Resolution theorem proving provides a useful paradigm for the exploration of question answering. A partition of the clauses generated during resolution refutation based on their syntactic structure is presented. The three classes comprising this partition correspond to semantically intuitive types of answers. This work encompasses and expands upon previous work on question answering in a theorem proving paradigm, which began with the association of answers with proofs. A complete, formal definition of what is meant by answer in the context of resolution theorem proving is presented. In this context, clauses that are relevant are all identified as answers, where relevance is determined with respect to a question and knowledge base: any clause descended from the clause form of a negated question is deemed relevant. This definition of relevance is not in and of itself novel; rather, it is the way in which the set of relevant clauses is partitioned that provides the key to interpreting clauses as answers. The three answer classes identified are: specific, generic, and hypothetical. These classes are formally distinguished by the way in which literals in a clause share variables, with class membership based on a property termed the closure of variable sharing of a literal. The results presented provide a foundation for further work by establishing a context-independent logical pragmatics of question answering.