Homographs, from a lexicographer's POV

[Wendalyn Nichols]

What Lesa says is almost right: "homonym" is indeed an umbrella term (a
hypernym, if you will); but "homographs" are simply words that are spelled
the same whether they sound the same or not, and "homophones" sound the
same whether they are spelled the same or not.

A list of words that have the same spelling but different pronunciations
would still be a list of homographs; just be aware that word X doesn't have
to have a different pronunciation from word Y to qualify as a homograph of
word Y.

To illustrate what I mean, let's look at how homographs work in
dictionaries. Native-speaker dictionaries tend to nest all the parts of
speech that share a common etymological derivation under the main entry
(headword)--thus, the headword form at the first entry for "bow" /bau/ in
the Random House Unabridged Dictionary is the intransitive verb ('bend the
knee or body'), with the transitive verb and noun nested at that entry.

The second entry for "bow" is pronounced /bou/; it has both a different
pronunciation and a slightly different etymology, two typical reasons to
make a new entry instead of nesting these meanings under the first entry.
Note that difference in meaning is not a criterion for making a new
headword: this entry covers everything from the bow of an arrow to a bow on
a gift to a violin bow.

Bow 1 and bow 2 are homographs. They are not homophones.

There is a third entry for "bow," however--pronounced /bau/ (the bow of a
ship)--and it is also separated out because its etymology is different. Bow
3 is a homograph of both bow 1 and bow 2, but it is only a homophone of bow
1. Bow 3 and bow 1 are BOTH homographs AND homophones.

In some native-speaker dictionaries and nearly all ESL dictionaries, part
of speech is also a qualifying criterion for main entry status, and thus
there could be many more than three homographs of "bow." ESL dictionaries
don't show etymologies, so they would put all the nouns in one entry, all
the verbs in another, etc., unless the pronunciation is different. So an
important point to note is that there is some flexibility as to what one
chooses to call a homograph, depending on the style guide of the dictionary.



At 07:52 AM 1/30/03 -0600, you wrote:
>Homonyms! Homonym is like metaphor.  Metaphor, as a cover term, includes
>metaphor and simile. Homonyn covers homographs (written the same, but  sound
>different) and homophones (sound the same). Some people, I think, use homonym
>to refer to homographs only???
>I've come across somewhat of the same situation with the words jargon, argot
>and slang.  Is there really a lot of confusion or is the confusion regional?
>
>Grant Barrett wrote:
>
> > Début du message réexpédié :
> >
> > > De: "Alan J. Friedman" <AFRIEDMAN at ftc.gov>
> > > Date: Tue 28 Jan 2003  15:41:23 America/New_York
> > > Objet: Question for the ADS Webmaster
> > >
> > > My son and I have compiled about 90 words  -- words like bow, minute,
> > > tear, delegate, intimate -- that change meaning depending upon
> > > pronounciation.  Some people call these words "homographs."  Is there
> > > an official linguistic category for such words?  If not, should there
> > > be?  My favorites are "axes" (plural of ax and axis), "entrance," and
> > > "routed" (past tenses of rout and route).  I have read that, in
> > > contrast to the multitude of homonyms, there are less than 100
> > > homographs.  Are there any scholars who may have a running list of
> > > homographs?