2 However, the hypothesis must be reduced into a form amenable to empirical verification. Obviously,
it is not possible to compare every expression in two languages. The few studies comparing the expressive capacity of two languages have been restricted to a single domain. For example, Forman et al.
1974 argues for the equality based on the existence of an elaborated grammar in HCE. Labov 1990 argues for the same thing based on the existence of an elaborated system of tense in HCE. Elsewhere,
Labov argues for the equivalence of Black English and SE based on the equivalence of their logical systems Labov 1969b and their systems of negation Labov 1969a. These studies, however, make no
pretense of being exhaustive in their coverage and although we must gratefully acknowledge their value and significance, such restricted studies cannot bring this issue to a closure.
The only practical way to extend the coverage of this study to all domains of language is to demonstrate equivalence or nonequivalence from the bottom up. Although the set of possible expressions
in any language is infinite, the set of terms and rules of combination is finite. If we are able to show that the terms and rules of combination are exactly the same at the primitive level for two languages, it
would then follow that these two languages have exactly the same expressive capacity. What has been missing until recently however, is an explicit specification of these primitive terms and rules of
combination for “real” languages. The NSM specification is exactly that.
1.4 The NSM specification
The NSM specification forms the basis for this study. It is divided up into two parts: a mini-lexicon and a mini-syntax. The lexicon contains the set of semantic primitives. The syntax specifies how these
primitives may be combined with one another. The intent is to construct a complete and universal specification such that every language has exact lexical equivalents for each primitive, and every
language allows all combinations specified in the syntax.
The primitives fall into two groups: the primitives covered in the preliminary study, Semantics and Lexical Universals Goddard and W 1994, hereafter referred to as the ESTABLISHED primitives, and the
recent additions found in Semantics, Primes and Universals W 1996, hereafter referred to as the RECENT ADDITIONS.
There are 37 primitives in the ESTABLISHED set of primitives: ESTABLISHED PRIMITIVES
SUBSTANTIVES: YOU, I, SOMEONE, SOMETHING, PEOPLE
DETERMINERS: THIS, THE SAME, OTHER
QUANTIFIERS: ONE, TWO, MANY MUCH, ALL
MENTAL PREDICATES: THINK, KNOW, WANT, FEEL
SPEECH: SAY
ACTIONS, EVENTS: DO, HAPPEN
EVALUATORS: GOOD, BAD
DESCRIPTORS: BIG, SMALL
TIME: WHEN, AFTER, BEFORE
SPACE: WHERE, UNDER, ABOVE
TAXONOMY, PARTONOMY: KIND OF, PART OF
METAPREDICATES: NOT, CAN, VER
INTERCLAUSAL LINKERS: IF, BECAUSE, LIKE
There are 18 additional primitives in the RECENT set of primitives:
3 RECENT ADDITIONS
DETERMINERSQUANTIFIERS: SOME, MORE
MENTAL PREDICATES: SEE, HEAR
MOVEMENT EXISTENCE, LIFE: MOVE, THERE IS, LIVE
SPACE: FAR, NEAR, SIDE, INSIDE, HERE
TIME: A LONG TIME, A SHORT TIME, NOW
INTERCLAUSAL LINKERS: IF ... WOULD, MAYBE,
OTHERS: WORD Since Goddard and W’s 1994 study covered some 17 languages, the primitives in the ESTABLISHED
group are quite well attested. Although the RECENT ADDITIONS appear to be attested in a number of languages, they have not yet been subjected to the same rigorous scrutiny and must be regarded as less
well established. The stability of a group of primitives is an important consideration in our interpretation of the
evidence. If I am missing a certain primitive in HCE, one could conclude either that HCE is an impoverished language or that NSM is an impoverished theory. NSM, after all, is still a hypothesis under
construction. A missing RECENT ADDITIONS primitive is likely to reflect problems with the NSM specification. On
the other hand, a missing ESTABLISHED primitive, would be the strongest possible evidence against our hypothesis. So strong, in fact, that we would need to seriously consider what is generally regarded as
linguistic heresy, that is, the possibility that HCE is indeed an impoverished and inferior language, at least in certain respects. Therefore, this ESTABLISHED group will be the subject of our study.
1.5 Falsification of hypothesis
