Dictionary definition of multiple words with identical pronunciation but different kanji


Recently I've been using the スーパー大辞林 Japanese dictionary, because it is built-
in to all my Apple devices. But I frequently find words where there is a
single entry in the dictionary, but 2 or 3 different kanji "spellings" are
listed.

For example, if I search for 空く, I get [this
page](http://www.excite.co.jp/dictionary/japanese/?search=%E7%A9%BA%E3%81%8F&match=beginswith&itemid=DJR_aku_-040)
which claims to be the entry for 開く, 空く, and 明く all at the same time. Does
that mean that all 3 of those words have identical meanings? It looks like
some of the definitions are reserved for only one of the kanji. Like in my
search, definitions 1 and 3 are marked 《開く》 and definition 4 is marked 《空》.
Does that mean that to use 空 to convey the meaning from definition 1 is
incorrect? If that's the case, why don't they have separate dictionary
entries?

Are these entries indeed homonyms, in that they have the same pronunciation,
but unique, independent meanings, and it is these unique meanings that gave
rise to the separate kanji to begin with? That would seem to argue for their
dictionary entries to be separate.




These 3 kanji words are by some means the same and by the other means quite
different. They are like "Venn diagram", not exact the same,but share some
parts.

The reason why they are not distinguishable, is that they have the same
origin.

The multiple spelling entries you have found almost always share the same "kun
yomi" but not the same "on yomi" because they are indifferent till Kanji
introduced.

There are many examples you can find. For example, 明るい(bright) and 赤い(red)
have the same pronouciation "aka". Since 赤 is the same as 明,the sun is bright
and also red(as the national flag says).

On the other hand the same kun-yomi doesn't guarantee the same origin. The
dictionary site has one entry for 居る, another entry for 射る and yet another
entry for 炒る-煎る-熬る.

居る = ゐる = 'wiru'

射る = ヤ行上一段活用 = 'yiru'

炒る = いる = 'iru'

These are from the different origins, don't share the same meaning,thus the
different entries are given.




To add to the good technical reasons given by user897730, let me explain how
the relationship **feels** to a native mind.

Every kanji character already has meanings tied to itself, independent of any
actual Japanese “word”. (And by “word” I mean a combination of sounds.) It
happens to be that, coming from another language (Chinese), the kanji meanings
do not map perfectly to the preexisting Japanese words. Hence the Venn diagram
metaphor.

So, it's not that the numbered dictionary meanings are assigned to the kanji,
but the other way around: the kanji are assigned to the numbered meanings.

When sentences flow from your mind, they come as sounds, not spellings. I'm
sure English speakers are very aware of this (you're/your? then/than?). When
people say in English “open the door”, “open your schedule”, or “open a
store”, I doubt they are conscious of which numbered dictionary meaning they
are using. They definitely **feel** like the same, single word. Imagine one
day the U.S. decides to import kanji characters, and imperfectly map them in a
way that sort of corresponds to the numbered meanings. Would it make sense to
split them up into different dictionary entries?

When natives write these words, we actually have to think quite consciously to
decide which is the “correct” kanji to use for a word-as-a-sound that comes to
mind. It is a major source of mistakes, and we will often just give up or
spare ourselves the embarrassment and write it in hiragana!

