
Auto-antonym - tomkwok
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auto-antonym
======
gabriel34
Relevant discussion from 2 days ago:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9339540](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9339540)

~~~
lt
This discussion reminds me of a joke:

A linguistics professor was lecturing to his class one day. "In English," he
said, "a double negative forms a positive. In some languages though, such as
Russian, a double negative is still a negative.

However," he pointed out, "there is no language wherein a double positive can
form a negative."

A voice from the back of the room piped up, "Yeah, right."

~~~
meepmorp
I heard a version of this joke from a syntactician, but it involved a
semanticist giving a conference talk on a paper he'd written. I think it's
funnier that way, but that's probably the background of academic
subdisciplines sniping at each other and the fear of someone pointing out that
your research is just a fraud.

------
spacemaus
As a recovering language curmudgeon, it literally kills me that "literally" is
now an auto-antonym too [1].

[1]
[http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_eng...](http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/literally)

~~~
dllthomas
I actually disagree with the dictionary there. In my experience (and
admittedly my sample is limited), no one intends "literally" to weaken or to
make it clear that their usage is figurative. I think use of "literally"
applied to something obviously not literal is just another example of
hyperbole.

~~~
dragonwriter
That doesn't actually disagree with the dictionary text linked in grandparent
post [0], though it disagrees with the apparent interpretation of it by the
post that linked it.

[0] which provides, as the definition for the non-literal use: "(informal)
Used for emphasis or to express strong feeling while not being literally true"
and, says of that use in the usage note: "In recent years, an extended use of
literally (and also literal) has become very common, where literally (or
literal) is used deliberately in nonliteral contexts, for added effect: ‘they
bought the car and literally ran it into the ground’."

~~~
dllthomas
On reflection, I agree!

------
astrobe_
In french there's also the curious case of "pesanteur" (gravity), which is
feminine; so "la pesanteur" (the gravity). But the absence of gravity is
"apesanteur" (weightlessness), which is also a feminine word; so
"l'apesenteur". So we have two slightly different words that actually sound
exactly the same with their articles. It's only a few years ago that people
decided to change the prefix and use "impesanteur" instead (which is however a
bit less accurate - see the difference between "im-possible" (not possible)
and "a-gnostic" (without belief)).

~~~
ComputerGuru
Thanks for sharing that! I've been learning French for the past two years and
it's really opened my eyes to some things. I am already a native bilingual
English/Arabic speaker, and thought Arabic was a very heavily-structured
language, but learning French has made me realize that more than anything it
is English that isn't. Discovering the French Anglo-Norman influence on the
language I speak most often has been a very introspective and eye-opening
experience for me.

------
andrewrice
The word "hack" can mean to assemble (e.g., hacking some code), but also to
destroy (as in, hacking with an axe).

~~~
dotsamuelswan
This is a homonym, not an auto-antonym.

~~~
lt
Well, auto-antonyms are homographs with opposite meanings. Homonyms are a
subset of homographs.

------
toolslive

      English:untie?
      German:untiefe?
      French:jamais?
      Dutch:aftrappen?precies?

------
rolfvandekrol
In Dutch the word for hostage and hostage-taker is the same (gijzelaar).

~~~
toolslive
I'm not sure, but I think semantics shifted throughout the years. I think it
used to be "gegijzelde(hostage)" versus "gijzelaar(hostage taker)" now it's
"gijzelaar(hostage)" versus "gijzelnemer(hostage taker" or, to be absolutely
unambiguous: "gegijzelde" versus "gijzelnemer".

~~~
rolfvandekrol
Gijzelaar was originally just the victim (hostage), but its meaning shifted
over the years and now most dictionaries list both meanings as valid.
[https://onzetaal.nl/taaladvies/advies/gijzelaar-
gegijzelde](https://onzetaal.nl/taaladvies/advies/gijzelaar-gegijzelde)

------
abecode
would "civil war" count?

~~~
toolslive
isn't that an oxymoron? (like "fresh frozen" or"military intelligence" )

~~~
andrey-p
"light yet filling"

~~~
qnaal
"javascript framework"

~~~
scentoni
"Modern Perl"

