For example, “flammable” and “inflammable” both describe an object that can easily catch on fire. I can also think of “ceased” and “deceased”, both of which can mean someone or something has been brought to an end.
edit: Some people are including words that can also mean its opposite (like sanction or table), those are cool too! The more weird words, the better!
-
Restless and Restful.
-
mark and demarcate. I love this one.
-
also, limit and delimit
-
a bit of a stretch but i can imagine someone saying “You’re a natural” and “you’re a freak” to express someone being abnormally talented at something on their first try.
“You’re a natural at rock climbing. You’re a rock climbing freak. A freak at rock climbing.”
While checking words that might work here i was reminded of this annoying trio:
- Allude
- Elude
- Illude
They mean, respectively:
- to suggest something
- to escape or avoid something or someone
- to lie or deceive
also elucidate more common in scientific works,foreshadowing.
-
I literally can’t believe this thread.
The undead are dead.
Slightly different, but single words meaning multiple conflicting things seem to come to mind more readily:
- Drop meaning both to abandon or release a product
- Table meaning both put something aside or putting up for discussion
- Literally meaning both literal and figurative
Within a region, does table ever mean both of those?
In the US, it means to set aside or ignore it, but never means to continue the discussion. In the UK it means to discuss it, does it ever mean to also set it aside?
I think there’s some bleed between different countries, given increasing global connectivity. I’ve heard both definitions in Australia which makes sense as we are influenced by both countries but I suspect the British version is more common.
Similar to chips meaning both crisps and French fries.
suck and blow
…are opposites
“Man, that sucks.”
“Man, that blows.”
Those two phrases have identical meanings.
Except on my… Other account.
One that sorta works:
it’s all uphill / downhill from here -> it’s only going to get worse
“flammable” and “inflammable” both describe an object that can easily catch on fire.
WHAT A COUNTRY!
Hi Dr.Nick!
Antiautonym is what you’re looking for.
I’m not sure this is correct, but I’ve heard that flammable and inflammable being used as synonyms is recent. Originally, inflammable meant able to burst into flames without a significant ignition source. Like a pile of oily rags or something that could catch fire because it was left out in the sun or just got too warm.
It sounds like it should mean something flame-proof. Like destructible - indestructible.
Yeah, adding in- as a prefix often does mean that, but it can also mean in, on, or into (among others) as a prefix or just part of the core word. And in this case inflammable comes from adding the suffix -able to inflame, a word that already starts with in- in it’s into meaning. And one definition of inflame is “to burst into flames.”
deceased specifically refers to death though. ceased mean something stopped in its track. " no offense and offensive" means the same thing if the context is describing someone or something. shelled/deshelled both means shells are remove from a plant product.
It has ceased to be. It’s expired and gone to meet its maker.
Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace.
“egregious” means outstandingly bad or flagrant, also distinguished or eminent
Egregious is distinguished only on a negative sense
In French there is personne (someone) and personne (no one), plus (more) and plus (no more)
Near miss and near hit both mean a close call.
This is kinda the opposite to what you are asking: awesome and awful used to mean the same thing IIRC, both being something filling you with awe. Later the meanings split between positive and negative.
Same with terrible and terrific.
As a non-native English speaker, I always have to think a second extra about “terrific”, about it being negative or positive. Probably because it sound similar to “terrible”.
Or as an analog: horror - terror, horrific - terrific.
You’re right to think that, because that’s how both words began!
I often thought awful was an odd word. Surely awful = full of awe, but it is frequently used to describe things that have little to no awe.
Also I have now said the word awe too much and it looks strange.
My guess is it came about because people were using it to mean “something so bad it fills you with awe”. Like “the thing humans are doing to the environment are awful”. But then it lost its connection to awe.
That’s my guess.
Not the original question you asked, but fits in with your edit:
Priceless and worthless are opposites
