I wanted to write “Word- creating”, but since we are talking about SQUALOR, then “WORDSMITHING” is exactly right here.
(This is what I often called Solzhenitsyn’s invention of all sorts of Russian-like words and phrases).

I washed the dishes after breakfast in the morning, as usual, and, “as usual,” I was thinking about something else that had nothing to do with the automation of the process. And suddenly it occurred to me that in Russian and in other languages known to me, and almost certainly unknown, the same word often means completely different concepts and even opposite ones.

I’ll take examples at random, of which there are thousands in any language, I suppose:

Broadside – from naval artillery to printed page

Grill – from grilling stove to jurisprudence

Vale — from geography to good bye

Range – from field to kitchen

Watery – abundantly moistened before dilution with water.

Watery – pale and colorless look, eyes, and coloring.

Again, not necessarily related to the “amount of water.”

Transfer – transfer of money from one account to another.

Transfer – wagon-cars from one railway track to another.

Again, different concepts.

I think there are plenty of such examples in any language.

Now the age-old question is: WHY?

These are not synonyms in any way, that is, the opposite of the above, different words denoting similar concepts. But there may be some “penumbral” difference. SIMILARITY, but not IDENTITY!

SO, WHY?

We proceed from the assumption, hypothesis, that language ORIGINALLY arose NOT as a means of communication between similar beings, but as a way of INDIVIDUALLY forming concepts for oneself.

The wind is different from a flower, which means you need to give DIFFERENT names to different concepts and sensations. And so it is in all the multitude and diversity of sensations and perceptions of the world, both external and internal.

When a group of genetically similar creatures inhabit the same ecological niche, their feelings and perceptions are similar, so the designations of these perceptions are also similar. The similarity of the names of concepts creates a commonality of a language, and only then does it acquire its SECONDARY function as a MEDIUM of COMMUNICATION between similar beings.

Once we accept this explanation, we inevitably come to the conclusion, the answer to the “WHY”:

MENTAL LAZINESS.

Oh, why bother and look for some new designation, I’ll give this concept any name that comes to me at random! So it turned out: Range, Grill, Watery and everything else…

Spiritual laziness!!!

All the same herd LABELLING!

The herd’s hatred of real honest thinking!

This means that the proportionality of such “polysemous” words can also be used to judge the intellectual level of a particular nation, which means that not only the verbal richness of the language reflects the level of mental development, but also the proportionality of such polysemous words!

I think even if there is SUCH a difference, it will turn out to be very insignificant, because ALL ETHNIC HERDS ARE PRACTICALLY INDISTINGUISHABLE, all are just parts of a large herd of spiritually poor, LABELLING creatures called humanity.

I remind you that I am not a linguist in any way!

10 V 2026