Do you know what a homonym is?

[Shaun]

I didn't - until a few minutes ago.

I wasn't actually looking for homonym, or epithet for that matter (although epithet is nearer to what I wanted, I think, than homonym).

What I was looking for was a word that describes an unnecessary descriptor word.

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

Are you thinking of tautology?

EDIT: Oh, after the last couple of days' posts, I should have realised that's not what you were thinking of

 

[Markymark]

Tautology?

 

[Maz]

Yes eye do no what a homonym is!

 

[Dan B]

A homonym ... doo doo de do do


View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8N_tupPBtWQ

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

And not to be confused with a homophone:

 

[rich p]

I once started a witty thread titled, " In Preys of Homonyms" but it sank like a stone

 

[asterix]

No, but I don't like the sound of it.

 

[Durian]

And not to be confused with a homophone:

The telephones in the Ecuadorian Embassy look quite old!

 

[Boris Bajic]

It's when you go on holiday after you get married.

Torquay is nice.

 

[swee'pea99]

What I was looking for was a word that describes an unnecessary descriptor word.

Why unnecessary? Because tautologous? - ie, it's implicit, eg black blackboard or wealthy billionaire? I'd probably describe the culprit word as 'redundant' - ie, it adds nothing that's not already there - but that's an adjective...I don't know of an equivalent noun term for a word like that.

 

[Shaun]

Ah yes, redundant - maybe, but doesn't it generally imply that at some point it has been of use? Perhaps the word I'm looking for is superfluous?

 

[ColinJ]

In this case, what you need is a word which combines contentious and superfluous!

 

[swee'pea99]

Ah yes, redundant - maybe, but doesn't it generally imply that at some point it has been of use? Perhaps the word I'm looking for is superfluous?

It can, but it needn't. All it strictly means is 'something whose removal would make no difference'. In the context of everyday language, where it's most often used in the context of redundancy payments and the like, it's gained an overtone of 'no longer needed'; but strictly it simply means 'not needed'. 'Superfluous' is very similar, but to me at least superfluous suggests 'more than enough', rather than simply 'unnecessary'. Superfluous decoration, to me at least, suggests that some decoration is needed...just not this much.

Both, in any case, remain adjectives. A word that performs no function or is unnecessary is not 'a redundant' or 'a superfluous'. We're still no closer to a noun.

 

[Asa Post]

What I was looking for was a word that describes an unnecessary descriptor word.

Otiose?