The Interplay of Synonymy and Polysemy

2.3.2 Lexical Decomposition
The traditional view of lexical meaning cannot account for many basic aspects of 
language and its use. Many criticisms have surrounded its account of polysemy. Criticisms 
have also surrounded its view on compositionality. Many theories have grown out of a desire 
to provide a more satisfactory portrayal of polysemy and compositionality.
The views exemplified in this section are Pustejovsky (1995) and Jackendoff (1990). 
Though there are major differences between them, they share some basic similarities. The 
meaning of lexical items is built up of smaller elements, whether they be primitives or 
generative elements. Pustejovsky and Jackendoff accept that the meaning of words affects 
syntax. Even so, they hold that syntax is a separate entity from the lexicon. They follow the 
traditional model of language where the lexicon stores information and syntax is a separate 
process that builds up phrases and sentences. 
Both posit meaning which is minimalist: only certain aspects of meaning are encoded 
within a words meaning. They differ though in what type of information is encoded and the 
system used for encoding it. They also have different strategies for treating polysemy. This is 
partly due to a difference in focus: each author only discusses certain types of meaning 
extensions. Pustejovsky (1995) accounts for polysemy by including various types of 
information within a lexical entry, and then specific aspects of meaning are highlighted in 
context. Jackendoff (1990) proposes the use of principles that apply to all lexical items; 
covering variations in meaning that are widespread.
Their account of synonymy, though, is not drastically different from the traditional 
view. Jackendoff (1990) does not discuss synonymy in depth; Pustejovsky (1995) discusses it 
initially but later does not clearly discuss how his view of lexical structure better accounts for 
this type of semantic relation. Even with this limited discussion, synonymy seems to be 
judged based on similarity of the structure. That is, if two items have the same structure, they 
will be synonymous. Synonymy is not captured as any connection within the lexicon. Due to 

---

12 | 
this limited exploration of synonymy, I also describe the approach to synonymy detailed in 
Murphy (2003). Her explanation of synonymy in the lexicon can be applied to the lexical 
decompositional model of Pustejovsky (1995) and Jackendoff (1990), giving a better 
description of this phenomenon.