Homophones and Homographs FOURTH EDITION Homophones and Homographs An American Dictionary FOURTH EDITION Compiled by James B. Hobbs McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers Jefferson, North Carolina, and London LIBRARYOFCONGRESSCATALOGUING-IN-PUBLICATIONDATA Hobbs, James B., ¡930– Homophones and homographs : an American dictionary / compiled by James B. Hobbs.—4th ed. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN-¡3:978-0-7864-2488-7 illustrated case binding : 50# alkaline paper ¡. English language—United States—Homonyms—Dictionaries. 2. Americanisms—Dictionaries. I. Title. PE2833.H63 2006 423'.¡—dc22 2006006090 British Library cataloguing data are available ©2006 James B. Hobbs. All rights reserved No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying or recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Manufactured in the United States of America McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers Box 6¡¡, Je›erson, North Carolina 28640 www.mcfarlandpub.com Table of Contents Preface 1 Overview of Homophones and Homographs 3 Definitions 3 The “Conflict of Homophones” Controversy 5 Criteria for Including and Excluding Words 6 Notational Devices and Phonetic Symbols 8 Organization of the Dictionary 9 Some Final Thoughts 11 Homophones 13 Homographs 293 Appendix: Unusual Groupings 351 Homophones 351 Five or More One-Syllable Words 352 Four or More Two-Syllable Words 352 Three or More Three-Syllable Words 352 All Four-, Five-, and Six-Syllable Words 353 Homographs (three or more words) 354 Homophones and Homographs (all words) 355 Annotated Bibliography 359 v Preface This fourth edition represents a 24-year work-in-progress that originated with a 7-year-old youngster bringing home in the spring of ¡982 his class assignment to gen- erate the most homophones possible, like rain, reign, rein, within a week. The short- term downer was that his second-place 279 words fell 77 short of the victor’s list. The longer term benefit is that his e›ort jump-started the process that has resulted in 9040 homophones furnished below, plus a bonus of 2¡33 homographs (like tear, number, minute). This compiler examined each of the 2¡9 sources noted in the bibliography, and solved countless New York Times and Wall Street Journal crossword puzzles, to glean what comprises this volume. Warranting special mention are two treasure houses of bona fide, or near-, homophones and homographs: John H. Bechtel’s ¡904 compilation, and Russell H. Godard’s ¡999 assemblage and idiosyncratic insights toward researching these phenomena. Probably in excess of four million entries have been reviewed since ¡982. Still sources undoubtedly remain unexamined; and I keep pencil and note pad aside the bedstead to jot down thoughts to verify or discard come daybreak. Although intended to be the most complete and accurate dictionary of this type cur- rently available, I make no claim that it is “the last word.” Several homophone and homo- graph candidates have almost certainly been overlooked during the eyestrain and physical exertion required in examining ¡3-pound unabridged reference works and their thinner kin. My current best estimate of when this project in American English may approach closure is about ¡¡,000 homophones and 3000 homographs. We shall see. Plaudits and grateful acknowledgment are o›ered to several individuals who assisted in bringing these four editions to fruition during these 24 years. David C. Weisman, who brought home that second grade assignment, is now a well established neurologist and married with two splendid daughters. Melody, his mother, in addition to suggesting early on that homographs be included in this dictionary, kept safe work-in-process and man- uscripts at critical junctures. Peg, my wife, furnished several homophones and homo- graphs associated with her fibre-art creativity, such as couch, ru›er, sliver, sley, and weave. Her endurance and tolerance were frequently tested while her spouse’s nose was 1 Preface 2 ensconced in one or more reference works. Her frequent remark: “The process resem- bled watching grass grow and flies flit.” Among colleagues at Lehigh University who supplied helpful suggestions and valu- able assistance were the late Frank S. Hook, professor emeritus of English, who was well known for his stimulating course entitled simply “Words”; the late David M. Greene, also professor emeritus of English; the late John A. Van Erde, professor emeritus of modern languages and literature; the late R. Allen Moran, associate professor of eco- nomics; Eli Schwartz, Charles W. MacFarlane professor emeritus of theoretical econom- ics, and Robert J. Thornton, Charles W. MacFarlane professor of economics, both of whom enjoy backgrounds in etymology and classical languages; Max D. Snider, profes- sor emeritus of marketing and associate dean emeritus of the college of business and economics; Marie-Sophie Armstrong and Mary A. Nichols, both associate professors of modern languages and literature; Herbert Rubenstein, professor emeritus of psycho- linguistics; and Albert (Tommy) Wilansky, university distinguished professor emeritus of mathematics, who furnished several bona fide homophones and homographs, includ- ing brother (male sibling and soup maker) andmother (female parent and collector of moths) which make appearances in this edition. Those also at Lehigh include William F. Finke and Pat Ward, who rendered detec- tive assistance over these many years in securing numerous references and hard-to-obtain texts through interlibrary loan; Robert Kendi, Revelly Paul, Judith Moran, Sharon Ruhf, Janice Schae›er, Rene Hollinger, and Diane Oechsle, each of whom provided patient aid and comfort at crucial points in manipulating computer programs, word-processing technicalities, and locating several rich repositories of literature relevant to this endeavor. Elsewhere in the world are contributors to this labor of love: John D. Hitchcock of Laramie, Wyoming; Felicia Lamport of Cambridge, Massachusetts; Sybil P. Parker at the McGraw-Hill Book Company; John L. Turner of Scotts Valley, California; Richard A. Schaphorst of Jenkintown, Pennsylvania; Jule Shipman of Doylestown, Pennsylva- nia: and Doug Fink, a compiler of numerous homphones. The late Russell H. Godard of Corvallis, Oregon, made a unique contribution with his eagle-eye for detail, fantas- tic memory recall, and idiosyncratic approaches to the collection of homophones and homographs. Drs. William Davis of Newark, Delaware, and Bevan J. Clarke, professor of accountancy and management information systems at the University of Canterbury in Christchurch, New Zealand, both evince insatiable and contagious curiosity in a vari- ety of intellectual endeavors. Finally, I extend thanks to each author and editor cited in the annotated bibliogra- phy that appears at the end of this dictionary. Their contributions confirm the research adage: “We can rise higher only atop the shoulders of predecessors.” And the o›er still stands of awarding $¡ for each bona fide homophone or homograph furnished to this compiler that does not appear in these pages. J. B. H. Bethlehem, Pennsylvania Overview of Homophones and Homographs This brief orientation addresses several aspects of homophones and homographs to provide context and perspective for these phenomena: definitions; the “Conflict of Homo- phones” controversy; criteria for including and excluding words in this volume; nota- tional devices and phonetic symbols used hereafter; and the organization of the dictionary. Some final thoughts precede the detailed listing of words. Definitions This dictionary focuses on American homophones and homographs, and is based on pronunciations that prevail in most areas of the United States. Briefly and precisely, a homophone is a word that is pronounced the same as another (a “sound-alike” or an aural/oral echo) but which di›ers in spelling andmeaning, such as cite,sight,andsite. A homograph, on the other hand, is a word that is spelled the same as another (a “look- alike” or visual echo) but which di›ers in sound andmeaning, such as tear (to separate or pull apart) and tear ( a secretion from the eye). The relationship and significance of these two classes of words in the English language may be more clearly understood by referring to the diagram on the following page, which divides all English words into eight categories according to the three characteristics of sound (or pronunciation), spelling, and meaning. The third group, homonym, is a word that has the same sound andspelling but has more than one meaning, such as set,which may possess the largest number of di›erent meanings of any English word. The sharp distinction between the first three categories in the diagram is adopted in this dictionary because the definitions for those terms in Webster’s Third New Inter- national Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged (which nevertheless is a key reference work for this particular dictionary) are ambiguous and overlapping: 3