If one word means its opposite, it's called an autantonym or contronym.
What you are referring to is called polysemy:
(from Greek: πολυ-, poly-, "many" and σῆμα, sêma, "sign") is the capacity for a sign (e.g., a word, phrase, etc.) or signs to have multiple related meanings (sememes), i.e., a large semantic field. It is usually regarded as distinct from homonymy, in which the multiple meanings of a word may be unconnected or unrelated.
Charles Fillmore and Beryl Atkins’ definition stipulates three elements: (i) the various senses of a polysemous word have a central origin, (ii) the links between these senses form a network, and (iii) understanding the ‘inner’ one contributes to understanding of the ‘outer’ one.
Love can be used reasonably and accurately with both versions you give, because language is more than the sum of its parts. Love is much more than one thing, though one word can be used.
- I love fish. I have raised tropical saltwater fish for 12 years now.
- I love fish. The light, flaky texture and delicate flavor of (favorite fish here) beats steak any day!
Verbal irony is something different. After the Charlie Hebdo attack, verbal irony was everywhere, as in this cartoon.
Edited to add: OP's comment is an example of contronym:
Contronyms ...do not tend to cause confusion, as it is generally clear from their grammatical or semantic context which of their two meanings is intended. In the sentence “He buckled,” for example, we know that the subject collapsed, since in its sense of “to fasten,” the verb is transitive and must be followed by a direct object; similarly, in the two grammatically identical sentences, “The house weathered the storms” and “The storms weathered the house,” simple logic tells us what “weathered” means in each case. Yet there can certainly be instances — e.g., “The horse had a handicap” — in which a contronymic sentence is interpretable in opposite ways.
Till a' the seas gang dry, my dear,/And the rocks melt wi' the sun;/And I will luve thee still, my dear,/While the sands o' life shall run.
I feel like he is probably referring to a lack of eloquence and simplified articulation. Like getting "wordy" and using an entire page to illustrate a character's shoe color, where he's determined it less "awful" to do so with a single poetic sentence.
Best Answer
Google NGRAMS shows "in the desert" to be much more common than "on the desert".
Some uses of "on the desert" have a preceding word, e.g., "bordering on the desert". But it's basically 200/1.
For "in a desert" vs. "on a desert," it's about 2/1.
"in a desert" is even more dominant when "on a desert island" is considered, since the phrase dominates the "on a desert" references.