Heteronyms
eep...@williams.edu
that will feature the incredible word types identified as heteronyms: words
that are spelled the same but whose meaning changes with a shift in inflection.
Some examples: tear, sewer, palsy, appropriate.
If there is anyone who has an interest in these wonderful stretches of the
language, please share. All who contribute will be credited.
Thanks for your interest.
Evan Kirshenbaum
>During the past three years I have been in the process of assembling
>a book that will feature the incredible word types identified as
>heteronyms: words that are spelled the same but whose meaning changes
>with a shift in inflection. Some examples: tear, sewer, palsy,
>appropriate.
Well, if you've been working on it for three years, you've doubtless
come across any that we'll come up with here. But on the off-chance,
you might have missed some...
[Actually, I'm not quite sure what you mean by "a shift in
inflection". For me "sewer" is pronounced either /'su R/ or /'soU R/,
with the accent staying on the first syllable. I assume you mean any
shift in pronunciation.]
There is of course the series of noun/verb pairs: "record", "affect",
etc.
"Polish" is either an adjective relating to Poland or something you do
to (or use on) your furniture. (Even in lower case, there's a
distinction. A "polish" is like a hot dog, but with a polish
sausage.)
I think Isaac Asimov is responsible for pointing out "unionized".
"Defense" is increasingly used as a verb (with the accent on the
second syllable) meaning "to defend against".
"tier"
My dictionary says that "comport" /'kAm port/ is a type of serving
dish.
In my dialect (Chicago), "root" is /rUt/ for the things at the bottom
of plants, and /rut/ when you cheer for a team. (Actually, the first
is variable, but the verb is always /rut/.)
Similarly, "route" as a verb is /rAUt/, but as a noun ("Route 72") is
/rut/.
That's all that springs to mind off the top of my head.
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories | K: Natives. They may be hostile
3500 Deer Creek Road, Building 26U | C: Well, we're all a little hostile
Palo Alto, CA 94304 | now and then. Some of us are able
| to sublimate. Others just can't
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com | adjust.
(415)857-7572
Peter Alan Dutton
Consider how changing the inflection of the word "have" changes the meaning
of the following sentences...
"What do you have to do tomorrow?" ["have" pronounced like "hav"] - in
other words, "what is there that you can do tomorrow?"
"What do you have to do tomorrow?" ["have" pronounced like "HAFF" and
emphasized] - in other words, "what is there that you must do
tomorrow?"
Or is this shift in pronunciation just a local (Northeast US) convention?
Peter!
Wes Groleau X7574
Peter! This shift in pronuciation indicates a diference of EMPHASIS not a
difference of meaning (although the meanings are indeed different). The
two meanings are generally pronounced the same, except that I supposed you
could argue that the emphasis itself is a component of the pronunciation.
Anyway, the second meaning is more often emphasized ever so slightly more than
the first.
to epp...@williams.edu :
You may be too late. My father sent me a newspaper article, with hints of a
book, that contained fifty to a hundred of these "heteronyms" I don't think
article called them heteronyms, though. If you're interested, send me your
snail address and I'll try to find the article for you.
Wes Groleau gro...@e7sa.epi.syr.ge.com
(If the header has a different address, use this one)
Peter Alan Dutton
>In article <1t6qau$8...@bigboote.WPI.EDU> padu...@bigwpi.WPI.EDU (Peter Alan Dutton) writes:
>>Consider how changing the inflection of the word "have" changes the meaning
>>of the following sentences...
>>
>>"What do you have to do tomorrow?" ["have" pronounced like "hav"] - in
>> other words, "what is there that you can do tomorrow?"
>>
>>"What do you have to do tomorrow?" ["have" pronounced like "HAFF" and
>> emphasized] - in other words, "what is there that you must do
>> tomorrow?"
>>
>>Or is this shift in pronunciation just a local (Northeast US) convention?
>Peter! This shift in pronuciation indicates a diference of EMPHASIS not a
>difference of meaning (although the meanings are indeed different). The
>two meanings are generally pronounced the same, except that I supposed you
>could argue that the emphasis itself is a component of the pronunciation.
>Anyway, the second meaning is more often emphasized ever so slightly more than
>the first.
I have always pronounced the word differently depending on the
meaning (with a "v" sound as in "value" or with a "f" sound as
in "half". Actually, the second "have" meaning sounds just like
"half", and it's one of those words that is difficult to say
without emphasizing it, but one usually has to over-emphasize it
in the above example so that the meaning is made clear).
You see, if I ask someone "What do you _hav_ to do tomorrow?" he
might answer "Well, I _hav_ a problem set to do and I _hav_ a party
to go to later in the evening".
But if I then asked "What do you _HAFF_ to do tomorrow?" (and there
is a slight emphasis, but also a distinct change in pronunciation),
then he might answer "Well, the problem set doesn't _HAFF_ to be done
until Friday, and I don't really _HAFF_ to go out partying tonight"
Or another example: Even though the word order is different in the
following sentences
"I _hav_ a computer to use"
"I _hav_ used a computer"
"I _HAFF_ to use a computer"
the "have" is pronounced slightly differently in the
last sentence than in the first two because the third "have" is a
slightly different meaning of the word.
I don't know whether or not I'm agreeing with you - I just wanted to
make myself more clear. Are there areas where there is no distinction
in pronunciation? I had always assumed that's the way it is everywhere.
Peter!
Yvonne Edwards
prayer
_--_|\ Yvonne Edwards email: yvo...@hydra.maths.unsw.edu.au
/ \ Y.Ed...@unsw.edu.au
\_.--._* <---------------- UNSW Sydney Australia
___________v__________________________________________________________________