Here, two studies seek to characterize a parsimonious common‐denominator personality structure with optimal cross‐cultural replicability. Personality differences are observed in all human populations and cultures, but lexicons for personality attributes contain so many distinctions that parsimony is lacking. Models stipulating the most important attributes have been formulated by experts or by empirical studies drawing on experience in a very limited range of cultures. Factor analyses of personality lexicons of nine languages of diverse provenance (Chinese, Korean, Filipino, Turkish, Greek, Polish, Hungarian, Maasai, and Senoufo) were examined, and their common structure was compared to that of several prominent models in psychology. A parsimonious bivariate model showed evidence of substantial convergence and ubiquity across cultures. Analyses involving key markers of these dimensions in English indicate that they are broad dimensions involving the overlapping content of the interpersonal circumplex, models of communion and agency, and morality/warmth and competence. These “Big Two” dimensions—Social Self‐Regulation and Dynamism—provide a common‐denominator model involving the two most crucial axes of personality variation, ubiquitous across cultures. The Big Two might serve as an umbrella model serving to link diverse theoretical models and associated research literatures.

provided the dictionary on which the Supyire-Senufo study was based, and assisted in extracting terms and refining the questionnaire, in consultation with local colleagues. Lamine Sanogo, (Société Internationale de Linguistique, Mali) conducted the interviews in Supyire. We are grateful to Zanga Traore for later assistance interpreting some Supyire terms, to Stephen Munet for assistance interpreting some Maa terms, and to University of Oregon research assistants who helped rate and categorize English translations of terms: Kassidy Sherman, Barkley Saltzman, PERSONALITY STRUCTURE IN EAST AND WEST AFRICA 2 Yasmeen Lee, Chase Hardt, and Samantha Sheffels. The data, syntax used for analyses, and copies of the original surveys are available in an Open Science Framework repository: https://osf.io/x79qz/

A Frame Semantics analysis determines the stereotypic semantic elements which are cognitively understood when one "knows" a given lexeme. Knowledge of such frame elements accounts for felicitous use of lexemes, and for how communication may proceed effectively even when some frame elements are not overtly instantiated. Multiple senses of a lexeme may arise from specific lexical complements chosen to instantiate frame elements. The Maa lexeme SIP is argued to have the basic frame structure of 'X thoroughly removes Z from Y (such that Y enters a new state)' Complement choices correlate with a wide range of senses, from 'make smooth, clean/clear (by licking, weeding, sweeping, burning, etc.), bless (a journey), destroy, kill, beat, tell/determine the complete truth, be certain, make verbal points in a meeting, do (something) thoroughly/effectively' and 'succeed', to an arguably epistemic modal use. What was historically a single lexeme may develop into multiple homophones partly by stereotypic lexical choices for, and by cognitive "supression" or "enhancement" of, frame elements. In this way, an intransitive verb centering on meanings of 'truth' and 'certainty' may be emerging from the otherwise transitive lexeme SIP.