Homophones are definitely not the thing that makes English hard. By that definition, Chinese is downright impossible language.
This fails because the first one reads as “soldier” to most people, I’d say the vast majority of native English speakers would think “soldier”, not that he’s a Navy Seal. Especially because My first thought for a Navy Seal would be coming out of the ocean in a wet suit.
From left to right, top to bottom:
Soldier, grommet, paint,
Wax stamp, person, seal.Top right is lacquering, not paint. But yeah I thought the same lol
It is a meme
soldier ### brush stamp man seal?
#2 is an engine valve stem seal
Stable genius
At least those are not contradictory. Imagine being told that someone was dusting a room. Well that is removing small particles! But if you are dusting some icing sugar on a cake, you are adding it!
That’s not fair though as navy seals are named after the animal.
Also, you can use a word in different contexts, to seal wood and to seal something shut is similar actions
I think this might work better with 4 frames since 3 of these images show items that fall under the same definition for seal since their purpose is to prevent something from getting into/out of somewhere.
I think the singer doesn’t count either since that’s someone’s name which could be anything in any language. Also the navy seal is named after the animal. It’s 2 frames. “Seal” the animal and “seal” the keep stuff in/out
Try reading Japanese without kanji and see how rough it get with all the homophones.
They have 3 alphabets and its called a “writing system” because of it.
There are no alphabets in Japanese language.
Yeah, kind of exactly the nightmare of a “writing system”. Its a dare to try to explain it in less than 10 words.
I’ll take that dare:
5 character sets and four languages in a trenchcoat です。
Are homonyms/homophones more common in English? As a non-native speaker, I remember the vowel shift causing more trouble at first. Also, rules for shortening/combining words can be tricky. They’re/their is the obvious example. But then there’s won’t, where the apostrophe doesn’t simply substitute a letter in two words that work independently. And it’s/its is very confusing, as possessive is normally also marked with 's. Is/are is a whole new thing if your native language doesn’t distinguish.
If it helps, the possessive versions of other pronouns don’t have apostrophes (hers, his, theirs, yours), so it makes since that the possessive of it also doesn’t.
I’ve never thought about won’t or ain’t not working like the other contractions. How funny.
Soldier, filter?, brush, wax, “there use to be a graying tower alone on the sea, you became the light on the dark side of me”, seal.
3 instances of sealing. 1 OG, 1 copycat, 1 unoriginal dude. Down to 2 uses.
Possibly an issue caused by simplified English.
Solider, some kind of plug?, applying some kind of weather proofing, wax stamp, that guy who did a single with Adamski, seal.
They’re all seals. The bad part is that this is really only 2 different meanings. The soldier is a navy seal but that’s just named after the animal. The top middle is a seal to keep oil in a machine. The concept of sealing something applies to the the oil seal, the deck sealant, and the wax seal.
And there’s nothing to stop Seal from becoming a seal and using a seal to seal a hole.
Monolingual native English speakers are constantly being surprised about basic universal linguistic concepts, while proceeding to think it is exceptional to the only language they are familiar with.
Have you tried any form of Chinese?
Ba-ya-ya, ba-da-da-da-da-da, ba-ya-ya
