The broad problem in this study is to examine some relationships between generality and ambiguity for a set of words. The generality of a word refers to the inclusivesness of a class which the word names; and the more general the word, the less narrow is the referent class it represents. The ambiguity of a word is a condition where a word evokes more than one meaning response in a perceiver. The results of this study suggest that no functional difference between the concepts of generality and ambiguity was perceived by the participating subjects.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bruning, J.L., and Kintz, B.L. ( 1968). Computational Handbook of Statistics (Glenview, Illinois) .
2.
Cassirer, E. ( 1966). On the theory of the foundation of concepts. In Leonard Uhr (ed.), Pattern Recognition (New York).
3.
Fink, J.B. and Goyer, R.S. ( 1968). Behavioristics and communication process. In L. Thayer (ed.), Communication Spectrum: Proceedings of the 15th Annual Conference of the National SSC (Lawrence, Kansas).
4.
Goyer, R.S. ( 1970). Communication, communicative process, meaning: Toward a unified theory. J. Commun., 20, 4.
5.
Greenough, J.B. and Kitteredge, G.L. ( 1961). Words and Their Ways in English Speech (New York) .
6.
Guildford, J.P. ( 1956). Fundamental Statistics in Psychology and Education (New York).
7.
Osgood, C.E., Suci, G.J. and Tannenbaum, P.H. ( 1957). The Measurement of Meaning (Urbana, Illinois) .
8.
Perrin, P.G., Smith, G.H. and Corder, J.W. ( 1968). Handbook of Current English (Glenview, Illinois) .
9.
Spreen, O. and Schulz, R.W. ( 1966). Parameters of abstraction, meaningfulness, and pronounceability for 329 nouns. J. verb. Learn. verb. Behav. , 5, 549.
