in your "some finnish" post abt eggs and dicking down, there's no... visual difference between "i want some egg" and "i want to get dicked down"--are they spoken the same and it should just be obvious in conversation whether someone's talking abt breakfast or breeding?
The statements are identical. You’re just supposed to know from context.
What is the literal translation that could lead to this meaning both things?
The phrase “Tahtoisin munaa.” is a good example.
Tahto- (root, infinitive form “tahtoa”, “To want”, present tense. Of note, the word “tahto” by itself means “a want” but then it is in the subjective/nominative case), -isi- (conditional suffix), -n (first person possessive suffix), muna- (root, “an egg”), -a (partitive suffix).
(Literal translation: “I would want some egg.”)
Now, semantically speaking the phrase “Tahtoisin munaa,” is unabiguous with the meaning that the speaker is currently, if possible, desiring a thing/an action, with the undefined amount of “muna” being said thing or action.
The thing is “muna” (which means “an egg”) is also a slang/informal term for the penis and/or the testicles. So, pragmatically speaking the sentence “Tahtoisin munaa,” could mean that the person wants to eat an egg/eggs, doesn’t currently have access to an egg/eggs and is politely requesting (in Finnish using the conditional mood is thought to be more polite when requesting things, compared to asking for them without it) them from the person (it is safe to assume that the speaker is talking to a human in this case) to give the egg/eggs to them, so that they can eat them. And that is in the (potential) context of the speaker wanting to eat food.
OR…
Continuing with a pragmatic reading of the sentence “Tahtoisin munaa.” If the speaker says this in a romantic/erotic/sexual context (like when spending time with their partner), this time the speaker is stating that they are willing to engage in penetrative sex, in which they are explicitly the one being penetrated, and politely asking the person (again it is safe to assume they are speaking to a person) if they are willing to engage in said action as the penetrator. Of note is the fact that the word “muna” in this case has it’s meaning expanded from the (current contextual) default of penis to “any object capable to be used in an act of penetrating a person’s orifice by another person” so it could as well mean, for example, a strap-on.
Due to the ambiguity of the word “muna” the listener is unable to correctly interpret the pragmatic meaning of the sentence without receiving needed context before or after it. The sentence can easily be made less ambiguous by simply replacing the word “muna” with a less ambigous word, for example “kananmuna” (lit. “an egg of a chicken) for the pragmatic desire for food, or with something like "kyrpä” (one of multiple slang terms for penis, literally meaning “cock” or “dick”) for the pragmatic desire to get one’s orifice penetrated.
Hopefully you found me indulging in my language studies and interests interesting even though it isn’t on the language I’m majoring in (since that’d be English)