Is there a term for using the same base word in different ways and still make sense?
I give the following examples:
Consistently consistent consistency
Efficiently efficient efficiency
Please feel free to chip in with your own examples.
Redundantly redundant redundancies.
I think you may be referring to:[ul][li]He was consistently late to the office.[/li][li]Falling is consistent with the law of gravity.[/li][li]Honey has a thicker consistency than milk.[/ul]My answer is that they are not really the same word. They started out with the same root, which in this case probably meant “sameness” or something like that. And then they went off in separate directions.[/li]
I think the great majority of words are in this category. Example: “majority”: older, bigger, or higher-ranking.
Missed the edit window:
To be more specific: Winning a redundancy contest against Redundant Redundantsen, Second Lord of Redundantshire.
Blackadderization?
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.
Beat that one!
That sentence uses just 3 meanings (and one spelling).
So…Milkers milk milky milks
The OP, I believe, is asking
sorry…
is asking for a rhetorical term, and not referring to different parts of speech in and of themselves.
Not quite the same as being asked in the OP but if we were to hire a sign writer to write a sign for our new bar the Hand And Land and wanted to be critical of his work we might say:
“There’s too much space between the Hand and And and And and Land.”
And if John were pretty stupid, then Tom, whereas John had had “had”, had had “had had”, “had had” had had the examiners approval.
Pseudozeugma.
Nouns, adjectives and adverbs?
[quote=“Keeve, post:3, topic:646389”]
I think you may be referring to:[ul][li]He was consistently late to the office.[/li][li]Falling is consistent with the law of gravity.[/li][li]Honey has a thicker consistency than milk.[/ul]My answer is that they are not really the same word. They started out with the same root, which in this case probably meant “sameness” or something like that. And then they went off in separate directions.[/li][/QUOTE]
Consist[ency] derives ultimately from the Latin consistere, “to stop” or “to remain still”.
I don’t understand what’s so special about this. You could do this for almost any word I think.
Happily happy happiness.
Lousily lousy lousiness.
Fatteningly fatty fat.
In fact, it’d be more surprising and interesting to find words you couldn’t do this with.
OP checking in here.
I thought there would be a term to which I was hitherto unaware of, but it appears there isn’t.
I’ve looked at zeugma, figura etymologica and the others suggested.
I guess it’s just quirk of the English language.
Thanks for your help guys/gals!!
Are you asking for the term for changing what’s added to a root of a word (usually the suffix) to change its part of speech? Sort of like conjugating a verb, but not limited to a certain type of word? If you do, then I don’t know but I’m sure there’s a word for it and someone here knows.
Affixation is when you make a new word by adding a prefix or suffix to an existing one - like adding -ly to consistent to create the adjverb form. Conversion is when one part of speech is modified for use as another (such as the verb “fuck” becoming the noun/expletive “fuck”).
No, the OP isn’t asking about how to refer to the mechanics of such language.
I repeat: He wants to know if there is a term for such use of language from a rhetorical point of view. Something like the terms alliteration, onomatopoeia, parachesis, etc.