I meant that they would successfully parse the words in context (and recognize the specific words and meanings), using their language ability. To use an example

I meant that they would successfully parse the words in context (and recognize the specific words and meanings), using their language ability. To use an example from an interview with a modern master of Sanskrit constrained writing (http://www.indictoday.com/interviews/citrakavya-the-wonder-poetry-an-interview-with-dr-shankar-rajaraman/ http://www.indictoday.com/interviews/citrakavya-the-wonder-p...), in an English sentence like “She is his panicky Hispanic friend”, the sound “hispanic” may recur when spoken (depending on the speaker's accent I guess) but most listeners would successfully parse it anyway. (I think there is some “lookahead” in the way we parse things... even if “She is Hispanic” and “She is his panicky…” begin with the same set of sounds, when listening to the latter sentence the listener would quickly backtrack and latch on to the correct understanding, which includes unconsciously re-analyzing the earlier words.) The difference I was suggesting is that such instances are either rare or awkward in English. But in Sanskrit they are common (helped by poets' enormous skill over centuries, honed in a highly language-focused tradition) even in popular works, and feel natural/elegant.