This paper falls into a shorter general part and a longer special part. Part 1 is concerned with the various solutions which a speech community may seek in the event of a threatening collision of two homonyms or near-homonyms ; a careful distinction is drawn, in almost every category, between strictly lexical and lexico-grammatical homophony. Four characteristic patterns are established: (a) The speakers, after some wavering, in the end accept both partners, because of contextual disambiguation or because the words at issue pertain to different social dialects (or registers)—or else because one is common, and the other relatively rare, e.g. technical, (b) The stronger word dislodges the weaker word, eliminating it altogether or driving it into a corner, sometimes only temporarily; strength, in this context, is measurable by sheer frequency, or by smoothness of structural integration, or by ready availability vs. total absence of suitable substitute items, (c) The two words merge, producing a third word, usually of extended semantic ambit. (d) The partners are gradually differentiated in meaning and, above all, in form, through complicated and less than obvious analogical processes—with the further dichotomy of either (α) a single partner or (β) both partners undergoing such polarizing changes. Throughout Part 1, examples are adduced from a mixed bag of European languages.