Definition by context or typical exemplar
Another way to define a word is to situate it in a system of wider relations through which the specificity of the definiendum can be seen. This definitional strategy differs from the synonymy strategy in simply showing the position of a definiendum with respect to other related notions which are not themselves identical to it, as alleged synonyms are. A possible definition of the verb scratch, for example, would be ‘the type of thing you do when you are itchy’. This is an example of definition by context: the definition identifies the event of scratching by placing it in relation to another event, being itchy, whose meaning is assumed to be already known, and which is taken as a typical context for the definiendum. This definition only works if the definition’s addressee correctly infers the intended meaning on the basis of the cue given. Thus, if, when itchy, I am in the habit of lightly striking my head against the wall, and if I believe that others do the same, then the definition will not be effective. Definition by typical exemplar is another example of this relational strategy: here, the definition is a list of typical examples or instances of the definiendum. If, given the German definiendum Vogel, I supply a list like ‘swans, robins, geese, hens, magpies, etc.’ and add that bats, butterflies and aeroplanes are excluded, you could correctly conclude that Vogel means ‘bird’. And if I give jars and conserve pots as examples of the French noun bocal, and exclude wine bottles, you will be in a good position to infer that it means something like ‘wide-necked glass container’.
QUESTION Can definition by context or typical example be applied to lexical categories other than nouns?
QUESTION Definition by context or by typical example are both subject to similar difficulties. What might these be?
