Huh? What about synonyms?
There are no absolute synonyms.
The are no two words that could be interchangeably used in all statements without any change of meaning of the statement.
"I've got no pants on" vs. "I've got no trousers on"
Do you really see no difference betwen the two?
For one, "pants" is American English, and "trousers" is British English.
So?
"There is shit all over the pavement"
"There are feces all over the pavement"
"There is poop all over the pavement"
"There is excrement all over the pavement"
etc.
That might fully be the case in a specialized or technical language. Where terms or symbols would be restricted to single definitions to avoid any misunderstandings, and the identical-meaning type of synonym was accordingly eliminated, with distinct and well-organized hyponyms, hypernyms, etc., maintained. But that such strict representational systems had to be invented spotlights the ambiguities of ordinary language (English, anyway), resulting from its often unguided evolution. Still, this is not to contend that ordinary language lacks numerous groups of synonyms that are claimed by usage authorities (if not always supported or clarified by their individual dictionary entries) to have clear distinctions:Words are not interchangeable. There are no two words that could be interchangeably used in the same statement and the meaning of the statement would stay the same.
Do you really see no difference betwen the two?
For one, "pants" is American English, and "trousers" is British English.
There is no such thing as "just semantics."
Words are not interchangeable. There are no two words that could be interchangeably used in the same statement and the meaning of the statement would stay the same.
There is no such thing as "just semantics."
Words are not interchangeable. There are no two words that could be interchangeably used in the same statement and the meaning of the statement would stay the same.
In a similar vein, this brings to mind a personal annecdote - I live in a country that very predominantly (although seemingly less so than when I was educated) uses British english for both spellings and meanings, which causes no end of grief when you're learning to program, and the language uses american english. Anyway, on this particular occasion I had the opportunity to role play in a fantasy setting with a group of Americans. The DM kept talking about room full of trunks, and how the trunks were locked, and emanating evil intent.In many of those cases when the terms are defined more thoroughly, so that both sides are working from the same understanding of the meanings of the relevant terms, those involved in the argument see their disagreement evaporate.
So?
"There is shit all over the pavement"
"There are feces all over the pavement"
"There is poop all over the pavement"
"There is excrement all over the pavement"
etc.
And please don't talk to me about 'Fanny packs' or spanking someones fanny, because I can't even keep a straight face typing it.
I know what you mean, that one gets me as well So do the names fanny and dick i admit (no i didnt purposly make that rhyme). Then there is root beer and root for. If you were rooting i would think you would have more important things on your mind than what team is winning
Not to mention questions like "Which route are you going to take".
:roflmao:
Where 'behind the word' is the meaning?So... That a person chooses one word over another may tell you something about the person, but the meaning behind the word itself is the same corn filled crap.
The singular of Latin faeces is faex, which means grounds, dregs or sediment. We never adopted the singular form of the word in English, and we changed the meaning.Oh, yes, the simple fact that excrement is singular and feces is plural elicits something slightly different phenomenologically.
In many American dialects those are two different vowels. A tree root is the OO in look, push, good, pudding, cookie. To root for a team is the OO in food, snooze, shoe, true, boot.Then there is root beer and root for.
It looks like you're re-spelling the word "rutting." If you pronounce that as "rooting," then your Australian dialect must mirror the regional British dialect in which luck and look, putt and put, stud and stood are homonyms. In American English and R.P. they are not.If you were rooting i would think you would have more important things on your mind than what team is winning.
You're obviously using the French pronunciation of the word, ROOOT. Many Americans say it that way, but others pronounce the vowel as a diphthong, so route rhymes with shout.Not to mention questions like "Which route are you going to take".