(redirected from logomachies)
Also found in: Thesaurus.


n. pl. lo·gom·a·chies
1. A dispute about words.
2. A dispute carried on in words only; a battle of words.

[Greek logomakhiā, from logomakhein, to fight about words : logo-, logo- + makhē, battle.]
American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition. Copyright © 2016 by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. All rights reserved.


n, pl -chies
(Linguistics) argument about words or the meaning of words
[C16: from Greek logomakhia, from logos word + makhē battle]
loˈgomachist loˈgomach n
Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged, 12th Edition 2014 © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2014


(loʊˈgɒm ə ki)

n., pl. -chies.
1. a dispute about words.
2. an argument or debate marked by the reckless or incorrect use of words.
[1560–70; < Greek logomachía. See logo-, -machy]
Random House Kernerman Webster's College Dictionary, © 2010 K Dictionaries Ltd. Copyright 2005, 1997, 1991 by Random House, Inc. All rights reserved.


1. a dispute about or concerning words.
2. a contention marked by the careless or incorrect use of words; a mean-ingless battle of words. — logomach, logomacher, logomachist, n. — logo- machic, logomachical, adj.
See also: Language
-Ologies & -Isms. Copyright 2008 The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved.
ThesaurusAntonymsRelated WordsSynonymsLegend:
Noun1.logomachy - argument about words or the meaning of words
argumentation, debate, argument - a discussion in which reasons are advanced for and against some proposition or proposal; "the argument over foreign aid goes on and on"
Based on WordNet 3.0, Farlex clipart collection. © 2003-2012 Princeton University, Farlex Inc.
References in periodicals archive ?
In presenting a counterargument, Chadwick-Joshua (1998: 43-59) examines Twain's construction of logomachies (verbal battles) between Huck and Jim, claims that Jim wins each of these battles, and focuses on the rhetorical strategies by which Jim triumphs.
Such "obligatory" yet possibly conflicting "truths" Johnson distrusted as "cant," terms by which the powerful may easily seduce the naive; and likewise Sisson dismisses the "various logomachies" (529) in which "managers" of political life have become adept.
And as Sisson might point out, that is a notably weak and passive response to the particular "logomachies" at work in the world of practical politics.