Conceptual analysis uncovers divergent definitions of colexification in linguistic typology, suggesting a need for standardized alternative terms.
The term colexification has become an important concept in lexical typology in particular and linguistic typology in general. Surprisingly, it is not consistenly used by all scholars in the field. Instead, two main interpretations have emerged, a broad version that uses colexification as a cover term for polysemy, vagueness, and homophony, and a narrow version that restricts the term to polysemy and vagueness. We discuss the ambiguity and reflect about the usefulness of introducing alternative terms instead.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
List et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: