HOMONYMY, ICONICITY, AND PROTOTYPICALITY

Dirk GEERAERTS

Katholieke Universiteit Leuven

1. A SEMANTIC THERAPY FOR HOMONYMIC CONFLICTS?

Ever since Gilliéron, the resolution of homonymic clashes has

been considered a paradigm case of the operation of the Humboldtian
principle, i.e. of a diagrammatic form of iconicity based on
isomorphism.1 Traditional treatments of homonymic conflicts2 gener-
ally exhibit two characteristics. First, it is accepted that there are many
restrictions on the pathological nature of homonymy, and second, the
therapeutic measures are said to involve formal substitutions: at least
one of the conflicting homonymie forms is replaced by another lexical
form.3 Its is not usually taken into account that next to such a formal
reorganization on the level of the signifiant, homonymy may also lead
to a conceptual reorganization on the level of the signifié. The homo-
nymie items may merge completely, in the sense that their original
meanings may be combined into a single polysemie complex. The
process in question is, to be sure, different from the mere disappear-
ance of one of the homonyms. For instance, of the Middle Dutch pair
of homonyms quareel 'square tile, brick' and quareel 'arrow with a
short, square shaft, as used in catapults and the like', only the former
survives in the regional form kareel, for the obvious reason that the
thing referred to by the latter is no longer a part of our present-day
culture. The conceptual mergers envisaged here differ from such cases
of lexical loss to the extent that at least some of the senses of both
original items survive after the process of merger. The existence of
conceptual mergers means that any homonymie configuration may
develop in three instead of two different ways. Instead of a choice
between maintaining the homonymy or therapeutically substituting one
of the homonymie forms, the choice consists of conceptual reorganiza-
tion (merger), lexical reorganization (substitution), and status quo
(extant homonymy).

Belgian Journal of Linguistics 5 (1990), 49-74. DOI 10.1075/bjl.5.04gee

ISSN 0774-5141 / E-ISSN 1569-9676 © John Benjamins Publishing Company
50 Dirk GEERAERTS

From a theoretical point of view, the merger of homonyms would

seem to be a downright violation of the same Humboldtian principle
that triggers the therapeutic change. Because the conceptual merger
involves a process of polysemization, the desired one-to-one corres-
pondence between form and meaning remains blatantly broken up.
However, as I have suggested elsewhere (1985a), this conclusion can
be avoided if it is accepted, first, that conceptual categories may be
prototypically organized clusters of single meanings, and second, that
the requirement of isomorphism applies to the prototypically clustered
conceptual categories rather than to the distinct senses of which these
consist. That is to say, the isomorphic principle may be reinterpreted
against the background of the prototypical conception of conceptual
structure.4 Polysemy within a prototypical category will then be con-
sidered harmless from the point of view of iconicity, but polysemy
among distinct prototypically organized categories will be a non-iconic
configuration. In the final paragraph, the fundamental motivation for
this distinction between intercategorial and intracategorial polysemy
will be considered in more detail. At this point, it suffices to see that
prototypicality is now an additional restriction on the operation of the
isomorphic principle: a one-to-one correspondence between the formal
and the conceptual level is compatible with polysemy if the senses
involved are part of a prototypical cluster. This reinterpretation of the
requirement of isomorphic iconicity leads to the hypothesis that mer-
gers of homonyms involve a process of prototype formation: mergers
do not violate the Humboldtian principle if the conceptual reorganiza-
tion consists of a process of prototype formation.

A preliminary illustration of this hypothesis follows from a recon-

sideration of the examples of avoidance of polysemy presented by
Goossens (1962).5 In the contact-zone between two dialect-geographi-
cally distinct areas, non-isomorphic configurations occur as a result of
the overlapping of the lexical-semantic systems that exist at either side
of the border (see figure 1). A structurally similar configuration in the
border area may lead to two distinct therapeutic configurations. In the
opper-case, the original concepts are merged into a single new one;
there is no longer a lexemic contrast as there is in the areas at either
side of the border. In the keest-case, the lexemic contrast is maintained.
This distinct development can be explained if it is accepted that in the
keest-example, the etymologically related concepts are too far apart to
be recognized as nuances of a single prototypical category, whereas the
reverse is true in the opper-example. In fact, the original concepts can
be distinguished by using the periphrastic combinations grote heukel
and kleine heukel; what were once distinct categories are now seen as
nuances of a single category. Furthermore, the examples schematically
represented in figure 1 suggest that there is a hierarchical relationship
 HOMONYMY, ICONICITY, AND PROTOTYPICALITY 51

between prototype formation and the operation of the isomorphic prin-

ciple. First, the possibility of a conceptual reorganization is checked;
the isomorphic principle applies afterwards, since the outcome of the
operation of the principle depends on the presence or absence of a
previous conceptual reorganization.6

Left Overlapping Right

dialect borderline dialect
area area area

"Stone or
core (of a keest kern kern
fruit)"

"Shoot (of
a plant, a scheut scheut keest
potatoe)"

Loss of keest in the borderline area (cf. Willemyns 1966)

Left Overlapping Right

dialect borderline dialect
area area area

"Small pile
of hay that is heukel opper
not yet com-
pletely dry"
heukel
"Large pile
of hay that is heukel
completely opper
dry"

Loss of opper in the borderline area (cf. Goossens 1962)

Figure 1.
52 Dirk GEERAERTS

Disregarding further details with regard to the avoidance of

polysemy, it will be clear that we can now formulate two hypotheses
with regard to the avoidance of homonymy: 1) conceptual reorganiza-
tions towards merger involve prototype effect, and 2) conceptual reor-
ganization logically precedes the operation of the isomorphic principle.
In what follow, a case study shall be presented in which both hypothe-
ses are tested, although most of the attention will be given to the first.
In particular, by following the semantic history of two near-homonyms
on the basis of textual material, a closer look at the process of concep-
tual reorganization is possible than with regard to Goossens's dialec-
tological material. Because the latter is based on traditional question-
naires and dictionaries, it is not suited for a fine-grained historical
analysis based on examples of usage in context.

2. METHOD AND MATERIALS

The present-day Dutch word verduwen exhibits a range of appli-

cation that results from the merger of two etymologically distinct
words. On the one hand, there is the form verduwen itself, a derivation
of the verb duwen 'to push' with the prefix ver-; the basic meaning is
'to push aside, to push away'. Ver- has a large amount of morphologi-
cal meanings, of which one other is relevant in the case of verduwen.
Next to the 'removal'-sense, a 'destructive' sense has to be taken into
account; verduwen then means approximately 'to damage or destroy by
pushing or pressing'. The relationship between the subsidiary 'destruc-
tive' sense and the main spatial sense will become clear in the follow-
ing pages. The vowel /y/ of verduwen is a reflex of Proto-Germanic û,
which frequently occurs with a diphtong /au/ as a regional and/or
informal variant: nu/nou, stuwen/stouwen, gruwen/grouwen. On the
other hand, the /au/-form is the historically regular one for verdouwen,
which is a derivation from ver- and douwen 'to thaw'. The etymologi-
cal meaning is 'to make something thaw, to make something melt', but
already upon its first attested occurrence in Middle Dutch, the word
displays 'to digest' as its main meaning. The word is synchronically
opaque, because douwen 'to thaw' does not survive in either Middle
Dutch or Modern Dutch. The notion 'to thaw' is now normally ex-
pressed by dooien, a historical variant of douwen.1 In this sense, if
verdouwen occurs at all nowadays, it is experienced as an informal
variant of verduwen, even with the meaning 'to digest'. Historically,
verduwen is a weak verb, verdouwen a strong one. Already in Middle
Dutch, however, the formal distinction between both words has to a
large extent disappeared; in particular, the weak form is the major one.
The quotations we shall be using are taken from the corpus of the
 HOMONYMY, ICONICITY, AND PROTOTYPICALITY 53

Woordenboek der Nederlandsche Taal, i.e. the Dutch counterpart of

the Oxford English Dictionary and the Deutsches Wörterbuch.8

Now, what method might be used to determine the presence of a

prototypical development? A process of prototypical merger may be
characterized by the following points. First, at a particular moment in
their history, both words have developed kinds of usage that are iden-
tical or that may be experienced as closely related. Second, in the
further course of their development, this common ground becomes
statistically more prominent, whereas the applications that do not
belong to it (or that cannot be reinterpreted in a straightforward fashion
in function of it) become structurally less important. On the one hand,
the prototypical development needs a starting-point: there has to be
some point of contact for it to get started at all. On the other hand, once
it has got started, the merger of the original concepts into a prototypi-
cally structured one implies strengthening of the common kinds of
usage and withering of the others. This means that a comparison will
have to be made between a middle period in the development of the
etymologically distinct words (when they are no longer restricted to
their etymological meaning but have developed a number of common
or related applications), and a period when the merger is (almost)
completed. In the case of verduwen, the Early Modern Dutch period
(16th century) will be compared with the 19th century. Starting the
investigation after the Middle Dutch period avoids a number of metho-
dological difficulties with regard to the Middle Dutch material, which
is often difficult to date, and which exhibits much more dialectal
variation than the younger material (we shall be concerned primarily
with the development towards and in Standard Dutch).

At this point, it should be mentioned that the absolute number of

available quotations (about 60 for both periods together) may not be
enough to yield results that are statistically safe. Because the absolute
frequencies with which particular senses appear are sometimes very
low, statistical distortions could easily appear. If, however, it is ac-
cepted that the material used here constitutes a representative sample
of 16th century and 19th century usage, the changes in the relative
frequencies of particular senses would still reflect (however roughly)
the actual changes in the semasiological structure of both words. In
other words, a certain amount of caution is called for; the lines of
development traced in the following pages are only correct to the extent
that the WNT-material for verduwen and verdouwen is a representative
sample of 16th century and 19th century usage.
54 Dirk GEERAERTS

3. THE SIXTEENTH-CENTURY SITUATION

To begin with, let us have a look at the quotations that can be
semantically related with verdouwen 'to digest'. The basic meaning 'to
digest' itself is found in eight quotations, illustrated by (1). To these
eight can be added two others (among which (2)), in which the mean-
ing 'to digest' appears with an intransitive rather than the more usual
transitive grammatical valence.

(1) Dat zy in Porto Desir verwintert hadden, alwaer zy op een eylandt

[...] om hun te ververschen soo veel Zee-robben, Pinguins ende
Eyeren haelden als zy verdouwen mochten. In WIEDER, Reis v.
Mahu en De Cordes 220 (1559).9
'That they had spent the winter in Porto Desir, where they got from
an island [...] to feed themselves, as many seals, penguins, and eggs
as they could digest'.

(2) Sy stercken de Maghe [...], doen de spyse verdouwen, verteeren

alle koude vochticheden. TWEEDE SCHIPV. 3, 82 (1559).
'They (certain flowers) strengthen the stomach [...], make the food-
stuffs digest, consume all cold humours'.

Next to these cases of the literal use of 'to digest', there are figu-
rative applications of the same sense, such as (3). Here, the meaning
is 'to digest inwardly' (for example, by trying to overcome the emo-
tional impact of negative experiences, by assimilating facts or expe-
riences on the intellectual level, or by assessing the acceptability of
something from a moral, ethical point of view). The transition from the
literal to such a figurative sense is not uncommon in expressions refer-
ring to eating: think of to digest, it sticks in his throat, to swallow, to
stomach in English.

(3) Niet wel en conste ick verdouwen, dat so mennighe mensche, so

voor Rechte als anderssins [...] so dickwijlen stonden als verbaest
ende voor thooft gheslaghen, wanneer sy eenighe buytenlantsche
woorden hoorden. V.D.WERVE A. ij r° (1553).
'I could not easily swallow the fact that so many people, in court
or elsewhere [...] stood there as if surprised and dumbfounded,
when they heard a few foreign words'.
(4) Ghy moet my met teerder spijsen lauen, sulck woorden die strauen
can ick niet verdouwen. ANTW. SP. f j r° (1562).
'You must feed me with more delicate food; such words that punish
I cannot swallow'.
 HOMONYMY, ICONICITY, AND PROTOTYPICALITY 55

(5)Hy can dat niet cauwen (of verduwen). GEM. DUYTSCHE

SPREEKW. (ed. KLOEKE) 59 (1550).
'He cannot chew (or digest) it'.

(6) Als die passien ghecoect ende verduwet sijn, soe mogen sij vrylic
metten prophete seggen (etc.). CASSIANUS, Der ouder Vad.
Coll. 81c (transi. 1506).
'When the passions have been cooked and digested, they may say
in the words of the prophet (etc.)'.

The link between the literal and the figurative use of 'to digest' is
made apparent by the quotations (4), (5), and (6), where verduwen/
verdouwen in its figurative sense is used in combination with another
word from the semantic field of eating and digesting: spijs 'food',
koken 'to cook', kauwen 'to chew', laven 'to refresh'. The figurative
character of (4) will be clear from the context, whereas in (5), it fol-
lows from the fact that the expression is cited as a proverb. In (6) the
abstract character of passie, 'passion, violent emotion' would seem to
call for a figurative reading of verduwen, but it should be mentioned
that a literal reading is not excluded, if the quotation is interpreted
against the background of the theory of humours: if emotions are
caused by particular fluids in the body, mastering an emotion equals
physiologically digesting the fluids in question. Even so, given that an
abstract reading of passie could hardly be excluded, (6) would still be
a case in which a link between a literal and a figurative interpretation
of 'to digest' is explicitly present. All in all, the link with the literal
interpretation is apparent in most of the cases in which the figurative
reading is possible: there are two strictly figurative quotations, such as
(3), next to the three mentioned above, in which reminiscences of the
literal interpretation can still be strongly felt.

(7) Tis meer dan twee maenscynen geleden dat ian ployaert mijne man
noch dit noch dat en dede, ende ben nochtans wijfs genoch om hem
te verduwen. EUANG. V.D. SPINR. B ij r° (± 1500).
'It is now more than two months ago since Easy-going John my
husband, did either this or that, and yet, I am woman enough to
cope with him'.

In (7), the notion 'to digest' is generalized into the notion 'to cope
physically with'. There is only one 16th century example, although a
few 17th century ones may be found. It should be noted that this
application shares the notion 'to endure, to stand, to bear' with the
previously mentioned figurative extensions. In this sense, it could be
said that there is only one non-literal meaning, viz. 'to cope with
56 Dirk GEERAERTS

(something)', which can be specified in a mental (intellectual, emo-

tional, moral) as well as in a physical sense.
As for verduwen 'to push away', quotations such as (8), in which
the notion appears in its purest literal form, are relatively scarce; there
is only one other in the corpus next to (8). Figurative readings are
much more common; they represent two core meanings: 'to harm', and
'to make (something) disappear'. The notion 'to harm', which is illus-
trated by (9) and (10), and which is represented in the corpus by three
other quotations, comes in nuances such as 'to treat badly, to oppress,
to slight, to undermine, to take the strength away of, to subdue'.
(8) Beesten verschudden vel en wol, Vogelkens haer pluimen ver-
duwen, Die in 't Niewe Jaer vernuwen. SPIEGHEL 213 (1583).
'Animals shake off skin and wool, birds push away their feathers,
which will be renewed in the new year'.
(9) Schouten, bailliuwen, die vanden coninck gestelt sijn, welcken nu
als gieren donnoselen verduwen en voor beschermers der goeden
nu willen getelt sijn; wie in heur handen compt, die mach wel
gruwen! SP. V.D. HEL 8 (±1560).
'Sheriffs and bailiffs, who are appointed by the king, who oppress
simple people, just like vultures, and who would like to be counted
among the protectors of the righteous - who falls into their hands
may well be horrified!'
(10) Men siet nu tpriesterscap heel verdouwen, Men heetse afgoden en
Antecristus cnapen; Omdatse som anders doen, dan sij souwen
Versmaet men altsamen muncken en papen. A. BUNS 42 (1528).
'One can now see that priesthood is treated badly; they are called
idols and servants of the Antichrist. Because they sometimes
behave differently than they should, monks and priests together
are scorned'.
(ll)Eenen persoon die om huwen ghaet Moet thoogen als jc, dat hy
een man zy. Want die hem van zyn wyf verduwen laet Tes een
laenekaert. EVERAERT 533 (1538?).
'If anyone goes off to marry, he should do as I do and show that
he is a man. For who lets himself be shoved away by his wife is
a coward'.
(12) Verdrinck icse die my mint, zoe sullen my verdouwen Alle
schoone vrouwen die draghen amoreus enghien. A. BUNS in
Leuv. Bijdr. 4, 292 (± 1540).
'If I drown who loves me, all beautiful women who know about
love will reject me'.
 HOMONYMY, ICONICITY, AND PROTOTYPICALÏTY 57

(13) V deruen mi seer rout Ic beminne v bouen gout Mer fortuine mi

verdout. ANTW. LIEDB. 238 (ed. 1544).
'To miss you grieves me much. I love you more than gold, but
Fortune rejects me'.
As was the case with the figurative reading of 'to digest',
examples can be found that make the transition between the literal and
the transferred reading of 'to push away' explicit. In fact, the idea of
pushing someone (literally) aside is still vivid in (11) and (12). The
figurative reading 'to treat someone in a way that is not to his advan-
tage' is accompanied by the image of someone being pushed away
from the position he has (or should have, or would like to have) with
regard to someone else. Etymologically, English expressions such as to
push someone into a corner, an outcast, or to reject are based on the
same image: the literal movement of being pushed away from the
presence or the society of a particular person or a group of people
symbolizes and accompanies an abstract action of refusing to support
or tolerate someone. In (13), the combination of a literal and a trans-
ferred reading comes about by the fact that the second person involved
in the act of pushing away is, in fact, a personification, viz. Fortune as
an allegorical figure. Needless to say, there may be contexts where it
is not clear whether the literal image behind the transferred sense is
still vividly present. If such unclear cases are counted with the clearly
transitional ones, there are five quotations in the corpus such as (11)-
(13), and five such as (9)-(10).
The second figurative extension of 'to push away' is illustrated by
(14). Here again, a quotation such as (15) presents a borderline case in
which the idea of a literal movement is still present, given the allegori-
cal character of the context. On the abstract reading, self-interest
should be made to disappear, but within the literal context of the play,
the allegorical character Self-interest is expelled. Obviously, a transi-
tional case such as (15) also links up with the transitional cases (11)-
(13), since a similar literal image (the expulsion of a person, here a
personification) lurks at the background of the figurative reading. In
cases such as (14)-(15), it is even more difficult than before to separate
the transitional from the purely figurative cases, but there seem to be
two quotations in the corpus to illustrate each of them.
(14) Wilt u niet versaghen, laet die sorghe verdouwen. RODE ROOS
95 (1588?).
'Do not lose courage, let trouble be made to disappear'.
(15)Eyghen Wasdom verduut, onder der caritaten subgecxie.
EVERAERT 70 (1511).
'Expell Self-interest, guided by charity'.
58 Dirk GEERAERTS

(16) U godlijc saet en heeft in mij niet gevaet [...] In mij, steenige
eerde [...] Eest verdort, vanden doorne liet ict verdouwen.
A. BUNS 394 (ed. 1567).
'Your divine seed has not germinated in me [...] It has withered
[...] in me, stony earth, I have let it be destroyed by thorns'.

(17) Den helschen zaeyere [...] Heefter crocke ende oncruyt onder
ghezaeyt, Dwelck de goe taerwe heeft verdauwen En ghebrocht in
verflauwen met nyde deurlaeyt. POLIT. BALLAD. 23 (1578).
'The infernal sower [...] has sown vetch and tares amongst it,
which have crushed the good corn, and made it to wither, mixed
with envy'.

Finally, it should be noticed that the figurative extensions of 'to

push aside' can both be connected with the concept 'to destroy by
pushing or pressing', which is, as mentioned above, a possible morpho-
logical meaning of verduwen. The link between 'to harm' and 'to
destroy' does not need much comment, whereas a connection between
'destruction' and 'disappearance (being pushed away)' can be estab-
lished through the notion 'complete destruction, annihilation'. Unfor-
tunately, the reading 'to destroy by pressing or pushing' is not found
in the corpus in its most literal form. The closest we find are (16) and
(17), where the literal notion of destruction is allegorically coupled
with the abstract idea 'to weaken, to subdue'; the seed that is destroyed
symbolically represents an abstract notion such as the word of God.
Moreover, it is not impossible to interpret (16) and (17) as transitional
cases between 'to harm, to subdue' and 'to push aside': it is possible
to read, not that the good seed is crushed by thorns and weeds, but that
it is pushed aside, pushed away from the place where it might germi-
nate. In this sense, the concept 'to destroy or damage by pushing or
pressing' appears to play a role only in the background of the sema-
siological structure of verduwen.

The foregoing analysis is schematically represented in figure 2.

The numbers between round brackets in each of the boxes refer to the
illustrative quotations; the unbracketed numbers give the total number
of illustrations in the corpus for each of the separate areas of the
diagram. Overlapping of boxes indicates that there is a clear semantic
relationship between the senses represented by those boxes; thus, 'to
digest' overlaps with 'to cope physically with', because the latter
meaning is an extension of the former. The quotations in the overlap-
ping areas are the transitional cases discussed above. The arrows
symbolize the points of contact between both conceptual clusters; they
connect senses that can be seen as near-identical, or as extensions of
each other. There are two such lines.
 HOMONYMY, ICONICITY, AND PROTOTYPICALITY 59

A "to digest"
B "to cope mentally"
C "to cope physically"

D "to push aside"

E "to harm, treat bad-
ly, subdue etc."
F "to make disappear"
G "to destroy or
damage by pressing
or pushing"

In the first place, the literal cores of both clusters can be related,
in the sense that 'to digest5 can be reinterpreted in function of 'to push
away'. For one thing, digesting involves moving food from the mouth
downward. In this respect, it is interesting to see that the literal reading
'to push away' may be specified as 'to push downward', as illustrated
by (18).
60 Dirk GEERAERTS

(18) Ghi hadt mi onder v verduwet En had ic mi niet cort gheuonden

Ghi hadt mi so onderbonden Dat ic ghebleuen ware ghesmacht.
SEGHELYN V. IHERUS. b iij v° (before 1517).
'You had pushed me downward under you, and if I had not been
strong, you would have held me so that I would have choked'.

Furthermore, digesting involves the decomposition of foodstuffs

(they disappear, they no longer subsist in the form they originally had).
The relationship with the figurative extensions of verduwen ('to make
something disappear' and 'to damage') will be clear. On the other
hand, the link between both literal concepts should not be overstressed.
First, the notion of pushing or pressing is not terribly marked in the
concept 'to digest'. Second, the notion of assimilation (i.e. nutritious
assimilation), which is essential for 'to digest', is not a part of 'to push
aside'.
The second line to be drawn is rather stronger, because it is in fact
based on near-identity. Coping mentally with negative experiences or
facts equals making them disappear from the foreground of one's
(intellectual or emotional) attention. Mentally digesting something in a
succesfull fashion entails removing its disturbing mental presence
because an adequate emotional, intellectual or moral reaction has been
achieved. In this sense, there is a fairly direct link between the abstract
readings 'to cope mentally' and 'to make disappear': the former can be
reinterpreted (exploiting a similar polysemy in English) as an act of
putting certain mental phenomena aside, of discarding them.

4. THE NINETEENTH-CENTURY SITUATION

The lines of contact identified in the foregoing analysis lead to a
particular hypothesis about the development of 'to digest' and 'to push
away'. If both conceptual clusters merge at all, three things are likely
to happen, given the hypothesis that conceptual merger involves proto-
type formation. First, senses that do not belong to the points of contact
will become marginal or will disappear. For instance, this should be the
case for 'to harm or damage' and 'to cope physically with something'.
Second, the notion 'to digest' will be reinterpreted in terms of 'to push
away'. However, since the conceptual distance between both notions is
still fairly great, it does not seem very probable that the structural
position of 'to digest' will be strengthened. Third, the strongest point
of contact (the application with regard to experiences that have to be
overcome) will become conceptually prominent.

The first hypothesis is easily confirmed. The notion 'to cope

physically with something' does not survive, and 'to treat badly, to
 HOMONYMY, ICONICITY, AND PROTOTYPICALITY 61

harm (etc.)' survives only in quotation (19). Typically, (19) is a tran-

sitional case in the sense that the literal interpretation 'to push aside'
is still vivid (due to the presence of another spatial expression, viz.
stap): the separate, autonomous character of the reading 'to harm (etc.)'
is greatly reduced. Furthermore, because there are no cases similar to
(16) and (17), the concept 'to damage or destroy by pushing or pres-
sing' recedes even further to the background.

(19) Ach, by verdrukking, ergernissen Ontmoet, verduwd by elken

stap! Sints ik Jerusalem moest missen In steeds gerekte
ballingschap! DA COSTA 3, 160 (1848).
'Oh, together with oppression, I encountered offences, pushed
aside with every step, since I had to leave Jerusalem, in an ever
prolonged exile!'

(20) De wezenlijke bestanddelen van de meeste droespoeders, komen

daarin overeen, dat zij, de levenskracht verhoogende, zoo wel op
de verduwings-organen als de vaten werken. CLATER-
RIJNDERS, Paarden-Arts 26 (1840).
'The basic components of most powders against glanders are
similar in the sense that they strengthen the vital forces and exert
an influence on the digestive organs as well as on the vascular
system'.

(21) 'Zou 't nog niet bijdraaien', weifelde Dik en hij verduwde met
moeite een paar kinderachtige tranen. NAEFF, Veulen 184 (1903).
'In doubt, Dick said: 'Wouldn't it be turning to the good yet?';
with some difficulty, he pushed back some childish tears'.

In accordance with the second part of the second hypothesis, it is

difficult to find quotations in which the literal interpretation of 'to
digest' and 'to push away' occurs; the more usual terms in the 19th
century are verteren and wegduwen respectively. However, examples
may be found by slightly stretching the boundaries of our investiga-
tion. If we take into account the derivation verduwing 'process of
digestion', in (20); and if we go just beyond the terminus post quern
non of 1900, we find an example of 'to push back' in (21). On the
other hand, a metalinguistic quotation such as (22) is evidence for the
conjecture that 'to digest' is reinterpreted in terms of 'to push aside';
further evidence will be presented further on. In (23), the concepts of
pushing something away and the notion of digestion are similarly
combined, though this may be a rather more incidental combination.

(22) De eigenlijke betekenis van het verbum 'verduwen' is wegduwen,

door duwen verplaatsen. In figuurlijken zin zegt men van eene
62 Dirk GEERAERTS

spijs dat zij niet te verduwen is, als zij moeilijk verteerd kan
worden. NOORD EN ZUID 8, 251 (1885).
'The true meaning of the verb "verduwen" is to push away, to
move by pushing. Figuratively, one can say of food that it cannot
be "verduwd", if it is difficult to digest'.

(23) 't Is een walvisch, die mij nadert, En met loddrig oog aanschouwt,
En mij, als een andren Jonas, Leukweg naar zijn maag verdouwt.
V. ZEGGELEN 1, 133 (1852).
'It is a whale that approaches me, and looks at me with blurry
eyes, and simply shoves me to his stomach, like another Jonah'.

(24) Nederlanders, als ge 't woord 'verzuipen' plat vindt - een woord
dat nooit over myn lippen kwam, want ik ben zoo grof niet -
bedenkt dan dat ik tot u spreek, tot u, gy die erger dingen kunt ver-
duwen dan gemeene woorden. MULTATULI 4, 262 (1865).
'Dutchmen, if you feel that the word "verzuipen" [to drown] is
vulgar - a word that never crossed my lips, for I am not crude -
recall that I am addressing you, you who can stomach worse things
than vulgar words'.

Finally, the correctness of the third hypothesis appears from the

fact that there are no less than fifteen quotations such as (24), in which
the notion 'to cope mentally with something' is present. As in the 16th
century, transitional quotations such as (25) and (26) can be found; the
link between 'to digest (literally)' and 'to digest mentally' is appar-
ently still strong enough to invite allusive or allegorical references to
a material process of digestion in a context that as a whole receives a
figurative interpretation.

(25) Ik wil niet dansen naar de pijpen van Mijnheer. Het heeft me al
leed genoeg gedaan, dat u het doet, dat u zelfs de steenen opslikt,
die hij u te verduwen geeft. SCHIMMEL, B.v . Omm 1, 9 (1870).
'I do not want to dance to Mylord's tune. It has grieved me enough
already that you do so, that you even swallow the stones that he
gives you to digest'.

(26) Wie heden Zijn dagen wil besteden Op 't veld der politiek, diens
voorhoofd moet vereelt zijn, En hem een maag bedeeld zijn, Die
zonder ooit te schrikken, Verduwen kan en slikken. V. LENNEP,
Poët. 13, 115 (1856).
'Nowadays, if someone wishes to spend his days on the political
field, his forehead has to be callous, and he has to be endowed
with a stomach that can digest and swallow without ever being
surprised'.
 HOMONYMY, ICONICITY, AND PROTOTYPICALITY 63

(27) Het scheen, als of hij onze dwaalbegrippen in zijne stille overden-
king verduwd had, en nu eerst deel begon te nemen in het gesprek,
dat onze wandeling veraangenaamde. GEEL 226 (1835).
'It seemed as if he had disregarded our misconceptions in his quiet
meditation, and as if it was only now that he began to take part in
the conversation that enlivened our walk'.

(28) Men kan zich wel voorstellen, dat de Keizer dien hoon niet on-
gewroken konde verduwen. HAAFNER, Ceilon 230 (1810).
'One can easily imagine that the emperor could not simply disre-
gard such scorn while it was unavenged'.

The growing importance of the application 'to digest mentally'

also follows from the fact that a new nuance of that concept can now
be found; it is illustrated by (27) and (28). In cases such as (24), the
fact of 'making something disappear' is the result of a mental activity;
for instance, a negative experience disappears from the foreground of
one's mental attention because an adequate emotional reaction has been
found. 'To cope with something, to mentally digest something' presup-
poses some sort of assimilation, a degree of mental processing that
finally removes the disturbing mental presence of the thing that catches
the attention.10

In (27), on the other hand, the interpretation is rather 'to ignore,

to disregard'; the mental reaction is one of non-consideration, of
downright rejection. This is an important observation, because 'to
ignore, to disregard' is linked directly with 'to push away', even more
directly than the concept 'to cope mentally with' that finds it primary
source in a metaphorical transfer of 'to digest'. In the latter case, the
fact that something disappears from the foreground of one's mental
attention is the consequence of a process of assimilation; in the former,
it is a deliberate act of non-assimilation.

We are now in a position to see that there are two ways in which
the senses 'to digest mentally' and 'to make something disappear' have
grown closer to each other. On the one hand, 'to make something
disappear' no longer occurs with nuances outside the mental domain,
such as (14) and (15). On the other hand, 'to digest mentally' develops
a nuance 'to ignore' in the closest possible correspondence with 'to
make something disappear'. The two senses involved in the strongest
16th century point of contact are so to say reinterpreted in terms of
each other - a further proof of the conceptual reorganization that has
taken place. According to the same conventions as before, figure 3
schematically summarizes the analyses of the 19th century material.
64 Dirk GEERAERTS

A "to digest"
B "to cope mentally"
D "to push aside"
E "to harm, treat badly, subdue etc."
H "to ignore"

Figure 3.

The conclusion that a conceptual reorganization has taken place

may be strengthened by considering the lexicographical treatment of
verduwen and verdouwen in the 19th century. The earlier lexicographi-
cal history of both words is not very instructive. Verduwen appears for
the first time in 1691 (Sewel), whereas verdouwen has been present
since 1537 (Pelegromius); all through the 16th century, verdouwen is
mentioned with the meaning 'to digest', and occasionally in the figu-
rative sense 'to cope with something, to endure'. Figure 4 clearly
 HOMONYMY, ICONICITY, AND PROTOTYPICALITY 65

VERDOUWEN VERDUWEN

"to push away"

"to digest"

"to cope, endure"

"to push away"

"to digest"

"to cope, endure"

Hol trop 1801 + + + +
Weidenbach 1808 + + + + + \
Holl.-Hoogd. Handwdb. 1809 + + + + + + \
Benau 1809 + +
Frieseman 1810 + + + + + + \
Blussé 1813 + +
Agron & Landré 1813 + + + + \
Janson-v.d. Pyl 1819 + +
Olinger 1822 + + + + + \
Martin 1829 + + + +

v. Dale 1872 + + + + + + \
Calisch 1887 + + + +
Manhave 1892 + + + + + + \
Bal 1899 + + + \

Figure 4 .
66 Dirk GEERAERTS

shows that both forms are identified in the 19th century. Two samples
of dictionaries have been consulted, one from the first thirty, and
another from the last thirty years of the 19th century.11 For each of the
major meanings, it is indicated whether it is allocated to either
verduwen or verdouwen (or to both). If a particular form merely re-
ceives a reference to the other form ("Verduwen: see Verdouwen"),
they are treated as semantically identical. It is easy to see that both
forms are mentioned with roughly the same range of application, as
might be expected. If both forms are mentioned, they are systemati-
cally treated as identical by the end of the century. On the other hand,
it is more or less surprising to find that the notion 'to push away' is
mentioned less often than 'to digest'; this would seem to suggest that
'to digest' in its literal meaning is more common than became apparent
from the corpus of quotations analyzed in the previous pages.
Likewise, the ouw-form is mentioned relatively more often than it is
present in the corpus. However, these lexicographical data should be
handled with caution, in the sense that they probably do not faithfully
mirror the actual facts of linguistic usage. In the first place, the diction-
aries in question are not based on an extensive lexical documentation;
not corpus analysis, but the intuitions of the lexicographer - and exist-
ing lexicographical reference works- provide the information to be
incorporated into the dictionary. In this sense, the frequency of the
ouw-form may well be due to the methodological conservatism of the
dictionaries, i.e. to the fact that they often merely copy older diction-
aries. In the second place, pragmatic principles may determine what
information is mentioned explicitly. In particular, the fact that 'to push
aside' is a morphologically transparent meaning, whereas 'to digest' is
less predictable, may be an argument for the lexicographer to mention
one explicitly but not the other. In general, the lexicographical material
can be used as evidence for the fact that verduwen and verdouwen are
one word according to the intuitions of the lexicographers, but it should
be treated with some caution as a reflection of actual linguistic usage.

5. THE FORMAL DEVELOPMENT

The conceptual merger of verduwen and verdouwen is accompa-

nied by a formal reorganization through which verduwen surfaces as
the main form. This is consistent with the fact that ouw-forms are
regular regional or informal variants of the uw-form. The primacy of
verduwen may further have something to do with the fact that it is a
morphologically transparent form, whereas verdouwen is etymologi-
cally opaque. The process through which both forms coincide is al-
ready well on its way in the 16th century. Figure 5 indicates how the
HOMONYMY, ICONICITY, AND PROTOTYPICALITY 67

Total: 10/*6

Total: 9/*10

Figure 5.
68 Dirk GEERAERTS

etymologically correct forms are distributed over the two conceptual

clusters distinguished in figure 2. An asterisked form indicates an
etymologically "wrong" form (i.e., ouw-formsin the verduwen -cluster,
and uw-forms in the verdouwen -cluster). It will be seen that "incor-
rect" forms appear in large amounts in both clusters: the conceptual
distinction is not mirrored by a clear formal distinction. If the strong
or weak character of the verb is considered, a similarly scrambled
picture appears. In particular, the only strong form in the material
occurs with the meaning 'to push away' rather than 'to digest' (which
would be the etymologically correct one); see (17). As can be seen in
figure 6, the fairly even distribution between uw- and ouw-forms has

Total: 22/*3

Figure 6.
 HOMONYMY, ICONICITY, AND PROTOTYPICALITY 69

disappeared in the 19th century, and verduwen is unambiguously the

main form. (Starred forms now indicate ouw-forms.) Typically, the
ouw-forms always occur in rhyming position in the work of authors
that will otherwise use the uw-forms: verdouwen is now a stylistical
variant only to be used in extraordinary circumstances. As we have
seen, 19th century dictionaries list verdouwen rather more frequently
than warranted by our corpus, but this may be due to lexicographical
conservatism.

It is tempting to take the redistribution of verduwen and

verdouwen as a proof of the hypothesis that conceptual merger hierar-
chically precedes lexical reorganization (cf. section 1); formal differ-
ences are neutralized if a conceptual merger is possible, and the
conceptual reorganization so commands a lexical reorganization.
Whereas a straightforward application of the Humboldtian isomorphic
principle would entail that the formal distinction between verduwen
and verdouwen requires a conceptual distinction to be maintained,
independent developments on the conceptual level now seem to bring
about a formal reorganization. However, the fact that the distributional
scrambling of verduwen and verdouwen is already well on its way in
the 16th century, when the conceptual merger has not yet progressed
very far, suggests that the formal development is at least partly inde-
pendent. The regular uw/oww-variation is probably the primary cause
of the redistribution, and the 16th century situation can be considered
a case of double homonymy come about by an independent process of
uw/oww-variation. The subsequent development, by which verduwen
becomes the main form, can then be seen as an Humboldtian attempt
to remove a superfluous synonymy. (In the 16th century, verduwen and
verdouwen are so to say synonymous homonyms.) In short, the formal
development of verduwen and verdouwen does not really allow us to
provide independent evidence for the second major hypothesis men-
tioned in the first paragraph.

6. CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION

We can safely conclude, then, that the development of the pair

verduwenlverdouwen shows, primo, that homonymy may be resolved
by conceptual merger rather than lexical substitution, and secundo, that
such a conceptual reorganization involves prototypical clustering round
the meanings that established a link between the original concepts. The
additional hypothesis that conceptual restructuring might even be inde-
pendent of complete formal identity (i.e., may itself lead to a formal
merger) was more difficult to confirm, since the tendency of verduwen
and verdouwen to become distributionally identical largely precedes
70 Dirk GEERAERTS

the process of prototypical reorganization, and can be explained inde-

pendently from it. Rounding off, two additional remarks have to be
made.
To begin with, a thorough-going corroboration of our basic hy-
pothesis requires a large-scale investigation of a considerable portion
of the alphabet, showing first that mergers of homonyms systemati-
cally involve prototypical restructuring, and second that those cases in
which a homonymical conflict is resolved by lexical strategies (in
particular, by substitution) are not regularly cases in which the original
concepts were close enough to allow merger through conceptual re-
structuring. In the absence of such large-scale evidence, the conclu-
sions drawn from our case study have to be treated with care.
Further, something more needs to be said about the theoretical
impact of our conclusion. It was suggested in the first paragraph that
conceptual merger as a reaction with regard to homonymy may be
reconciled with the Humboldtian requirement of isomorphism, if a
distinction is made between intercategorial and intracategorial
polysemy, semantic categories being conceived of as prototypical
clusters. This is, of course, basically a terminological innovation. The
fundamental point to be addressed is rather where the distinction be-
tween both kinds of polysemy comes from, and how both kinds relate
to each other. The recent literature on iconicity provides us with a first
answer (cf. Haiman 1985). On the one hand, polysemy arises through
the tendency towards economy, in particular by keeping the number of
word forms down. On the other hand, a tendency towards isomorphism
is motivated by iconicity, in the sense that what is semantically the
same is preferably represented by a single word. Further, between
iconic isomorphism and economic polysemy, a conflict of motivation
seems to exist, leading to an incomplete application of the isomorphic
principle. However, this way of putting things is not yet completely
satisfactory, among other things because the economic principle does
not explain why acceptable, intracategorial polysemy takes the proto-
typical form that it does.
The point to be made is that there are other functional reasons at
the basis of prototypicality, next to the economic advantage of keeping
the number of word forms down. As I have pointed out elsewhere, a
prototypical structure for lexical categories is cognitively advantageous
for the following reasons.12 Prototypical categories are cognitively
efficient because they allow us to interpret new experiences in terms of
existing knowledge, even if the new phenomena are slightly distinct
from the concepts already available. The incorporation of slightly
deviant cases into the periphery of the prototypical cluster is a struc-
tural reflection of the interpretative processes guiding concept forma-
 HOMONYMY, ICONICITY, AND PROTOTYPICALITY 71

tion: existing knowledge functions as a guideline for the interpretation

of new data, even if the goodness of fit is not 100%. Now, this basic
interpretative character of cognition derives from a joint functional
requirement of flexibility and stability. On the one hand, our concep-
tual apparatus should be flexible enough to deal with unexpected cir-
cumstances; the real world phenomena that we are confronted with are
so diverse that the human cognitive system has to be able to adapt
itself to those changing phenomena. On the other hand, the cognitive
system should be stable. It should not be subject to drastic overall
reorganizations any time new data have to be dealt with; it should not
simply reflect the diversity of the outside world, but it should impose
a structure onto it - and it can only achieve this if the conceptual
categories are relatively stable. Obviously, flexibility and stability can
be combined if the conceptual categories of the human cognitive sys-
tem are indeed interpretative schemata; they maintain themselves as
interpretative guidelines, but the interpretative process itself is sche-
matically flexible.
In short, if prototypical polysemy reflects the flexibly stable na-
ture of cognitive categories as interpretative schemata, structural econ-
omy is not the only reason behind the existence of acceptable intracate-
gorial polysemy: cognitive efficiency (in the form of a combination of
flexibility and stability) is at least as important. At the same time, the
principle of isomorphic motivation receives a new interpretation.
As mentioned above, the isomorphic principle seems to act on the level
of the interpretative categories as a whole, not within each prototypical
cluster. In this sense, the isomorphic principle as well may be said to
derive from a principle of efficiency. In fact, iconicity as such is not
necessarily an ultimate factor in the explanation of linguistic phenome-
na: why does a tendency towards iconicity exist at all? In the case of
syntagmatic iconicity, iconicity is itself an interpretative principle (for
instance, what is formally close together may be iconically interpreted
as belonging together on the semantic level). But in the cases of para-
digmatic, lexical iconicity that interest us here, something different
seems to be the case. Isomorphic iconicity is efficient, I suspect,
because it facilitates the access to the interpretative categories that
constitute the cognitive system. (Conversely, while each of those cate-
gories is an interpretative schema, it is not necessary to have direct
access to the prototypical nuances that can be reached through the
intermediary of the schematic categories.) It is easier to reach a par-
ticular interpretative schema if the road that leads towards it does not
heteromorphically deviate to other, less pertinent destinations.
If this is correct, there is a complementarity rather than a conflict
between isomorphism and prototypicality. Both seem to refer to other
72 Dirk GEERAERTS

aspects of cognition: prototype formation is situated at the conceptual

level as such, whereas Humboldt's principle deals with the relationship
between the prototypically organized, interpretatively schematic con-
ceptual categories and their lexical expression. More generally, it
would be wrong to simply contrast economy and iconicity. An ade-
quate functional approach to natural language requires, first, that the
different levels at which different principles may operate are taken into
account, and second, that the analysis does not stop short by merely
positing principles such as iconicity, but that the question is answered
why such principles are functionally efficient.
 HOMONYMY, ICONICITY, AND PROTOTYPICALITY 73

NOTES

(1) Cf. Haiman's (1980) classification of types of iconicity.

(2) Cf. Ullmann (1962: 180-188) for an overview.
(3) The restrictions invoked to explain the absence of therapeutic changes may be
of a formal nature (e.g., the distinction in gender between Dutch het portier 'the
carriage-door' and de portier 'the janitor') or of a semantic nature (the homo-
nymy between sun and son is not likely to cause confusion). In the case of a
lexical therapy, the substitutive item may be formally unrelated to the original
homonym (as in Gilliéron's faisan and vicaire), but it may also happen that
formal variants of the homonymic form ensure the required lexical distinctness
(cf. Ullmann 1962: 185 on noyer and nier).
(4) On prototypicality, see e.g. Rosch (1978).
(5) See also Goossens (1969). A brief summary of the basic results of Goossens's
research may be found in Anttila (1972: 182-183). My own reanalysis of Goos-
sens's data may be found in Geeraerts (1985b), and, in more detail, in Geeraerts
(1986).
(6) In the examples of figure 1, the operation of the Humboldtian principle involves
the elimination of superfluous synonymies; what is to be regarded as the identity
of meaning with regard to which the synonymy is to be defined, follows from
the presence or absence of a conceptual reorganization. For details, see the
literature mentioned in the previous note.
(7) The Proto-Germanic sequence of semi-vowels aui is resolved as either auj, in the
case of dooien, or awi, in the case of douwen. Cf. Gothic taujan next to tawida
for the same bifurcation.
(8) The standard abbreviation for the Woordenboek der Nederlandsche Taal is
WNT; for information on the dictionary (which has been being compiled and
published since 1864, and which has now progressed up to the letter W), see
Heestermans (1979). The entry for verduwen/verdouwen in the WNT has been
compiled by myself, but the semasiological structures presented in this article do
not correspond entirely with the structure of the dictionary entry. This is not
merely due to the fact that the present article allows for a stricter periodization
of the material, but also to the fact that I have changed my opinion on the inter-
pretation of a few quotations. Two quotations that are extremely difficult to
interpret (for reasons explained in the WNT entry) have not been included in the
present discussion.
(9) The references accompanying the quotations are the same as those used in the
WNT.
(10) In a number of cases, this assimilation is forced, it is not achieved wholeheart-
edly; this is particularly the case when the verb is accompanied by the auxiliary
'have to'. Verduwen can then be translated with 'to endure, to stand, to bear'.
(11) Full references to the dictionaries mentioned in the figure may be found in Claes
(1983).
(12) Cf. Geeraerts (1988); the epistemological background of the view of human
cognition presented here is treated in Geeraerts (1985c).
74 Dirk GEERAERTS

REFERENCES

ANTTILLA, Raimo. 1972. An Introduction to Historical and Comparative Linguistics.

New York: MacMillan.
CLAES, Frans. 1983. A Bibliography of Netherlandic Dictionaries. Munchen: Krause.
GEERAERTS, Dirk. 1985a. Cognitive restrictions on the structure of semantic change.
In J. Fisiak (ed.). Historical Semantics - Historical Word Formation, 127-153.
Berlin: Mouton.
—1985b. Polysemization and Humboldt's principle. In R. Jongen (ed.). La
polysémie: lexicographie et cognition, 29-50 (Cahiers de l'Institut de Linguis-
tique de Louvain 11. 3/4). Louvain-la-Neuve: Cabay.
—1985c. Paradigm and Paradox. Explorations into a Paradigmatic Theory of
Meaning and its Epistemological Background. Leuven: Universitaire Pers.
—1986. Over woordverlies in lexicaal-semantische overgangsgebieden. Tijdschrift
voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde 102, 161-186/103, 35-51.
—1988. Where does prototypicality come from? In B. Rudzka (ed.). Topics in
Cognitive Linguistics, 647-677. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
GOOSSENS, Jan. 1962. Polysemievrees. Tijdschrift voor Nederlandse Taal- en
Letterkunde 78, 36-55.
—1969. Strukturelle Sprachgeographie. Heidelberg: Winter.
HAIMAN, John. 1980. The iconicity of grammar: isomorphism and motivation. Lan-
guage 56, 515-540.
—1985. Natural Syntax. Cambridge: C.U.P.
HEESTERMANS, Hans. 1979. Das Woordenboek der Nederlandsche Taal. In H. Henne
(ed.). Praxis der Lexikographie, 68-82. Tubingen: Niemeyer.
ROSCH, Eleanor. 1978. Principles of categorization. In E. Rosch and B. Lloyd (eds.).
Cognition and Categorization, 27-48. Hillsdale (N. J.): Erlbaum.
ULLMANN, Stephen. 1962. Semantics. Oxford: Blackwell.
WHJLEMYNS, Roland. 1966. De pit van een peer in de Zuidnederlandse dialecten. Taal
en Tongval 18, 115-134.