Talk:Homonym
From Academic Kids
| Contents |
Debate over the correct name
The debate over the correct name: Homonyms vs Homophones: http://www.go2net.com/useless/useless/homonym.html -- Ellmist Monday, November 25th, 2002
The discussion is not pointless at all. And the definitions as of homonymes, -phones, and -graphes as they are now seem obscure and unreasonable to me. I suggest the following classification:
Homonymes: Words with different meaning but identical in writing or pronunciation;
Homophones: Words which are pronounced the same;
Homographs: Words which are written the same.
"know" and "now"
Should we really have "know" and "now" on this list? They aren't pronounced the same way anyway. In my article at Misspelling I have them distinguished in a section for pairs of words that are clearly pronounced differently yet among which one is often written for the other, i.e. "through" and "thorough" (so we can get people to stop writing "He did a very through job") or "corps" and "corpse". Should we move them from this list? 12.240.227.239 02:34, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Where should I factor in the following observation?
I've seen a number of instances where non-native speakers (particularly Hindi-speaking people) use the spelling "their" for "there". There may be similar observations of L1 influence (native tongue influence) coupling with confusion with homophones that are not homographs. Where do we mention these (if at all this is verifiable)? -- Sundar 06:26, Mar 18, 2005 (UTC)
This is hardly limited to non-native speakers. Correct spelling of homophones is something that has to be taught, and not everyone learns it well. One sees it distressingly often in people who have been speaking English all their lives. Csernica 19:58, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Reduced "to"
It is too dialectical. Nohat, it may be reduced when you speak naturally, but it sure isn't when I speak naturally. Csernica 19:55, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
