(For CC, c.6 From Taylor)
[Note: Taylor uses SCHEMA/INSTANCE where CC use HYPERNYM and HYPONYM.] 1. On the basis of clear-cut examples of the schema-instance relation, such as the relation between [ANIMAL], [CAT], and [DOG], devise a set of tests for diagnosing the relation between a schema [A] and its instances [B] and [C]. Here are some examples of test sentences. B is a (kind of) A *A is a (kind of) B *B isa [kind of) C If it's B, it must be A _ If it's A, it may be (but need not be) B If it's B, it can't be C ?It's not a B, it's an A. Having satisfied yourself of the validity of your tests on a range of clear-cut examples of the relation, apply the tests to some not-so-clear data, for example: cup, mug, beaker, pot trousers, jeans, pants, shorts wife/husband, partner, girl-friend/boy-friend, friend house, home, cottage, bungalow, apartment, mansion, hovel, tent, hut, caravan, (my) place, residence red, scarlet, pink, crimson, maroon Because the words in these sets may not constitute clear-cut examples of the schema-instance relation, and may not lend themselves to an organization in a well-behaved taxonomy, speakers are likely to have fluctuating intuitions on your test sentences. it will be important to test your data on a sample of speakers. 2. The tests devised for (1) were applied to nominal concepts. How could these tests be modified so that they can be applied to relations between verbs and between prepositions? (If you are searching for a verb which is schematic for (to) think, it may not be legitimate to construct sentences of the kind Thinking is a kind of mental activity. This test sentence makes use of the nominalized form thinking, and shows, if any- thing, that the nominal concept [THINKING] is an instance of the nominal concept [MENTAL ACTIVITY], not that the verbal concept [THINK] is an instance ofa more schematic verbal concept.) Are there prepositions that stand in a schema-instance relation? Consider the following: in-inside of on~on top of over-above under-underneath-below 3. Some words in a language have meanings that are highly schematic. Examples, in English, include (to) do, thing, creature, stuff. What other words in English could be regarded as semantically highly schematic? List some of the most highly schematic words in the languages with which you are familiar.