3° 
39 
and standard deviations calculated from the data presented by Jackson (1967/1984, Table 10) for 
135 single adults from the Toronto area. 
The relationships of the verb similarity ratings with the materialism and motivation 
measures, and of these latter two with one another, were analyzed by examining three 
correlation matrices. Relationships are reported and discussed only if they were statistically 
significant (p <.05) in both samples, even when controlling for Desirability by partial correlation 
procedures. With these conservative criteria, the number of significant findings were fewer than 
would be expected by chance with a p =.05 significance criterion alone. The 13 significant 
correlations of the 337 examined are shown in Table 7. The presentation of these results will 
be couched in the assumption that traits cause nuances in the meanings of verbs, not 
vice-versa, since what underlies the motivational trait measures is presumably the source of 
individual differences, while word meanings are expected to be relatively invariate common 
currency in interactions between individuals. 
First, consider the effects of motivational traits on the meaning of own. For summer 
students and ferry passengers, the trait of Abasement seems to resuit in own having more of a 
meaning of stewardship (r=.14; r=.23). This was largely due to own having more of a meaning 
of share for abased persons (r=.20; r=.36). Own having a nuance of share was also related to 
the trait of Nurturance (r=.15; r=.36). The trait of Dominance, however, corresponds to own 
having more of a meaning of dominion (r=.13; r=.22). None of the component verbs of 
dominion (claim, control, keep) were significantly related to Dominance. However, one of them, 
claim, was related to the trait of Defendence (r=.17; r=.22), Since Abasement is the opposite 
trait to Dominance in a higher order factor of ascendency (Jackson, 1984), it seems that owning 
does have social nuances. On the one hand, for those valuing interpersonal dominance, owning 
is related to dominion and defense, both of which suggest social separation. On the other hand, 
for those those who accept domination by others, owning reflects responsibility, suggesting the 
counter process of social unity. 
Next consider the relationships of verb similarity ratings to the Materialism measures. The 
more materialistic a person, the more own took on a meaning of dominion (r=.16; r=.37). Since 
Dominance and Materialism were unrelated in both samples (r =.06, .10<p; r=-.03, .10 <p), it 
seems that their relationships to the dominion component of own were independent of one 
another. Materialism also resuited in own having more of a meaning of claim (r =.14; r =.38),