Synonyms

[haji]

what i mean is you want to avoid saying "first he claimed that _____, then he asserted _______, then averred that _____" better to use just one verb

that is like a venn diagram

 

[haji]

this lot are using a special thesaurus

that is like poetry, sort of but zombified

 

[haji]

that is like a venn diagram

 

[haji]

View attachment 10480

Better Informatics

Welcome to Better Informatics. The student run website for students in the School of Informatics.

betterinformatics.com

 

[IdleRich]

I reckon there are direct synonyms, cos sometimes we have two words for something which are derived or even simply borrowed from two different languages. Most likely we have a Latin word for something and a Germanic word for it too. And if the word is seen as a translation of the other then how can they not be synonyms when they are in English?

What I mean is, suppose there is a French word X, and if you translate X into German, then the word for X is Y. OK, now suppose that English has absorbed both X and Y and uses both of them, then it's difficult to argue that they mean something different isn't it?

Unless you are gong to insist that actual translation is impossible. Which is more of a philosophical position than a linguistic one, and if you insist on that then the thing about synonyms is pretty much trivial anyway.

 

[haji]

that is like poetry, sort of but zombified

 

[woops]

I reckon there are direct synonyms, cos sometimes we have two words for something which are derived or even simply borrowed from two different languages. Most likely we have a Latin word for something and a Germanic word for it too. And if the word is seen as a translation of the other then how can they not be synonyms when they are in English?

What I mean is, suppose there is a French word X, and if you translate X into German, then the word for X is Y. OK, now suppose that English has absorbed both X and Y and uses both of them, then it's difficult to argue that they mean something different isn't it?

Unless you are gong to insist that actual translation is impossible. Which is more of a philosophical position than a linguistic one, and if you insist on that then the thing about synonyms is pretty much trivial anyway.

this is a good point and an example is mirror/looking-glass

 

[woops]

@sufi has invented a radical new poetic form

 

[haji]

I reckon there are direct synonyms, cos sometimes we have two words for something which are derived or even simply borrowed from two different languages. Most likely we have a Latin word for something and a Germanic word for it too. And if the word is seen as a translation of the other then how can they not be synonyms when they are in English?

What I mean is, suppose there is a French word X, and if you translate X into German, then the word for X is Y. OK, now suppose that English has absorbed both X and Y and uses both of them, then it's difficult to argue that they mean something different isn't it?

Unless you are gong to insist that actual translation is impossible. Which is more of a philosophical position than a linguistic one, and if you insist on that then the thing about synonyms is pretty much trivial anyway.

i wonder whether (apart from being tediously philosophical about it ) those very common functional words translate directly between languages, words like "occasionally" "never" "between" "more" - i guess they have equivalents in any language

 

[haji]

this is a good point and an example is mirror/looking-glass

sheep/mutton
cow/beef
pig/pork
chicken/kfc

 

[IdleRich]

in my ear there are subtle differences in frequency and duration between "from time to time", "sometimes" and "occasionally", no?

With this list, I certainly think that "occasionally" does mean rarely or infrequently and so if something happens occasionally then it happens less often than something that happens sometimes - and I think most of us would agree on that cos that's the common usage. But I think that there are some synonyms where A and B mean either roughly or exactly the same thing (ie they may or may not be true synonyms) and I personally might ascribe a slightly different meaning to A and B based on how I first heard them or who first said them to me or whatever - BUT someone else might not agree with the difference that is in my head cos it's an entirely personal thing.

 

[haji]

With this list, I certainly think that "occasionally" does mean rarely or infrequently and so if something happens occasionally then it happens less often than something that happens sometimes - and I think most of us would agree on that cos that's the common usage. But I think that there are some synonyms where A and B mean either roughly or exactly the same thing (ie they may or may not be true synonyms) and I personally might ascribe a slightly different meaning to A and B based on how I first heard them or who first said them to me or whatever - BUT someone else might not agree with the difference that is in my head cos it's an entirely personal thing.

yeah, but we're not really supposed to have our own personal definitions of words are we?

although i would support that approach tbh much less fussy but potentially hard to make oneself understood i find

 

[Clinamenic]

what i mean is you want to avoid saying "first he claimed that _____, then he asserted _______, then averred that _____" better to use just one verb

Yeah and my point was I'd rather just restructure it to not be repetitive, or else avoid the repetition in the first place. But I do think I agree that one word is better than a flipping between synonyms here.

 

[Clinamenic]

maybe the thesaurus will help you get closer to what you actually mean

Thats true, didn't consider that. I guess the thesaurus is useful if you are looking for a word but you can only think of words with similar meanings that don't quite suit your aim.

 

[IdleRich]

yeah, but we're not really supposed to have our own personal definitions of words are we?

That's what I'm saying, the different meanings we ascribe to different synonyms are probably personal in the main and so I don't think we can really use them to argue that synonyms don't exist.

 

[Clinamenic]

yeah, but we're not really supposed to have our own personal definitions of words are we?

although i would support that approach tbh much less fussy but potentially hard to make oneself understood i find

Yeah I agree that idiosyncratic semantics often comes at the expense of one's ability to communicate, but its also interesting to consider how language mutates largely because of this: how people consciously and unconsciously mutate their understandings and usages of terms, and how this mutation is driven from ones exposure to other's usages of the terms, and one's own reflections and limitations of comprehension.

 

[Clinamenic]

@suspended mentioned this a while back, about people (such as myself) having "private languages" that need to be deciphered, and the time and effort this deciphering takes is often a liability, insofar as people need to communicate important information throughout the day.

 

[sus]

@suspended mentioned this a while back, about people (such as myself) having "private languages" that need to be deciphered, and the time and effort this deciphering takes is often a liability, insofar as people need to communicate important information throughout the day.

To be clear I think they are not private languages (in the Wittgenstein sense) but more like hodge-podges of many local dialects. They're effectively private but all the parts are taken from a shared culture. Not really important to your point but "private language" has a lot of Wittgensteinian problematics

 

[Clinamenic]

Oh I didn't know it was a Witty term.