What I found was a word with multiple main entries in 11C and with distinct etymologies; furthermore, two of the entries had overlapping senses, such that one sense of one entry could be used as a definition clue for one sense of the other entry.
Sure, it could be written up as an ordinary heteronym (even an overlapping one), but what I'm agog at is the idea that (unless I misunderstand my tagging, which is quite possible) such a thing as an "apt heteronym" exists even if it can never be used because of the TETCNBNness of the flat type.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rhu![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2008-08-03 11:35 pm (UTC)Sure, it could be written up as an ordinary heteronym (even an overlapping one), but what I'm agog at is the idea that (unless I misunderstand my tagging, which is quite possible) such a thing as an "apt heteronym" exists even if it can never be used because of the TETCNBNness of the flat type.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-08-04 03:05 am (UTC)APT HETERONYM (3 4)
NO, THERE
... right?
(no subject)
Date: 2008-08-04 12:01 pm (UTC)INAPT HETERONYM (6)
CLEAVE