Seeing clearly: Frame Semantic, Psycholinguistic, and Cross ...

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 16
can cover all of its uses and not those of any other lexical form. If more than one de nition
is required, then each de nition is proof that the lexical form has a corresponding sense,
i.e. participates in that number of LUs.
This test actually dates back to Aristotle (cf. Geeraerts 1993:230); its most vig-
orous modern proponent is probably Wierzbicka (1996:242-244). Wierzbicka's program is
based on the assertion that it is possible to write de nitions that clearly de ne the meanings
of all LUs in all languages by building them up from a set of atomic semantic universals.
We will see how thisworks in speci c cases in Section 1.4.
Yes/No Tests
These are originally based on Quine's (1960) discussion of polysemy in terms of
truth-theoretic semantics, but it is possible for proponents of other semantic theories to
make use of similar tests.
In their original form, these tests are basically assertions of the form \X is Y but
not Y"; if we can truthfully make such an assertion, the argument goes, then there must be
two senses of Y, by the Law of the Excluded Middle. Although this sounds very simple, it
is actually di cult to nd simple, acceptable sentences of this type.
(1) a. She's rich, but she's not really rich.
b. She's rich, but she's not rich.
(with lengthening and higher volume on the second rich),
In actual speech, we often nd sentences like Ex. (1-a), containing the hedge really, meaning
that on a scale from poor to rich, she is closer to the rich end, but she is not near or at the
end, i.e. the second occurrence picks out a more extreme point. As (Kay 1983:135) points
out, \. . . a hedged sentence may contain a metalinguistic comment regarding the way in
which aword or phrase of the sentence is being used in the sentence." Thus, we need not
conclude that rich is polysemous on the basis of Ex. (1-a). The intonation contour on rich
in Ex. (1-b) (which is usually more dramatic than the contrastive stress that \Y but not
Y" would require in any case) probably serves a similar function, so that we cannot regard
either sentence as simply using rich in two di erent senses.
On the other hand, a sentence like \I'm happy, but I'm not happy" can be inter-
preted as meaning that I feel two contradictory emotions or that di erent parts of me feel