Heritage and Reality!

[Archangel]

I got it!!!!!

**raising my hand***

LOLOL!

me too, me too.

[Archangel]

If history was indeed the same thing as passion, then they wouldn't have needed distinct names and definitions. History and passion may co-exist, but they are certainly not the same thing.;)

Kevin

You realize that, while you may be correct in this instant, your logic is wrong. While it may be a fun discussion to debate your statement, you have erred in your primary statement by discounting synonyms and homonyms.

...just the mood I'm in right now...

[bubba]

How can you disregard synogoges and hominids? :mrgreen:

[Sir Robert]

Bubba, that was funny!

[KMacT]

...you have erred in your primary statement by discounting synonyms and homonyms.

But I would respond that a synonym, for example, is a word with a *similar* meaning to that of another word. Synonym does not mean "exactly the same meaning." As such, synonyms were properly discounted in my primary statement! (I don't see how homonyms come into the discussion).

Kevin

[KMacT]

I see my attempt at humour failed miserably! ;) History IS my passion! :mrgreen:

I got your point (helped by the smiling face in your post), but nonetheless wanted to make my little point that there is a difference (and also note the smiling face that was in my post!).

Kevin

[Archangel]

But I would respond that a synonym, for example, is a word with a *similar* meaning to that of another word. Synonym does not mean "exactly the same meaning." As such, synonyms were properly discounted in my primary statement! (I don't see how homonyms come into the discussion).

Kevin

like I said, I was just having some fun, that was the mood I was in. Fridays, I teach a program that involves deconstruction, sub-text, and mind-altering stuff. Sometimes I forget to take that hat off when I get home.

Unless we are talking technically, words seldom have exact meanings. The meaning is usually defined by context. So, two words, different in isolation, could mean the same when other literary tools are used to enhance the picture.
Illustration: how many ways can a sports announcer, think Howard Cosell, say, "Touchdown" or "knockout".

Homonyms came in as a response to distinct words (synonyms responded to distinct meanings). One word can have many meanings and, without context, not be distinct. Examples are bat, row, etc. By itself, if you hear someone say, "he gave her a smack on the cheek", you will look for other indicators to tell if this describes affection (kiss) or assault (slap).

[KMacT]

Unless we are talking technically, words seldom have exact meanings. The meaning is usually defined by context. So, two words, different in isolation, could mean the same when other literary tools are used to enhance the picture. Illustration: how many ways can a sports announcer, think Howard Cosell, say, "Touchdown" or "knockout".

At the risk of wading into water much too deep for me, I'm not sure we are even talking about words, per se. Alan made reference to "history" and "passion" as concepts more than as words merely to be defined. I would think that my original statement (that if these two concepts were the same thing, they wouldn't have needed distinct words and definitions) still holds because I cannot imagine a context in which these concepts could mean the same thing. Maybe that is true with mere words (although I'm inclined to "talking technically," see below), but surely not with something as broad as a concept.

As for Howard Cosell, I might give him the benefit of the doubt that when he uses "knockout" in one instance and another word at another time, that he has two different (albeit slightly different) meanings - hence the different words employed. If he means exactly the same thing, then he's just being sloppy in his use of language. But maybe I'm just a lawyer - we spend a lot of time giving words absolutely distinct meanings. But I don't want to lay all this at the feet of lawyers because I think poets spend a lot of time uses different words for similar concepts so as to evoke different responses each time.

Homonyms came in as a response to distinct words (synonyms responded to distinct meanings). One word can have many meanings and, without context, not be distinct. Examples are bat, row, etc. By itself, if you hear someone say, "he gave her a smack on the cheek", you will look for other indicators to tell if this describes affection (kiss) or assault (slap).

I'm just not able to address this right now. Can't get my head around it this early in the morning. Sorry.

Kevin

[Mike n NC]

Several of the previous posts refer to logic, words and their usage. All are meaningless since you have no concrete expression, frame of reference or base for your hypothesis. In other words, there is no means of proof. Since there can be no proof, the argument is meaningless (do I sense a circle here?). :smile:

Don't do logic in front of a math/chem major...

Mike, just gettin my fun this morning

[Andrew Breecher]

English has more "duplicate" words than many languages, I believe, a result of having so many different languages influence our own.

Just as one example, many languages have just one word for both the animal and the food that one eats from that animal (e.g. in French, the word "boef" means both a male cow and beef). English has two words - because when the Normans conquored England, the Anglo-Saxons tended the animals, and called them by Old English names (cow, pig, sheep), but when the food was served the Normans called them by French names (beef, pork, mutton). There are many other examples of different words for almost identical concepts that through the vagaries of language acquisition came into use.

Just my little contribution to the fun here. Etymology is my passion. ;)

Andrew.