have not come across a consensus on whether polysemy is a term that is allowed to be applied to isoformal / homographic orthographic words of different word-classes (eg house (n) and house (v); round (preposition) and round (adj) etc).

Oh, and in answer to the second question - an orthographic word is 'a meaningful (within the parameters of the language being used) string of letters bounded by spaces'. The term lexeme covers 'families' of 'the same word' , so man = man & men; go = go, goes ...

Edwin Ashworth

share|improve this answer
add comment

Homophony - words sound the same but have different meanings Homography - words are written the same but have different meanings Polysemy - more than one sense to a word or sentence

"I'll not be the first president of the United States to lose the war" Is polysemic, has 2 meanings, even though there's no homophony of homography

"Fan" Homography - a ventilator or an admirer?

Sorry I can't give you and example of homophony, I only have exemples in Portuguese.

Whenever a signifier has more than one possible sense, it is polysemic (so it would apply to homophony and homography), but polysemy doesn't require homophony and homography to happen

share|improve this answer
add comment

I've come across the term "intercategorial polysemy" used in lexicography and cognitive linguistics for the form of polysemy where the same orthographic word (and with the same etymology - not a homonym) is used in different word-class usages.

Thus bank (your money) and bank (where you bank it) but not bank (a steep natural incline).

Or bank (a steep natural incline) and bank (to border or protect with a ridge or embankment) but not bank (where you put your money).

This would make lecture (n) and lecture (v) say intercategorial polysemes.

share|improve this answer
    
Did you forget that you already answered almost exactly this? –  Mitch Jan 8 '13 at 0:23
    
Intercategorial polysemy is a compound. Are you saying that wolf and werewolf don't warrant different entries in a dictionary? And it does look like it is the correct answer, after all. –  Edwin Ashworth Jan 8 '13 at 14:09
    
You have multiple much more distinct words in your first answer. Adding a modifier to one of them doesn't warrant a full separate entry. Unless of course you want to do the work to separate your other answer. Just move this to the 'polysemy' paragraph in your other answer. –  Mitch Jan 8 '13 at 15:49
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.