The fallacy of equivocation occurs when a word switches meaning in the middle of an argument - when it expresses one concept in one premise and another concept in another premise or in the conclusion. Example: The term, "censorship" refers to a restriction on someone's freedom of speech by a government, using the coercive threats of fines, jail, or worse. But the term is sometimes used metaphorically for other constraints on the ability to express oneself. It would be equivocation to switch between these meanings, as follows: Some newspapers censor speech by refusing to publish controversial authors. Censorship violates the First Amendment. Some newspapers violate the First Amendment by refusing to publish controversial authors.
Example:
The term, "censorship" refers to a restriction on someone's freedom of speech by a government, using the coercive threats of fines, jail, or worse. But the term is sometimes used metaphorically for other constraints on the ability to express oneself. It would be equivocation to switch between these meanings, as follows: Some newspapers censor speech by refusing to publish controversial authors. Censorship violates the First Amendment. Some newspapers violate the First Amendment by refusing to publish controversial authors.