The comprehension of anomalous “strings” is frequently explained in terms of their “reduction” to grammatical and literal interpretations. Although degree of departure from grammaticality (a form of anomaly) is a potent psychological variable, the actual interpretability of anomalies has not been examined. The present study establishes some criteria, based on the concept of synonymy, for deciding if a sentence is a genuine interpretation of an anomaly. Specifically, Hoffman and Honeck’s (1976) bidirectionality paradigm was used, in which in Phase 1, subjects ranked potential interpretations in terms of their similarity to poetry Unes taken from e. e. cummings; in Phase 2, different subjects ranked these lines and foil lines with respect to the interpretations. The results met all of the criteria, indicating that the presumed interpretations were genuine and that cummings’ lines are interpretable. Discussion centered on the inadequacy of the reduction view and on the need to incorporate factors (inference, world knowledge, etc.) that allow practically unlimited flexibility in theories of understanding.