I’m not a linguistics expert and this is just me offering an unsolicited layman’s opinion, but perhaps the nuance comes from whether or not one might still conceive of the words being related despite the acknowledged difference in definition?
For example, “bat” (the animal) and “bat” (the implement) are homonyms that are used to describe two clearly different things. But maybe one might think of “scale” being connected between its various uses when it is not. “Scale” (the measuring tool) uses plates which are similar to the flat plates of fish scales. Or that to “scale” a distance is like measuring a “scale” of height. Something like that.
I’m not a linguistics expert and this is just me offering an unsolicited layman’s opinion, but perhaps the nuance comes from whether or not one might still conceive of the words being related despite the acknowledged difference in definition?
For example, “bat” (the animal) and “bat” (the implement) are homonyms that are used to describe two clearly different things. But maybe one might think of “scale” being connected between its various uses when it is not. “Scale” (the measuring tool) uses plates which are similar to the flat plates of fish scales. Or that to “scale” a distance is like measuring a “scale” of height. Something like that.