This is a thought that has been haunting me for some time. And, as we are all here prone to punditry, I want to hear the general thoughts on this one.
My position is that all words carry some form of sub-text or connotation that will prevent any two words from being absolute synonyms. Even words like 'aluminum' and 'aluminium' carry subtext of the speaker's frame of reference. What is the verdict from the cloud?
"Absolute" is probably an impossibly high standard.
I second EmmettRedd's verdict. It's an interesting question, but if there were truly "absolute" synonyms, why would there be additional words to choose from? If there wasn't some "meta-data" associated with the other word, we wouldn't need it. Even in the exact world of mathematics you find subtle distinctions. For example, at first read, "sum" and "total" would appear to mean the same, and within mathematics they probably are absolute synonyms. But since each word can be used outside the context of math, even as verbs instead of nouns, they could never be considered truly absolute synonyms. I doubt absolute synonyms exist. I'd be interested to hear an example that you couldn't shoot a hole in.
I agree - Absolute synonyms are only absolute within a limited context. I first thought of "dead" and "deceased". They are absolutely the same in the context of biological life. But when someone says, "My battery is dead," symmetry is broken.
Even within math, I might distinguish between "sum" and "total." "Sum" feels like a single step, while "total" has a feeling of finality. This distinction may exist in my brain only. Individual results may vary.
Maybe.
Possibly polyglottous and polyglottic.
Perhaps along with multilingual.
Perchance someone knows of some nuance to distinguish these.
Schadenfreude and epicaricacy might qualify.