If two words have the same meaning, then they refer to the same thing.
Linguists (and especially philosophers of language) distinguish between using a word and mentioning a word. If I say 'Fido come here', I use 'Fido' to refer to my dog. In contrast, when I say 'Fido is a common name among dogs', I mention 'Fido' to refer to the word 'Fido'. The referents differ, so the meanings differ.
So if I were to say, "Murray said - and I quote - 'I will be back by five'". My quotation refers to what Murray said, so it doesn't mean what Murray said.
So, if Murray were to use the name of G-d and I were to quote him, I wouldn't use the name of G-d. In quoting him, I would have uttered something homophonic (like the two meanings of orange) with the name of G-d.
Similarly, if I wanted to write a computer program that searches for uses of the name of G-d and censors them (or rendered them acceptable), I'd need to mention the name of G-d in my code.
Lastly, suppose I have a friend whose name is a homophone of the name of G-d (e.g. this man), would I be permitted to refer to him by name?
In sum: Is it ever acceptable to utter a word that is indistinguishable from the name of G-d?