Professional Documents
Culture Documents
By
NICKQCCOTOSTO
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
1991
DEDICATION
dedicate this
to
work
to
my
as
my Mom,
known
as Irene
Tosta.
work
Ciccotosto,
my
wife, and
Christopher
my
life
and there
is
no doubt
support
this
and
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I
would
like to express
my warmest
gratitude to
my
committee
me
with
much
this
also
would
the
statistics
department
the University
He gave
thank
my
friend Dr.
humor and
It
direction
his
in
was with
help that
studies
I
would
my
Donald, for their love and concern over the years. There are no
greater parents in the world.
My
wife,
Carol, deserves
special
I
when
was
I
my
my
friends,
Tom
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
ABSTRACT
CHAPTERS
I
iii
iv
SOUND SYMBOLISM AND BIO-CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY: TESTING PROTO-LANGUAGE HYPOTHESES IN NATURAL LANGUAGES
Introduction
Sound Symbolism and Proto-language The Nature of Sound Symbolism Sound Symbolism Hypotheses
Physiological
10
15
18
Anatomical
Semantically Ancient
29
31
I I
39
The Universe of
39
41
44
63
I I I
SOUND SYMBOLISM AND PROSODY, SOUND SYMBOLISM TERMINOLOGIES, AND SOUND SYMBOLIC EVIDENCE IN NATURAL LANGUAGES 72
Introduction
72 74 80
in
Natural
106
141
141
146
155 165
Experiments "Goodness-of-Fit" Sound Symbolism Experiments Synaesthetic Studies into Sound Symbolism Summary of Sound Symbolic Experiments
174
180
188
191
CONCLUDING REMARKS
Summary
Theoretical Weaknesses
191
195 197
Future Research
APPENDICES
A
B
D
E F
16 CONCEPTS SUPPORTING DICTIONARY REFERENCES FOR 16 GLOSSES CODING PARAMETERS FOR ALL GLOSSES INITIAL RANKINGS OF FEATURES AND GLOSSES ACTUAL RANKINGS OF FEATURES AND GLOSSES PHONETIC CHARACTERS
200
231
252 258
261
263
265
REFERENCES
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
292
Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
December,
1991
Major Department:
Anthropology
major assumption
in
modern
associate
linguistics is that
sounds
Saussure's
composing words
early
arbitrarily
with
meanings.
20th
century
arbitrary
doubt
upon
this
virtually
known language
phyla.
meaning nature,
relationships
are
routinely
utilized
by linguists
to
trace
genetic
among language
phyla.
composed of
a lexical
sample representing
1%
least
10 of the
human language
phyla.
The
set includes:
FOOD, WATER,
languages,
are
and
CHEW.
of 229
tallied
articulatory
bilabial,
and others.
total of
certain
be
found
at
The application of
rank-order median
gives
test
of Kruskal-Wallis
to
the
same
hypotheses
similar results.
test,
all
Jonckheere-Terpstra
predicted
based on three k-
is
striking.
the
basic
behavioral
and physiological
Their evolutionary
into
adaptive
value
may allow
conspecifics
entry
communication network.
CHAPTER I SOUND SYMBOLISM AND BIO-CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY: TESTING PROTO-LANGUAGE HYPOTHESES IN NATURAL LANGUAGES
Introduction
Sound symbolism,
acoustic
a nonarbitrary,
an
important
study
light
for
because
its
accurate delineation
may shed
faculty.
fuller
Additionally,
humankind
in
pre-sapiens
that
This dissertation
to
relates
neonates and early and pr&sapiens society. The crux of this type of
examination
is
that:
more primitive stage of language in which the sound and meaning is partly motivated. there
.
.
relation
is
systematic
universal
signs."
investigation
in
of this
vocabulary
tests,
in
various
supplemented by psycholinguistic
the
expressive function
(Fischer-Jorgensen
1978:80)
In this chapter,
of
hypotheses
about
motivated
meanings and
their
representations
2
with
nonarbitrary
linguistic
II
features.
it
are
discussed in Chapter
and
represents
16 semantic categories
to
words
contain
sound
ethnoanatomical,
and culturally
specific
semantic
domains.
My
SWALLOW,
WATER,
DOG, FOOD.
The data
categories
set
may
reflect
is,
form, phonetically
archaic in shape, which are basic in meaning, and which are learned
earliest
by
language
is
speakers
(Battistella
1990:23-68).
least
5,000
separate
so,
an expansion of lexicons
everywhere
distant
through a changing
neuro-physiological
call
morphology,
structures
(Hewes 1983).
3
Statistically speaking, greater than two-thirds or
70%
of
all
phonemes. Even
so,
is
the range of
at
phonemes
actually produced in
all
human languages
least
size
from
11
(UsLwaiian-Austronesian
1984:7).
Phyla) (Maddieson
is
In turn, each
phoneme
group,
composed of binary
distinctive
and motor-
1929).
composed of
the
arbitrary
accepting
view
that
there
an arbitrary connection
the
between
comes from
work
word
to a concept.
If the
association
arbitrary,
100,000
(l&-5%
it
per
would
in
1%
of a
1,000,000 items,
scholars
agree that an
average
speaker
might
command
behavioral
figure
more
would mean
large
more than
3%
may have
I
already
this
argue
Chapter
III.
a matter of
some
Malkiel
1990a).
statistical
assumptions
is
that if a
number of
basic glottochronological
geographically
the expectation
years, then
that,
only
1%
contact
parallel
and borrowing
forces
are
at
ruled
out,
internal
and cross-culturally
nothing
one appearing
as
aberrant
morphological
as yet
words.
At
moves"
theories,
that
is,
concept.
at
least
out,
the
relationship
between
phonological
and
once motivation
meaning
to
a particular phonological
levels
The subconscious
explicated
in
special
word-meaning formations
is
not well
studied.
Much
to
speculating
disdained
theories.
origin
etymological
the
1921/1947:410).
Among
few
Hewes
(1983).
So
far,
historically
documented languages
attest
sound
is
is
forthcoming
from the
sub-field
emerging
to
be labelled
"generative
phono-semantics"
the
"psycho-semiotics"
(Markel
under studied
mental
socially
structures
its
affective
use within
dynamic contexts.
Psycholinguists, linguists, and anthropologists have
sound
research
has
never been
incorporated
into
anthropological
is
theories
context.
in
toward food.
lengthening"
efficient
It
is
no small observation
that
production
1990:147).
in
This
the
human
bio-social
evolution,
witnesses
humans
as
paragons of communicative efficiency. Humans are the only species producing a vocal communication allowing themselves defense
outside of real evolutionary time. This
is
to
say,
other
senses,
about dangers
Bloom
1990:712).
Among
is
the endless
(Washburn
1960),
vocal-morphological
brain
size
restructuring
(Lieberman
(Falk
1984),
increased
(Jerison
1976),
neural-reshuffling
1990),
gestural-motor
enhancement
to
face
this,
Beyond
into
gradualist
language
is
an
"exaptation,"
of otherwise spurious
physiological
referential
remarkably sudden
the expense
of efficiently eating,
Lenneberg
1967;
Lieberman
early
forest.
Our
distant
ancestors,
in
alarm
calls,
system,
was
"to
and
this
1976). Wittgenstein
states,
talk,
one
is
silent."
Simply
produce
put,
a
this
means
that
is
no selection pressure
that
to
sound, there
a
Chomsky claimed
humans developed
The more
"rules"
to
Instead
of the
of
form
innate.
findings of
developed
to represent nature,
and
this
function
human behaviors
as
an animal species.
More
basic meanings
may
"get
the point
'fight',
across."
'flee',
'mate',
or
moot
distant
present-day
relationship to one another is extremely remote. The symbols are found to be nonarbitrary. Their motivation depends upon a gestural iconicity between manner of articulation and movement or positioning in space which the symbol
whose genetic
reconstructed
represents.
Thus,
the
hypothesis
presented
here
implies
that
early
naming
in the conventional
sense but
means of another, displaced in time but similar in spatial relationship" (LeCron Foster
1978:78).
If a
manipulated so as
generate elementary
propositions,
language
"THERE"+"FOOD" would
Evidently,
be
this
tremendous
to
to
capacity
relate
is
to
(or
rote
genetically
and
(Patterson
Homo
habilis
or
Homo
erectus
1990:158).
Proto-language
negators,
also
may have
words,
proto-syntax,
including
question
pronouns,
particles
relative-time
indicating
markers,
quantifiers,
modal
auxiliaries,
and
location
(Bickerton
1990:185).
identified for
any human
are,
in
Wittgenstein's views,
synonymous with
symbolism element
theories fail to
pressures.
Without recourse
to
sound
meaning. This
an
10
overwhelming
level
of arbitrary
sound-meaning,
all
the
present
symbolism
is
have
totally
is
foregone
clearly
all
emotion and
any
1
language.
sound-meaning hypothesis
is
an
Why
(Jakobson and
Waugh
meaning
in
symbolism
realities
in
that
it
come
vogue. Presently,
holding vital
is
an arena
is
a reflex
integrated
initiated
by
or
irritation
of the
bronchio-alveolar,
tracheal,
laryngeal,
pharyngeal
mucosae
(Geoffrey,
Bernthal,
Bertozini,
auricular nerve
stimulation
can
and
it
1977:547). During a
and
finally,
the
air,
glottis
mucous,
a
cough
from animal
to
some
of them.
duplicates,
process
through
sympathetic
nervous
system.
nervous
system,
it
but
"gets
would
points to a "least
moves"
Sound
known
to
that
it
provides a
mnemonic
assist to
Homo
1971b,
Jakobson and
of individual
Waugh
1979). If language
is
to
incorporate a
assists.
list
of symbolic elements,
certainly
needs mnemonic
12
In contemporary linguistics, there are arguments for "weak"
is,
utilize
one feature
this
type to represent
(Durbin
1969).
To
date,
evidence shows
Among
the
more
interesting
the
observation
is
for
most
(e.g.
Subject-Verb-Object
Do
It").
actual
social
regard
terms
labial
for
male/father
to
and
female/mother
universally
appropriate
consonants
vs.
the
[dada]) (Jakobson
humans share
common
language universals
are
linked
through
sound symbolism
vowel
[i]
is
an example of a
semantic-phonological
e.g.).
sound
symbolism("tiny">"teeny,"
[i]
Bob>Bobbie,
vowel
this
is
used,
it
with syntax.
clearer
example of
syntax-phonological
a pluralized
symbolism
noun
(in
is
a connection
[-s]
English
or
its
13
instead of plosive and brief sound (use of an
e.g.).
[-s]
instead of a [-p],
is
probably universal
in
language use,
it
comparisons.
the regularities
was ignored
until
1978).
terminology (Berlin and Kay 1969), folk botanical (Berlin 1972; C.H.
Brown
Brown
1975),
1979), kinship
(Witkowski
(Berlin,
1972),
ethnoanatomy (McClure
1973).
and ethnobiology
is
An
implicational universal
apparent
when
the
implies the occurrence of another item or items, but not vice versa
1978:428).
As an
First,
scheme
at
is
in order.
least
one word
involving the
is
name
certainly
part
of the
human evolutionary
cognitive experience.
But,
many languages
spoken
by
Some
languages
hunting-gathering
societies
terms.
An
implicational
universal might
if
least
languages have three terms, the third term will be a "grerb," a small
plant relative
to
the
botanical
inventory of a particular
14
environment,
whose
parts
are
chiefly
herbaceous.
Given four
botanical words in a language, the fourth will be either "bush" or "vine" or "grass"
a term for "tree" before one for "vine", "grass", "grerb" an so on.
known
as well for
human language
and Miron (1975) found that people use the same qualifying
framework
in
This biconditional
their
implies
that
all
evaluative
potency
(strong/weak),
and
activity
(active/passive)
dimensions.
For a biconditional
universe,
the
With regard
ancient
to
human avenues
the
proto-words
rank concepts
may
according
to
the earliest
primitive,
more
basic,
or universal
word may
be,
the
more sound
a
other terms,
basic
activities,
and
survival value to
close connection
between the
to
be signified.
The
physical
events.
Their
acoustic
productions
include
imploded
"words."
differing
1984).
Among humans,
less
muscles groups
midbrain,
in
the
larynx
alone,
a rarified
and condensed
stream of
resonance chambers.
Human
oral
An
a decrease
the vocal
folds elasticity or an
16
pressure elevation can cause an increase in intensity (Judson
and
Weaver
1942:77).
The voluntary
that
act of phonation in
humans
is
so extraordinary
an
folds
1-1.5
micrometer (Wyke
Additionally,
the
humans
the
post-glottal
sound wave by
movements of
astonishing
tongue, mandible,
lips,
example, held the world record for an articulatory rate of 327 word
per minute in an outburst in a
Although
mechanistically
speaking
is
based
number of feed-back
articular,
in
presented
above
the
cough
reflex,
glottis
is
produce what
"phasic tuning."
Finally,
phylogenetically
older
myotatic
mechanoreceptors
frequency emission
(Wyke
1967:13).
17
Considering the
breathing,
eating,
many
drinking,
is
now
existing
would
exist
functions
1942:37).
Of importance
here
is
distinguish
speech
mechanism from
the
vegetative
mechanisms.
Unfortunately, this
tissue
may never
can be
the
earliest
conceptions are
present,
though
at
psycho-semiotic level,
in
everyday
language.
I
Below,
word present
in
Table
at
l.a.,
there
are
50 instances of
this
particular
I
least
10 of the world's
17 language phyla.
arguing
nonarbitrary,
articulation
manners of
phonetical
are
(The
transcription
of these
in
are presented
Appendix F
for easy
review.)
Tablel.a.
Testing Glosses and Categories
Physiological
19
Because of
this,
the
association
expressive ones of emotional value through the face and the mouth
is
closely
that
prominent
lip
language
the
The reason
upon
sounds
behavioral
reinforcement
lips
produced
by
synesthetic
experience:
"[B]ecause the
a
own speech-organs
and, for a
the
hearer,
When
senses of touch and sight overlap the sense of hearing, they not only
reinforce the
but ease
auditory
transfer."
to
an
auditory
(Wescott
Wescott's attitude
the
is
gesture-speech
origin
of language.
most important
Johannesson (Critchley
1967:27-38).
In
Wallace,
in
particular,
self
20
At
the center of gesture-speech origin theories
is
the
lip
protrusion,
teeth
may
for
provide a
shorthand
synonymy
behaviors.
origin theory
better labelled
constrained
sound
symbolism.
Two
assumptions
COUGH,
are
SPIT,
all
SWALLOW,
and
CHEW,
when
primates;
still
second,
they
became
Therefore,
assume
that,
as
became necessary
in
for
these
physiological processes to
response
to
intense
evolutionary
is
Cough.
maneuvers
in
cough
a fluid coupling
to
which
transmits energy
respiratory
the respiratory
for:
1.
Ventilation, including
sniffing:
breathing:
olfaction;
gas
2.
whistling,
snorting,
Moving
material outward or
inward,
including coughing:
hypopharynx,
spitting:
mouth,
sneezing:
upper
airways,
sniffling:
nose-blowing:
retaining
nasopharynx,
in
secretions
the
nose.
21
snuffling:
sinuses
(Leith
1977:545-
546).
health,
is
likely
became a
diagnostic
sign to hominid
true,
it
COUGH
as
could
SICK,
so on.
COUGH
Ho:
stops, velars,
in
find
chance/normal distribution
the
alternate
glottals
in
the
is
sample.
The
alternate
such an
invariant
autonomic process,
provides reference
to
itself
through
sound
symbolism.
are
Vomit. There
The smell
or taste
of potential foodstuffs
2.
The
triggering
appropriate
responses;
nausea
to
prevent
further
to
the
22
entirely
1986:66).
Vomiting
is
of great importance in
human
evolution considering
It
is
powerful reinforcer of
memory and
that
behavior for
all
primates.
in
world
languages for foods which can cause nausea (Farb and Armelagos
1980)
It
VOMIT,
its
and so on.
especially
manner of
(Wescott 197 la: 124). This back and front pattern relates
superficially
least
VOMIT.
Vomiting
stress
is
the
world's
its
examples of
VOMIT
is
difficult.
Its
23
sequence of motor actions:
1.
salivation
mouth,
4.
closure of glottis,
7.
5.
inhibition of normal
forced inspiration,
11.
sharp contraction of
12.
characteristic
posture,
The
nasals,
VOMIT
are:
Ho:
velars,
glottals,
stops,
in
the
Ha:
nasal
is
features
should
be found
shut
when
at
high
to
VOMIT
they imitate
Spit.
activity,
it
Though
is
much
coughing and
about 1.5
secretes
liters
anti-bacterial
1983:392).
It
is
known
in
early
24
the
means
to
human
cultures,
the
act of
much
like
COUGH. The
gathered higher in the
stops,
that the
The
null
hypotheses assume:
Ho:
fricatives,
dental-
The
alternate
Ha:
stops,
in
fricatives,
dental-alveolars,
the distribution.
act
They
points in
the
and abrupt
is
eating centers of
the nervous
of
little
aid in determining
what
EAT
might contain.
The reason
the
steps
even though
EAT
in
turn
a behavior
whose
are
largely
autonomic.
that
would appear
EAT may
selective pressure
qualities
announced a need
identify
the
good
or
bad
to
of foodstuffs
any
EAT may
mark an occasion
Of
all
the physiological
EAT
is
the most
refer to?
25
hypotheses:
Ho:
fricatives,
dental-alveolars,
stops,
Alternately,
propose:
Ha:
stops,
dental-alveolars,
EAT may
refer to getting
food
to
mouth
of eating
(dental-alveolars),
is
the
two
is
that
1975:109).
The
stops
Ho:
velars,
palatals,
resonants, and
should
be
at
hypotheses
find
are
are:
Ha:
stops,
palatals,
the
sample.
Velars
represent
the
kinesthetic
shutting.
Resonants
mime
the
drinking.
Chew. As mentioned
earlier,
chewing
is
generated by a
not proprioceptive in
26
crush
a
tiny
oro-pharyngeal,
and
laryngeal
is
motoneurones.
Since chewing
the production
of vowels
and
ongoing cycle of movements closely resembles the incorporation of food transport and swallowing movements into the cyclical jaw movements of chewing, suggesting that the pattern in speech is taken over from eating, with modifications specific to manipulating the shape of vocal tract resonators in place of ingesting food" (Kingston 1990:738-739).
Chewing
food.
is
muscles,
found
at
chance/normal
rates,
dental-alveolar,
front
vowels,
velars,
Ma:
features
vowels,
found
velars,
at
above chance/normal
rates,
dental-alveolar,
front
fricatives.
and
Suck. There
post-natal period
is
little
is
for
primates.
Some
studies
27
a
functionally
may
be influenced by feeding
situation"
nutritive
reinforcement contingencies in
the
(Siqueland
and DeLucia
child
1969:1145).
tactile,
may have
at first
initiate sucking,
labial
lips
seal
and
gum
responsible for
is
minimal factor
in
olfactory,
other words,
humming
an infant
may
be used
to
reinforce
can be suggested,
that
sucking reinforcement
in
early
direct
elements,
ultimate purpose
being to train
motions of the facial and oral musculature. Sucking behaviors are also an important part of healing
procedures
practiced
in
widespread
cultural areas.
finally into
to
the
limits
the
features
reference.
The
null
affricates,
the
nasals.
28
fricatives,
in
SUCK
glosses.
The
act
explaining
features
in
chosen. Fricatives
and affricates
mimic
the sounds
made
suck simultaneously
calming
qualities.
Swallow. When
collecting
oral
swallow
is
initiated
at
rate
of about 4
glottal
closure
parts
(Ganong 1983:393).
Swallowing
closely corresponds
1976:7).
that
to
that
of
is
This behavior
human experience
(Ganong
Since
of
its
SWALLOW
refers to a virtually
Ho:
known
glides,
velars,
at
hypotheses
are:
Ha:
as
semi-
splits
vowel
to
29
swallowing, glides should be found
distribution.
at
higher rates
trachea.
Anatomical
The
anatomy
in
human
languages
strongly
suggests
that
ethnoanatomical
named
first
in
is
a mystery.
One
function
of body
Another function
to
seen in
river",
"neck
specific
"the neck of the hand" for "wrist" and "neck of the leg" for "ankle."
The
physical
naming of anatomy
rests in the
similarity
allowing
memory
to
be the same.
human
breast
is
an active area of
The
null
hypotheses about
BREAST
are:
Ho:
nasals.
30
bilabials,
front
in
vowels, and
stops
should
have chance/normal
are:
occurence
bilabials,
the sample.
The
alternate hypotheses
Ha:
nasals,
in
in
is
terms for
TOOTH
in
are:
Ho:
stops,
and bilabials
chance/normal
the
Ha:
dental-alveolars
rate
than
chance/normal
Bilabials
in
chance/normal distribution
the
I
sample.
that
Though covering
the
teeth,
assume
versus
the
teeth
also
made
is
this
dichotomy obvious.
air
contains
sounds. Likewise,
the
The
null
hypotheses
are:
Ho:
nasals,
in
resonants,
the
sample.
The
alternate
hypotheses are:
Ha:
should find
part
also
in
of
place of articualtion.
Bilabials
should be higher
frequency
31
than
chance/normal
similar to
distribution
nose
visually
lips.
is
Neck. Many
the
most
in
the
Ha:
velars,
stops, and
in
autonomic processes
than
since
the
the neck.
In
addition,
it
must be assumed
realized
the
paleolithic
hunter era,
humans have
it
is
broken.
Mouth.
It
is
MOUTH
refers to in
many
languages. Though
lips
is
meaning
is
variable cross-culturally
like so
many
things.
The
Ho:
stops, dental-
alveolars,
bilabials,
distribution in
the
Ha:
Stops,
higher than
bilabials
chance/normal
distribution.
Dental-alveolars,
velars,
and
at
higher than
chance/normal
Semantically
rates.
Ancient
"once upon a time" theory about
Any
human language
origins
a pivotal
part of the
32
proto-language naming system in early hominids,
of transforming a
it
did
so because
into
consistent acoustic
form.
named and
is
a referent
acoustical so
it
metaphor. For
that
it
example,
WATER
with
soft
and
fluid,
be named
stops
or
dental-alveolars.
Water.
water.
A human
is
There
little
became
proficient in
necessity.
alveolars,
The
null
hypotheses are:
Ho:
labio-velars,
dentalall
find
chance/normal distribution
hypotheses
are:
the
The
alternative
Ha:
dental-alveolars
WATER.
Both
in
oral
gesturing
water as a
The
labio-velars,
vowels
should
drinking
It
be
higher than
chance/normal frequency
they
mime
behaviors.
Food.
a
is
FOOD
represents as
mean something
that
it
mean something
set
appropriate
of preparative
behaviors
about
itself?
Although
it
its
33
name,
taste
it
is
the
same
millions of genetically
if
variable individuals.
Nonetheless,
it
honey were
to be
named,
might be named more for the front of the mouth where those
receptors are found, rather than the back of the mouth.
taste
For
example, the English "honey" and Greek "mellis" both contain front
If
a food
were
bitter
or used to induce
For
front
FOOD
hypotheses
are:
Ho:
in
nasals and
the
sample.
The
find
that
hypotheses
are:
front vowels
I
should
argue here
humans
FOOD
in
much
the
same way
as
BREAST.
Dog.
humans.
It
It
uncertain
when
the wolf
and the
human communities.
spread
to
all
Importantly,
wolves are
cultures
like
humans
in
having
continents.
Human
humans because
when domesticated
contamination
cultures
in
In
various
work horse,
pet
and family
member,
subject,
and god.
34
A DOG
null
is
it
makes. The
glottals
hypotheses are:
Ho:
velars,
stops,
languages for
DOG. The
Ha:
velars,
back
stops
the sample.
The proto-word
for
is
DOG may
near the
have
NECK.
16 glosses.
35
36
37
38
identify
such references
III
the
literature.
Finally,
Chapter
presents
These are
the world,
symbolism throughout
symbolism.
Chapter IV
critically discusses the
of these experiments
II.
is
with the
is
from Chapter
impressive.
Finally, a
are given in
listed.
The Universe of
in
Chapter
regard
human language
as
unitary event,
languages.
To
test
Chapter
I,
representative
is
necessary.
When
testing
any gloss of
is
this
that
presence of any
or
pattern
of sound
a universal
levels
domain when
In
frequency
the
falls
above or
soundshould
below chance
of occurence.
that
short,
arbitrary
consists of 800
monolexemes
for 16 concepts.
The
WATER, DOG,
and
FOOD. Each
comes from
5
languages come from one of the 17 language phyla considered. So, for
its
at
least
39
40
10 language phlya of 17 language phyla are represented. The
1.
Afro-Asiatic, 2.
6.
Australian,
3.
4 Austronesian,
Indo-Pacific,
9.
5.
Eskimo-Aleut,
Indo-European,
10.
Dravidian,
11.
8.
Niger-Khordofanian,
North
Amerind,
this
list
and
ambiguities
surrounding
phyletic
assignments.
The
of geographically
separated
languages
should
demonstrate
That
is,
languages
composed of varying
show
structural
components.
their
differences should
"language"
their
phonemic
inventories.
All
told,
present;
signifiers
impossible. This would have been ideal because a range could have
total
in
the
sample. Unfortunately, the data set holds words from 229 sampled
languages, with no one language providing more than a total of 16
41
words for
all
identical
in
all
is
uncertain
whether they
or cognates
plenty
in
of distance between
cultures,
meaning
phyletic
different
especially
when comparing
across
boundaries.
not
supported.
Each word
descriptive ways.
in the
in a variety of
(The entire
of words
is
presented in Appendix
is
in
Appendix
B.) First,
phones were
tallied.
A mean word
EAT
(3.6
SWALLOW
In
(5.2
phones per
word). Perhaps the longer average reflects the less cultural and
addition,
is
over
90%
of
all
table 2. a.:
42
Table
2. a.
Words:
43
longest three.
It
represent longer
slower phenomena,
It
the
reverse
to
test
might be true
such a guess by
If
would be
interesting
new
languages.
true,
length and
meaning connection
as
a
in
human language
universal
alloprimate communication
These conjectures
this
will
because
data
is
The standard
a large
1.6.
(4.4)
easily
contains
(5.2).
EAT
(3.6)
SWALLOW
number of
articulatory
is
consonant or vowel,
features.
either:
a).
according to
its
distinctive
its
Tallying
is
a binomial decision.
b).
language and
word
Yes, contain or
the
maximum number
is
given feature
50, or
COUGH,
49
all
rounded or unrounded
front,
height.
places
labio-dental,
interdental,
glottal.
dental-
alveolar,
labio-velar,
velar,
uvular,
and
Consonants
stop,
nasal,
glide,
trill,
lateral,
approximants.
44
obstruent,
in
Appendix C according
glosses.
Not
all
were used
in
testing
whether they are front or back. The extra coding parameters are
available to demonstrate the full
testing
by interested
scholars.
In Chapter
I,
arbitrary
sound-meaning
is
The
arbitrary-meaning
hypothesis
the
null
hypothesis.
all
5,000
over
known
all
languages,
separate
Further,
meanings attached
is
to
sounds.
when
the
single category
of words
compared among
languages,
interlanguage
similarity
is
should be as small.
It
My
synchronic.
century.
takes
words from
represent the
this
No words
The
statistical
tests
necessary are
of a
nonparametric
sample
is
not uniform
data set
represents
inventories.
The
little
information
available
test.
normality
assumptions difficult to
45
However, the 800 word sample does represents 229 languages
and the phonetic range for
possible phonetic
entirety.
this
90%
in
its
of the
variation
known
human language
for
certain
variables
(distinctive
features),
two-by-two
COUGH),
is
compared
to
all
as a sample,
COUGH
its
might contain a
total
50 languages. This
number
features,
is
compared
to
the
total
which might
total
750 features
1966:322-324):
ad-bc
W(a+b) (a+c)
2
(b-Hd) (c+d)
o X=(D2 N
1,
was applied
for
distribution
skewing. There
is
some debate
is
recently
In
necessary.
our
is
values very
little.
46
directional
associative
it
findings.
COUGH
in
predicts
either direction
result
in
significant Chi-square.
1
predictions:
Null
Hypothesis:
(800)-n(50)=(750) and
occurence of a feature
should be similar);
Alternate
Hypothesis:
Ha: u
is
not equal to U.
test statistic is
The
given.
is
The
the
true
correlation
meaning
is
zero,
the
results
at a
must be qualified.
If
100
tests
.05
would be
tests
insignificant by
number of
significant tests.
Below
are the
47
Table 2.b.l, Breast
48
Table 2.b.2.
Tooth
49
Table 2.b.3.
Nose
50
Table 2.b.4.
Neck
51
Table 2.b.5.
Vomit
52
Table 2.b.6.
Cough
53
Table 2.b.7.
Mouth
54
Table 2.b.8.
Suck
55
Table 2.b.9. Eat
56
Table2.b.l0.
Drink
57
Table 2.b.ll,
Chew
Table 2.b.l2.
Swallow
59
Table 2.b.l3.
Spit
60
Table 2.b.l4.
Food
61
62
Table
2.
b.l6
Water
63
contacts. Finally,
features. In this
It
WATER
way,
it
to
is
much
like
BREAST.
for water
would be
interesting to
ice
compare terms
from
little
cultures
knowledge of
liquidity,
its
include more
water term,
is
A
the
is
large
null
are
available
to
test
One
the
is
test
when
there
are
When
equivalent to the
Mann-Whitney
(Daniel
test
1990:226).
Another nonparametric
considered here
Terpstra
1954).
in In
test
is
test useful
known
ordered
in
the
literature
as
the Jonckheere-
for
alternatives
test,
(Terpstra
in
1953)
(Jonckheere
the deviation
the
Kruskal-Wallis
as
the Chi-square,
a particular direction
64
measured (Holander and Wolfe 1973:122). With the JonckheereTerpstra
three
test,
the
alternative
at
least
this
1990:235).
test
It
is,
therefore,
very powerful
results
nonparametric
to
which creates
simplified
available
understanding
of z-score
(Odeh
1972:471).
In Chi-square analysis, each of the 16
category (n=50)
mean average
different
same universe of
In
features;
dental-alveolar,
nasal,
palatal,
labio-velar,
glottal,
affricate,
fricative,
in
Appendix
ties
between categories
in
the initial
rankings.
Kruskal-Wallis
rank
test.
Testing.
The Kruskal-Wallis
it
test
is
a medianthat
Any
null
(that
assumes
the k
sums of ranks
the
sums of
65
1990:227). According to the 63 hypotheses outlined in Chapter
1
to
Chi-square in
this to
chapter,
we can
only say
each Chi-square
test
shows or
fails
show
significant
In
association
the case
to
individual
hypotheses
the
about words
test
is
considered.
tell
In
testing
median,
not mean,
as
Kruskal-Wallis
can
not.
La.,
l.b.,
and
I.e.
predicted to be High,
Mid, or
Low
in
hypotheses
177
unstated
in
using
some
values
predicted,
and nasals
have three values predicted. Below are the predictions made for 16
glosses and
15 features on
e.g.).
it
The Kruskal-Wallis
is
measurement
that is
a weighted
sum
sum of
ranks,
1990:227).
12
^i
H=N(N^.^--3(N^1)
1-1 n.
The use of
66
hypotheses that given nl, n2, or n3 population comparisons (Hi,
Mid, or Lo samples,
alternate
i.e.),
their
medians
will be identical.
The
hypotheses
are
different
from one
High or
Low
my
data
set.
Mid
predictions.
is
1.
When
2,
for k=2,
The significance
same
as
those used
Table
2.c.
67
68
languages,
strong
it
would have
to
showing.
Testing. While the Chi-square and
Jonckheere-Terpstra
Kruskal-Wallis
test
statistics
in
the
predicted direction
test
is
Though
there
are
many
ranking
tests,
one useful
the
little
known Jonckheerethis
test,
With
at
least
three
it,
the
null
hypothesis predicts
predicts
all
populations
inequality
is
equal,
in
but
the
alternate
hypothesis
an
particular
direction.
is
lesser or equal to
n2 which
test
is
Jonckheere-Terpstra
test.
one-sided
is
Mann-Whitney
it
or
Wilcoxon
The advantage of
prior
this
test
that
partial
information in
postulated
previous
ordering.
1,
it
Chapter
can be seen
that
Additionally,
all
the
summed and
a grand
score of
test
creates a J-
tables,
elicits
is
a significance level.
3,
12,
and
1.
The
probability
.05.
69
The formula
below.
It
is
given
tallies
all
giving a score of
in
is
It
measures
than at least
whether
least
is
less
1990:234).
J=XUij
i<j
The k-scores
unusual.
As
a result, tables
J-
statement.
size
is
When sample
large enough,
is
always
and the
is
The formula
to
given
below.
"
(N^-Z.^jn. )/4
V
This
arbitrary
[N^(2N-F3)-zJ'^jnf(2n. +3)]/72
test is useful
because
in
it
a data
which according
have
order.
to
sound-meaning
tenets,
should
not
70
The
scores are given below in Table 2.d. with their significance
levels.
Jonckheere-Terpstra Res
71
of this
symbolism
phenomena.
CHAPTER III SOUND SYMBOLISM AND PROSODY, SOUND SYMBOLISM TERMINOLOGIES AND SOUND SYMBOLIC EVIDENCE IN NATURAL LANGUAGES
Introduction
Within
this chapter,
They
are
important
to
the difficulties
which
when
research
phenomena.
symbolism
encompasses prosody
essential
to
pivotal
the language
it
play during
children,
is
basic in
until
speakers.
serious
Yet,
recently,
little
attention
by language scholars.
scratched out schemes which place
72
73
within prosodic
conclusions.
one.
Among
more notable
.
include:
Fonagy (1979),
Voyage en
and
Psychophonetik
Jakobson
.
Waugh
Wescott
Subjects
Subconscious
Language
Second, prosody
is
vast and
its
been
Neither has
body of
done
here,
will
list
recognizing
numerous sound
is
symbolism researchers,
a
sub-set of
I
much
tighter
predict
that
when
the
symbolic ones.
Lastly, evidence of
sound
symbolism from 12 of
I
the 17
is
presented.
in
all
known language
due
to
lack
it
74
Sound Symbolism and Prosody
is
composed of environmental
Sounds have always
human
speech.
in
particular
Each
described in
all
adjectives.
far
from
about
includes
the
bio-accoustically
perceived
dull,
female or
empty
high or
Though
binary description
are
not well
that
understood, there
is
general
acceptance
this
among
carries
scholars
and
it
(Jakobson and
refers
to
Waugh
75
utterance.
So defined
as
meaning (Barry
1981:321).
Prosody has
rhythmic"
as
tempo modulation
inseparable
is
common
of one
to
all
word
into another.
phenomenon
is
witnessed
in
it
when
is
more
easily
learned
literally.
is
A
signalling.
known
as speaker attitude
For
this
function,
is
a person
whether
sad,
speaker
agitated,
angry, calm,
happy,
or despondent,
elements processed
to
interact
states
within
are
context. That
humans, the
traits
used to identify
76
instance.
Nevertheless, keeping
it
social
situation
qualifier in
When
or
rate
to
"softness"
"harshness",
has
soft,
empathetic
emotions such as grief and love are expressed through peakpitch profiles.
The
contempt,
are
expressed
through
peak-loudness
1969:269).
profiles
Additionally,
friendship (Markel
1988).
Consequent
to
these studies,
no one
now doubts
social
synergistically
interact
convey speaker
is
attitude.
a function of prosody.
movement, forces
a centralization
With
this
intonations
to
the
a
converse
speaker
in
indicate
statements (Bolinger
Otherwise,
command
acts
to a child
such as "Get
that
in
it
this
house
NOW!"
Focussing
as
a double function in
determines the
77
unit and
at
the
same time
its
context (Barry
1981:337).
Finally, experiments
show
that
when
subjects are
presented
listener's
with
syntactically
ruptured
binaural
sentences,
the
attention
follows
the
syntacto-
semantic
switch
is
to say,
in
the
the
syntax.
context.
Certainly,
vocal
part
in
semantic
"guidance."
Cross-cultural similarity in the use of the fundamental
frequency to convey
affect,
intention,
or emotion
is
well
known
1984:2).
in
anecdotal
Neonates prefer
own
frequency
1987).
and
amplitude (Ferguson
1964)(Fernald
in
and
Kuhl
any hominid
and
proto-language
may
be that
MOTHER
is
FEMALE
SMALLER
and
TONALLY HIGHER
is
conjecture
extended,
the
earliest
human
culture
and
language
affective
It
began
intent.
is
little
with
mother-infant
interaction
communicating
secret all
mammalian
orders communicate
emotional
activity
with
tonality
1984:4).
In
phonemic
vowels,
this
means
the front
means
the
voiceless
an important focus of
sound
symbolism experiments.
In
universal,
if
only
is
the
most
common
unrounded
differing
adult,
of
size and
common
linguistic
source, or chance
(Ohala
1984:2).
Indeed, Liebermann
intonation
be
"supervowel" because
it
is
identified
with
unerring
79
accuracy
among
(Lieberman
1984:158-161).
is
Intonation
thusly
deemed
It
partly an innate
is
and
evolutionarily
selected
to
behavior.
so
because evidence
alloprimates
shows
it
is
crucial
Some
Any
Too
alter the
a time"
the
assumption goes,
variability.
Prosody
scheme. Partly,
this
due
to
Any two
commonly
linked
symbolism
is
80
context containing shared perceptual routines.
In
any case,
it
seems absurd
to
be labelled
connotations,
troublesome blur
treated as if
it
could
never sustain.
Sound symbolism
including:
"iconic
is
"phonetic
"synaeslhesia"
symbolism"
1978),
(Paget
1930),
"phememism"
"animal talk"
1970),
1977),
(Langdon 1978),
"magical imitation"
"expressiveness"
1983),
"mimicry" (Bladon
(Henry
1936;
Fudge
1970), 1987).
and
"holestheme-phonestheme
symbolism" (Wescott
as
sometimes partially
to
types of
sound symbolism:
lexical,
syntactic,
morphic, psychological,
more
types.
simple
maximally arbitrary
though
it
is
difficult
to
construct
cross-culturally,
in
semi-inclusive
functions
enabling
communicative intent
a
to
be interpreted
than
in
among
conspecifics in
manner more
units.
certain
purely
arbritary
sound-
meaning
Mimicry. Mimicry
is
form of language
An
important
difference exists,
name
for
what a
delivery
cat says.
pitch,
amplitude,
speed,
reduplication,
and so
82
on
(in
i.e.].
The
latter
are described
recall
below
of
Mimicry
linguists,
is
poets,
it
is
not
is
The great
art
is
to
or emotion,
well
that
known among
primates.
Evidence abounds
talents.
duck-calling,
or
turkey-calling
festivals.
The
is
an uncanny ability to
say
something which
voice.
is
semantically
inappropriate
to
that
persona's
One
speaker's
ability
create onomotopoetic
words so
to
describe
to
auditory
describe
and the
like.
Interestingly
number of
in
corresponded
to
the
83
the noise.
Syllables
created
stress
differentiation
and
highlighted
important
sonal
like,
usually
[t],
was
)
named with
[k]
common scheme
Vowels
for
refer to
experiences.
"Is
it
man
created his
words
in
men,
made
translation
of the
first
earliest
system
in
dynamic communicative
observations,
84
Onomatopes. Onomatopes
acoustical
imitations.
are
As
qualified
possess
difference
dictionary
definitions.
They represent
sound
bee buzzing. The /z/ and the sounds of the word "buzz" are
phonemes
in
English. In Yucatecan
Mayan, there
is
no
/z/
phoneme
and their
lb
I.
to /b
is
If
Mayan
children
make
it
word
for
what a bee
says,
it
is
phonemes
into those
cross-culturally.
Onomatopic production
distinct
from
shared word.
of
languages
regarding
is
statements can be
made
it.
No
word
for
its
bark.
To
give
the Indo-
and
Palis'
Tahitian,
an
it
is
[waha],
Finally,
[miki],
Iki^]
that
untrue.
differ.
same sub-species
may
Which
quickly
dismisses a tidy
summary
complex
event.
Other onomatopes relate to sounds that a culture
recognizes as emotionally significant. In English these include
"tee-hee,"
"boo-hoo," "ugh,"
"tut-tut,"
Certain
styles,
speech
"yammer," "stammer,"
"babble,"
dissertation is a
86
cultural
onomatopic
similarities
further examined.
should be noted that even with the most automatic event, say
are
non-identical
in
identical
in
other,
predictable,
ways.
Synaesthesia.
Greece,
Homer equated
colors,
(Pecjak
1970:625).
More modern
subjects,
response to
music, report
War
2,
in
information
specialized
lexicon.
creative
called "bright"
processes
When
events
approached the ship, they were called small, bright, and high
(Solomon
1958,1959).
nonsense
CVC
words
(i.e.
consonant),
the vowel,
tests
demonstrated
the
the
more
anteriorly
size
produced
Other
(1929).
phonemes
(e.g.
/b/,/p/,/m/,//,/6/
87
velar stops (e.g.
(Firth
/k/yg/./g"/
1935).
next chapter.
definitions
are
archaic
sound dynamics.
five
Just as any
more than
sense receptors,
includes
transduction
energy through
air,
water,
itself
Phonaesthetics.
to sounds.
Good
safe
are
types
of sounds
mid back
e.g.)
associated with
cluster carries
[sm-]
pejorative
speakers (Markel
1966).
to
Ideophones operate
"big"
or
Niger-Khordofanian languages
label
Samarin
1967;
Sapir
1975).
Nonetheless,
The
underestimated.
Language speakers
directed
to
That
own
rules
of appropriateness
social milieu
tied
or perhaps
to
failed
phonaesthetics.
phonaesthetic
devices
are
little
different
Many
on,
the following
section upon
sound
symbolism
natural
languages.
Linguistic
designates
linguistic
(Wescott
1971b:416).
Instances
highlighting
a.)
the
contrast
rapidity with
"chirr,"
"yell".
The
their
rank as
produced
make.;
b.)
quietnessvoiceless
to
imply
"tick,"
"hiss,"
"whistle,"
diminished activity of a
events
are
process;
the
c.)
temporality--later
is
reflected
in
commonality--frequently
used
shorter
than
average
when
also
referent
importance
rises.
1982:73).
Such a
list
of linguistic icons
is
hardly complete.
An
they
Iconism
is
As
such,
it
is
very
similar to
meanings get
expressions,
albeit
is
in
greatly reduced
forms.
90
connotes steady projection of something from a base.
Many
earth
or
the
body
utilizing
dental
"to
consonants.
bite"
Instances
include Proto-Indo-European
*ed-
"woods,"
Following
rise
phonemes
v]
1985:284).
He remarked
that
these
to
the
meat.
Such a
all
shift
became
types should
sharing
phonemes.
In
minimal semantic
that,"
or "six-seven,"
"six-seven"
(Wescott
1971b:421)
for
Names
named.
I
body
name
"tooth"
made with
the
teeth.
Similarly, "lip"
are
named with
labial consonants.
Vocal icons
necessarily redundant.
91
in
all
What
would be of
to
test
through electro-mylography
so,
vocal iconism
may be
body
languages
(Argyle
1973).
Psycho-morphs.
unit
A Psycho-morph
is
"a
non-morphemic
connotative meaning
may
not
accompany
all
1966:2).
Non-morphemic
clusters
phoneme
associates,
the
/sm-/
and
/gl-/,
for
example.
The speaker
understood,
identified
psycho-morph with
speakers
1960).
select
attitude.
For
cluster
instance,
English
negatively
regard
the
/sm-/
(Markel and
Hamp
The mechanisms
inherited,
for Markel's
appearing culturally
like
and
However,
so
many speech
of the psycho-morph
awareness.
influence
Unconscious
toward
psycho-morphs
given
level
in
word
retreival
92
morphs demonstrate
a
culture's
self-reflexive
is
processes,
is
only one
of a
of a speaker.
expressive words,
up
in
"mentalist"
ethologist.
worlds
upon extrinsic
linguistically
marginal units,
Africanist Clement
Doke
described a group of
common
to
Bantu
separate
much
as
special
lexical
status
1980a).
Other linguists have added
ideophone.
to the
at
least
terms
1971).
Westermann
suitable acoustic
form"(Smithers
1954:73).
Linguist Gerard
Diffloth
93
characterizes
function
morphemic constituents
1972).
to
and
stress
applying to other
1954:83).
elements,
Two
examples are
intensity--English
tt,
dd,
gg,
etc.]
"yell,"
"guffaw,"
"chatter,"
"sluggish,"
known
in
when
their
(Smithers
1954:85);
is
ideophony
on.
head,"
"kick-kack,"
"sad-sack,"
"sing-song,"
"rag-tag,"
"hurly-burly,"
series);
"pell-mell,"
"rag-tag,"
and
"tootsy"willy-
bilabial
"super-duper,"
series);
and
"hootchy-kootchy"
and
"hurdy-gurdy"(e.g.
velar
series)
(Wescott
1980a:200-202).
94
Discussions of ideophony present an interesting dilemma
for scholars.
In
learned
and homorganically
same place of
articulation
for
This
has
debate sound
but
its
symbolism
learned
or
inherited
universal,
suffixes,
infixes,
prefixes,
linguistic
These
tools
are identical in
subsumed
different
as
types
symbolism.
Vocal-gesture.
is
communication
the
as
an
ancillary
that
body
The
result
was
sounds
of the
speaker.
Consonants are
1952:10).
process such
choking
Indeed,
the
velar
sound made by
'to
/k/,
/g/,
'to
/q/,
and so on
catch',
'to
is
eat',
close'
(Johannesson 1952:18).
95
The term articulatory
(1897),
gesture
is
discussed by Schuchardt
Grammonts
(1901),
An
is
found
Sinitic
in
languages produced
many
intriguing
to
examples. The
the verb to
devour
word
roll,
complex
vocality.
Even
so,
such as
Much
like
the
hypotheses
argued
in
this
dissertation,
the
behavioral
expressions.
when one
of root
morphemes
for six
distantly related
first
argues
velar+vowel+/\/ or
for primitive
/r/
hominids. Then,
the
same paragraph
that
insists,
however,
his
"it
Homo
sapiens
in
attempts
describe the
made use
96
of the lips or teeth as starting point instead of the throat or
the
palate"
(Johannesson
is
1952:15).
that gestural value
There
no doubt
found
It
in
some
is
argued that
least
five
or
more "languages"
exist
simultaneously
1973).
Wild speech
is
Nevertheless, a theory as
intuitively
sensible
as
vocal-gesture leaves no
is
little
room
for
left
to
understand.
By
is
explained.
Gordon Hewes
and sound
remarks on
this
point,
still
"mouth-gesture theory
symbolism research
unexplained"
(Hewes
1973:10).
correlation.
Sound-meaning
statistical
another.
They
Evidence of
only so far as
interaction
certain
that
statistical
measurement can be
dubious
affair.
One
known
as
the
"semantic
Measurement of
Meaning (Osgood,
Tannenbaum
97
differential
science
experiments.
Briefly, the semantic differential offers the subject of an
to
describe father a
scale indicating
side of the
is
The
measurement of relationship
agreement
in
is
direction
of alignment.
The
interaction
among
"weak-strong,"
analysis.
tautness,
novelty,
receptivity,
and
aggressiveness
evaluation,
studies
dimensions.
potency,
linguistic,
gallery"
(Carroll
1959:67).
The authors of
activity,
adjectival
to
characterization
attributes
because
they
correspond
fundamental
98
perceptual
individual's
it
the extent
is
refers
in
the
necessity
or
nonnecessity of making
movement
deal
1959:74-75).
studies have used
A
adjectival
classes of linguistic
behavior,
1959:75).
rating the
One
1,000
Navy
8
semantic differential
to
99
words constructed of separate phonemes. This study
discussed in more detail in the next chapter.
In the case of this test, the use of the semantic differential
is
is
Drawing the
presented
results
not
may
is
words.
It
/i/
phoneme
/a/
(Heise
1966:26).
Sound meaning
sounds,
phonemes, and
designs
They
are
as
strong as
the experimental
that
sound symbolism
For
this
reason,
Animal
for
a special
set of
words
In
Cocopa, a
animal talk
Yuman
is
language spoken
in
the
and which
in
turn
100
follow similar themes about animal
talk:
(1)
it
does not
more
adult
members
of the speech
community except
includes
language
(Chandola
1963:203).
the vocal repertoire of a
animal.
some scholars
in
to
language.
Such
the
human
ability
and desire
imitate environmental
to
under frustration
is
to
create
the
a difficult goal
many animals
the
attract
prey
(Fischer
1983:313).
meaning
in the
speaker's
101
species
animal
represents
an
ancient
interplay
effect.
between
is
An example
the
is
imploded
lateral
affricate
(e.g., "chick-chick-chick")
which
made
to
trot
in
a higher order
it
merely causes
striking
to
move.
buried
against rocks
the soil.
staccatoed
"whine"
call
it
with
conspecifics.
animal talk also create a psychological distance between the animal world and the human world by defining both
according to roles and expectations. Sounds purposely used to
move animals
to
action
are
talk
different
is
from combinations
that
to
newspaper with a
command
but not
Everyday speech,
as part of social
level.
No
have four
Military
commands
102
dramatized physical settings. Male fighting identity, closely
modeled
or
after
the
men
"grunts",
"squids",
"sea-bees."
et
commands
(Kill 'em.
e.g.),
and the
human
manner of sound
if
the
and
modeled
for children
Is
competition.
this
manner
is
in
which
talk
useful to
metaphor defining a
may
or
may
sound symbolism.
Phememism. At
in
present,
lively
languages.
The
earliest
linguistic
as
to
symbols are
to
still
considered
parental
modern languages,
is
one another
extremely
be nonarbitrary
iconicity
reconstructed
symbols tend
a
to
and
their
gestural
103
between manner of articulation and a movement or a
positioning in
space,
which
the
conventional
activity
of physical
spatial
phememe
is
A phememe
is
taxonomically organized
sounds involving
lip
NOSE,
BREAST
carry
nonarbitrary
larger
Phonemes
a result.
are
structurally
much
than
phememes
as
A phoneme
its
might
contain
perception, a
phememe
only a few.
are the
Importantly,
Foster's
phememes
skills
deduced
result of
LeCron
comparative
more
intuited
hypotheses proposed
of proto-language
(i.e.
by Paget (1930).
103
Her
of
reconstruction
claims
ancient forms
primordial language
104
reflexes
plausibly existed
that just
shift
argument says
articulatory
as
phonemic
than
transition
is
an
feature
distinct
rather
substitution
of a
/d/
completely
into
III
articulatory
e.g.),
configuration, (Teutonic
in
Old English
particluar
or
replace
features
rather
than
whole meaning
configurations.
New
base
increased
enormously
in
sophistication
as
it
and
is
forever
doing, but
phememic
hypothesis,
is
it
of expressed
behavior and
activity.
Conceivably, there
present today in
all
languages.
addition,
language learning
knowledge of
the
phememe.
is
Phonesthemes.
phonestheme
defined as a
phoneme
105
in
common some
(Householder
1946:83).
are
Etymologic
to
provenance
is
when words
traced
proto-forms
as
form of a psychois
morph than
as
a distinct entity.
This term
rarely
brief,
to
used.
Summary
in
this
of
the elements
set of
way
intrinsic
"hard
wired"
connections
neural
unspecified
Some
are
merely
structural
expanded
its
lexicon.
others identify
or minimal
units
transmitted,
as
is
part
of
humankind's distant
evolutionary past.
is
Poetry
ubiquitous in
human
cultures.
It
difficult
to
tempoed
insights,
acoustic, or phonetic
to
express
meaning
sound together
elaborated
in
nonarbitrary
in
manners.
Though
is
certainly
upon
misunderstood.
106
to
mandatory, genetically
to
language
last
as
human
culture
expanded geometrically
over the
Below,
symbolism
in
present languages.
fairness,
sound
a
as
acts
as
structural
human
super-
communication known
language.
in
Natural Languages
Of
least
above,
this
evidence
neither
to
study.
their
researchers.
all
Future research
language phyla.
However, since
my
discussion of sound
In
this
symbolism evidence
will
involve English.
regard,
yet to
be
analyzed
sufficiently.
107
There are a variety of reasons for presenting
evidence of sound symbolism here.
diverse kinds of sound
First,
this
in
describing the
seen.
is
spurious.
Third, the
many
their
their
cultural
differences
to
relations
the
physical
in
presenting
selective
process.
that
are
By
focussing upon
how
a certain
units,
language partitions
important facets of
its
sensory
human
highlighted.
Important sub-divisions
Hausa, like
many African
and
utilizes
a tonal
become dim'
is
is
[dusi-dusil.
108
gown': [buyaa-buyaal;
bustling about':
[hayaa-hayaa];
'noise of
together':
[kayaa-kayaa], and
so on
(Newman
1989:251-252).
is
comprised of
in
of the group
is
and Mon.
Expressives are
known from
some
detail
created
adding a post-verbal
(Pederson
1986:479).
a particular expressive
it
The meaning of
is
dependent upon
total
is
meaning of
the
V+PVE
Hmong
is
used in the
'a
following White
expressives:
[plig
plawg];
bird rising
from
its
plej];
'a little
popcorn popping
ploj];
'bullet impact,
109
bamboo
bursting',
and
[plij
plooj];
1986:481).
It is
White
Hmong
[pi-]
cluster
represents
meaning with
the
use of sound
symbolism
formation
This
of
is
proto-syntax
proto-language.
symbolism
this
is
Munda
grouping. In
the
among
are
speech
of
women (Mahapatra
1976:815).
Echo-words
formed
usually
semantic
1.)
[a-]
[u/a-]
or
[i-]
compared
to
original
form (Mahapatra
1976:823-824).
Some
include:
Gta^
'a
[kitir]],
small and
weak
larger and
stronger ghost';
[kisi],
[kesa],
[bill],
'a
'a
main
dish' versus
snack' (Mahapatra
no
words are formed
uncertainty:
like';
to
[cor]],
'to eat'
and [cog-cag-e],
ce],
'after
and the
[ko],
'to sit'
and [ko-ka
sitting,
etc' (Mahapatra
his
1929 studies.
this
Austronesian. Members of
At
least
20%
is
of the
world's
the
due
to
the
and
is
of Asia.
It
structures
words involving
animals,
nick-names,
hortatives,
plants,
and
krama
-courtesy
words (Uhlenbeck
is
1950:265).
of Madagascar and as a
Malagasy
language
it
isle
contains
an extensive sound
symbolic system.
symbolic words:
1.)
cries
noises
made from
natural
in
forces
common
patterns
including
stuttering,
muttering,
and so
on;
and
4.)
HI
shivering,
shaking,
anger,
excitement, gaiety,
sadness,
and so
on
(Bernard-Thierry
1960:241-242).
Malagasy (Bernard-Thierry
this
1960:243).
Most
often,
words of
sort
are
suffixed,
infixed,
prefixed,
or reduplicated.
'crying
Examples of
interest include:
of
hounds' [kinaonaona];
'tiger roaring'
[kaonkaonal; 'housecat
mewing' [meo];
[rehokal;
'light rain'
[dadadadal; 'heavy
rain'
[dradradradra];
South
language phylum
Among
the
more
symbolism
is
increasing evidence
to
neighboring
languages
(Emeneau
1969:274).
12
CVC
shape
may
be
vowel nasalization,
CV
instead of
the
CVC
pattern
more
interesting
examples
[dododo];
[kavakn];
'to
become limp
rattle'
bumping
in
[mak mak];
[civk civk];
'to
laugh' [gilgiU;
'to
talk secretly, in a
whisper' [gucgucn];
'to
dog
bite'
Niger-Khordofanian
phylum
speakers
are found
in
share
at
least
known languages
in
this
phylum
Mande, Dogon,
Igbo, Igala,
A
tonal
in
large
are
sound symbolism.
ideophones
number of languages.
Among
Igbo, and
others
113
Samarin
1971;Wescott
1980a;
Wescott
1980d).
Unfortunately,
each ideophone
may
language.
Though
have created
event there
an
at
25 types to describe
similarities.
this
sound symbolic
are
notable
to
amazing tendency
they contain
specific
special
1990:10).
in
the
word
in
Nature. Again, as a
mnemonic
to the
Niger-Khordofanian
may
"Africanized" Creoles
structures.
14
Some examples
tail'
[fififi];
'relatively
movement with
'action
respect to a slow
moving
creature'
[hilKl..)];
of grabbing tightly'
[kuwow];
1990); (Bini)
'blabbermouth'
[ez^iza]; 'way
up high'
so begins the
tale' [s^iss
iss ie];
in
(Wescott 1980a)
North
Amerind. Paleo-indians
125,000
archeological
one recognizes.
alluvial fan,
Among
its
became
the
and Blackfoot.
Sound symbolism
of
is
ways
in
many languages
consonantal
the North
Amerind phylum.
Some
include
specific
ablaut.
the
is
highly developed.
When
the
vowels
/i
115
or
o/, the subject has been
made
a condition
in a
given
(Reichard
1945:49).
in
These examples
same
in
work of Osgood,
Suci, and
"potency"
and "activity"
to
light
view of
this.
Some examples
[piy];
are: 'milk'
[pay] versus
'squeeze, press'
[tcil'];
'scare'
grease' [min];
(Reichard
1945).
In addition to using
vowel contrasts
series of
to indicate
shifts
semantic
to create
value,
consonant
/tc/>/ts/;
/gw/>/w/; and
/c/>/s/.
'just
Examples include:
level'
'be
below
[tsis];
'wait' [catc]
correspondence between
Reduplication
is
found
in
Coeur D'Alene,
Tzeltal,
Cocopa,
Yucatec,
languages. For
116
augmentation,
1963:211;
intensification,
Crawford
1978:20-220;
Cowan
1972).
to
date
it
'he
/-is/,
which means
'in
a general
manner akin
to'
(as in
found
in
Yurok where
/c/
in 'ashes'
>
[pontet]
>
'dust'
'heart of
human' [cek'^s],
If
where
/!/
>
/r/
in 'hair' [^lep]
>
'eyebrow' [^rep].
both sets of
will
be replaced:
'to
'to
whittle wood'
Consonantal symbolism
is
seen in
languages. For
Mohawk, Oneida,
117
Cayuga and Seneca:
'crow
call'
[ka;ka^].
in
More
Seneca except
'croak of a frog'
Cayuga,
Seneca, and
Mohawk;
[kluklukluk]
[bo^ks]
(Mohawk);
'plop'
[phlo^ts]
(Seneca) (Mithun
1982:50-53).
A
Amerind
in
the
Mayan
a
well.
of physical
properties,
indicate
long,
nick-names
(Durbin
1969:19).
to
their
semantic
or
cognates in Proto-Indo-European.
rife
The
results
assumptions of
as
arbitrary
disclaimers
textbooks.
the
Durbin
that
these...
118
"examples illustrate the fact that in many cases where the English lexicon derives from the same PIE root we can also expect the semantic counterparts in Yucatecan Maya to be phonological similar to each other. This indicates that the same historical processes found in Indo-European languages resemble those in Yucatec Maya, a not very surprising fact. But it also indicates that the cognitive processes (i.e. the selection and placement of semantic features for a given object or event) are comparable for the two languages. For example, there is no linguistic reason why [drying] should be associated with [flat open place] in both languages" (Durbin 1969:46).
at
at
least
separating
these languages,
any semantic
if
one wishes
Some
of the
more
interesting
examples include:
'to fill,
'cold'
'fat'
(Yucatec) [poll;
'to
'to
throw' (PIE)
[*bheld-]
[*sner],
(Yucatec) [pull;
wind,
twist'
(PIE)
'to
cook'
(Yucatec) [c'aak-|
vs.
'to
[pookl
'toast'
to the lips'
slip'
slide'
(Yucatec)
(PIE)
[*lei];
'to
119
(Yucatec) [pic]
vs.
'to
mash' (English);
'to
[peh]
(Yucatec) [peek']
[*kwon];
from
to reconstruct genetic
human
proto-
both
similar manners.
is
For example,
[base,
in
'root'
also
associated with
is
shrink,
associated with
essence,
contracting,
drawing, dragging,
moving](Durbin
South
1969:47).
Hundreds of
known languages
of this phyla
Amahuaca,
seen in
this
actions
transformations
identified
in
emerged from
120
Quechua
[s],
or [-lu],
the
[-sapa]
consonantal contrasts of
>
/s/
>
/x/ correspond
to
contrast
other North
Amerind languages
of articulation
Nevertheless,
to
is
vomiting,
sounds produced
Apalai
is
separate
an
infinite
reduplicated up to
Koehn 1986:124).
is
located in
best
known languages
A number
of
this
known
Nenets.
Few
However,
in
121
appears
in
phonesthetic
concepts (Austerlitz
1967:26).
se,
The presence of
violates
the
normal
of
morpheme
distribution.
He found
a variety
double
suffix
an
increasing
verbs.
frequency in
a
is
variety
also
Vowel shortening
noted.
these phonological
as
regularities
of affective
nouns act
phonaesthemes, growing
a
few words
1975:18).
He
other Urgic
South
East Asia and the more well studied languages include Tai,
Black Tai, White Tai, Siamese, Lao, Lue, Phuthai, and Phuan.
tone
(Hudak
1990:767)
quality,
'good'
[dii]
vs.
'rather
good'
[diidii];
intensify meaning.
122
'to
be
true'
[cir]]
vs.
'really true'
[cigcig];
'child'
[dek]
vs. 'children'
[dekdek]
or
quantitative
meaning.
Examples include:
with
its
vowel
'mutteringly'
[mubm'ib];
'sleepy'
[rjuarjia];
'wrinkled,
mussed'
in
/o~ e/
(as in
'scanty'
wobbly' [to^te''];
[gon^gEn^]; 'stammeringly'
[?5??e
far
?];
b.) the
[w'idwad]; /e
a/
in 'radiant,
~
a/
a/ in 'mumblingly' [p'ip'am];
~
/a
a/
a/
/u
a/
in 'roaringly' [su'^sa-^];
/o
[proypray]; and
finally /o ~
2).
a/
in
'sadly, lamentingly'
[mogmar]] (Haas
1942:
The
final type of
in
used often
addition,
it
is
used more
in
woman's speech
speech.
first
Generally,
1990:767).
idii];
Examples
'whisperingly' [krasl
bkra^sab]; and
[wabwab]
(Haas 1942:3).
rarer,
examples of
to
notice
Some
vs.'rum-pa-pum' (English);
[y
Imyrm](Tai)
vs.
'so-so'
[heha];
igc'sg] (Haas
1942:2).
comparison
to Tai,
Haas remarks
similar,
include:
patter,
hodge-podge,
ding-dong,
mamby-pamby,
dilly-
dally,
slipslop,
sing-song,
mish-mash,
riff-raff,
zigzag,
tonk,
helter-skelter,
honkyhocus-
razzle-dazzle,
humdrum, hobnob,
fuddy-duddy,
hurly-burly, others
pocus,
humpty-dumpty,
and
(Haas
1942:5).
billion
work
124
has been done on sound symbolism, again, oustide works by
Chinese linguists.
One paper
Tibetan
languages (Shafer
1964).
Surprisingly,
virtually
number of
basic
identical
the correspondences
are
at
for
basic
vocabulary
underlying
parallel
think a
vital
[namu] (Yaqui)
vs. 'rain'
vs.
'cloud'
[nam]
(Old Bodish);
'rain'
[yuu] (Papago)
[yu] (Kukish);
'wind' [hwe-li]
(Papago)
vs. 'father'
pd] (Shoshone)
[-kaml
(Cahita) vs.
'joint'
[tsOik] (Burmish);
(Dandezongka);
[kup-tca]
[kup]
'belly'
[wo'k] (Papago)
[vok]
125
'belly, breast'
'urine' [sisi]
[to-
ma]
[na-ka-] (Comanche)
'bear'
vs. 'ear'
[tyo-tum] (Papago)
vs.
[*bwi] (Burmish);
(Karenic);
'sing'
'call'
'to
[t'u]
[ko]
(Papago)
(Middle Burmese);
'see,
[ka'a] (Ute)
vs.
[ka]
(Mandarin);
'think,
consider'
105).
Sino-Tibetan and Uto-Aztecan languages separated more
than
100,000 years
ago.
The
arbitrary
sound-meaning
hypothesis
To make
this
point even
more
forcefully,
encoding of
'near-far'
in
vowel ablaut
at
discussed more
'near'
holds that
or
'here'
small front
Uto-Aztecan languages
(Yaqui), [ivi] (Cahuilla);
(Papago),
['r'i]
(Hopi), [T
[i]
(West Himalayish),
['i]
(West Bodish),
Altaic.
to
[i-]
(Mandarin),
[r
stretch
126
Korean, Manchu, Ainu, Yakuts and Sibo. As a whole, the Altaic
languages
may
take
trait.
(Hamano
1986).
Korean
is
have noticed,
at
words.
a wealth of
words and
childhood.
did
'gitaigo'
or 'modal' words
until
is
apparent from
However,
Hamano's
dissertation,
most scholars
of Japanese
sound
It
symbolism.
is
make up more
than
3%
of the
more
1,450 words
it
(Hamano
shows
1986:3). This
is
striking
for
two
reasons. First,
a massive
Second,
it
a powerful
linguistic
remnant.
127
Japanese contains two main sound symbolic structures.
The
first
is
and
is
concerned with
The second
is
(Hamano 1986:32)
are
seems
that
more
'synaesthetic'
meanings
five types
forms,'
which
/p-/;
consonant
consonantal doubling;
CVC
groups;
CVCV-
CVCV
(Hamano 1986:13-31).
symbolism.
Additionally,
Some
interesting
examples
'surprised'
are: 'crisp'
[pari-paril;
'startled'
'crunchy' [pori-pori]
[to suru] is
do'
'splendid' [riipa
'tight'
[gata-gata (da/desu)];
[gyuu-gyuu (da/desu)];
'spirally'
[kuru-kuru (da/desu)]
copulas
The nominal
are
CVCV-CVCV. The
'it
[da/desu]
or 'just so'.)
is'
or 'the
way
it
is'
CVC,
with a small or
[ween
to];
'drunken sighs of
riin to];
contentment' [wii
'very excitedly'
to];
[ru'n-run]; also
[yooj;
'a call'
[yaa];
128
'vividly'
[kuukiri];
clogs'
'tasting rich'
[kookuri]; and
others, 'sound of
in a
wooden
[ga'ta-goto]; 'being
sullen'
[mu'sya-kusya];
'noisily'
'with
bumps'
[de'ko-boko]; 'being
suka];
flustered'
[do'gi-magil;
[zya'ka-
'toiling' [e'etira,
o'otira]
(Hamano 1986:28-32).
symbolism, which
is
paralleled
in
diverse
language phyla
Some
of the
nonarbitrary
'explosion,
sound-meaning connections
decisiveness'
/p,b/;
in
Japanese involve:
'hitting
breaking,
of a surface,
/t/;
coming
agreement'
puffing
'opening,
breaking
up,
swelling,
expanding,
out,
emission
from
inside,
surfacing=inward/outward
faintness'
/w/;
'soft
movement'
contact,
/k/;
'softness,
/s/;
haziness,
friction'
/y/;
'sounds from
fluid
many
sources,
/r/
childishness,
haziness'
and
'rolling,
movement'
(Hamano
1986:226).
It
to
test
my numerous
'fox or the act of
hypotheses
[wa'n-wan];
homonymity'
e.g.);
stomach' [po'n-pon]
describing
its
'A-bomb
blast,
[pi'ka-don]('culturally
129
specific' e.g.); 'breast'
[boi'nlitnune]
('ethnoanatomical'
e.g.);
e.g.);
'baby
rattle'
[gara-garal('baby-talk'
'small dots'
[putu-
pulu];
'dry,
skin'
[kasa-kasa]
('ethnoanatomical'
(Hamano 1986:49)
language
English,
Most of
Many Indo-European
number of
these
include consonantal
symbolism,
clusters,
and
reduplication
stage,
in
CVthis
Ultimately,
human
physiologically constrained
Vowels and
their
prosodic
CV
Finally, because
CVThis
utterances can 'go out like a lion' or 'go out like a lamb'.
is
precisely
130
proposed as a feature
in
Proto-Unified-Language: (Biologically
contrainedvocals)>(V+)>(CV)>(CV+)>(CV+(SOFT-UNMODULATED)
or
(HARD-M0DULATED)>(C1VC1), (C1VC2)
For Proto-Indo-European
at
et cetera.
least,
widespread
shifts
CV
(or prosodic
pool of
CVC
dental
n/
fricative
/-s/
/-s/
(Shields
This
theory
argues
the
/-
and
as
mime
other reduplicative
[ball]
(Sanskrit)
'strong'
'THE name'
Greek)
[esti]
[naman] (Sanskrit);
[epher]
(Attic-Ionic
vs.
'he
was
carrying'
[epheren]
is'
(Attic-Ionic
[estin]
Greek);
'be'
(Attic-
(Attic-Ionic Greek);
CV-S;
[nava]
(Sanskrit),
[niesen],
and
[sniz]
(English) (Shields
1976:37).
Though
it
is
unclear
a
how
transformation
taking
place
the
it
more
/-s/
than
Proto-Indo-European.
Assuming
and
/-
would be
interesting
see
frequencies of
and
/-n/
in
'sneeze'
131
fricative
and
nasal
than
an
arbitrary
sound-meaning theory
[tehi],
Maori [matihel,
Eskimo
Pali [khipita],
Portuguese
[-
sxi],
Hopi [aasi],
Micmac
[hacil,
Chama
[ati],
Marinahua
[atisi],
Mayoruna [atisun],
Shipibo-Conibo [hatisainl, Uralic; Finnish [aivastaa], NiloSaharan; Miza [o-si], Ojila [tssl,
[tso], Sino-Tibetan;
[tso],
Lokai
/n/=iV50 /fricative/=48/50
/nasal/=23/50)
Languages arising
consonantal
later than
Proto-Indo-European show
/t/
symbolism.
among
Slavic, Russian,
Castilian,
132
Czech, and others (Malkiel
it
would be usual
NOT
to label
deliberate
obstruction
or
occlusion
passage
of the tongue
the
meanings about
and
'resistance',
'firmness',
'toughness',
'stiffness'(Malkiel
1990c:71).
is
Although Latin
language,
its
it
a generally
commended
scholarly
symbolism. Evidently,
people highly prized birds for some 315 terms are known.
loans, Latin
names
at
More
than
20%
of these
names
not only
name
call
because
it
that could
The same
breeding group.
Latin labelled
parts
Many Romance
many
of
its
tonal vocabulary.
named
French
the
[vano],
the
Sanskrit
word
for 'sneeze'.
'li
Meanwhile
the
huit',
somehow became
English
name
'litweet'
(Andre 1966:148).
in Bhojpuri, an
Indo-Ayran
is
similar to
it,
(CV
-i-
any
133
C)
is
added a duplicated
initial
(C + either
/o/ or /u/)
(Tiwary
1968:32).
For Gujerati and Marathi, the most commonly reported
/b/.
in
Hindi
is
/w/
really
implies the echo, and not the reverse, echo-words are far from
functions
(Tiwary
1968:35).
their reduplication
can serve as a
highly
manipulation
of
young-old
is
strategy(Tiwary
1968:36).
Sound symbolism
negotiating
(hardness,
It
relations
softness,
cetera)
reality.
is
so,
affective connotations
and sound
symbolism may be
selecting
intrinsically
linked within
species
Recently,
the
has been
'emotional'
sound
134
(Markel 1990). Wescott regarded
anger-context connection
to
this
as
the reason
for
an
in
labio-velarity
and derogation
conflict
biting
is
it
has been
a
to
as
an 'un-sound-symbolic'
language.
Below
word
is
created to
show
that English
contains a substantial
either
contain
(Malkiel
1963).
This
list
suspected or attested sound symbolic words are given. The presented in table
3.. a.
is
far
from
being comprehensive,
of American English.
it
is
It
language of English
may be
everyday speaker,
(i.e.
3%
sound symbolic
words.
This
extraordinary
135
Table 3. a. English sound symbolic words
136
Table
22. -iggle
3. a.
continued
137
Table
52.
3. a.
continued
-udge
138
Table
71.
p3. a.
continued
139
Table
85.
kl3. a.
continued
140
Since English
the
arbitrary
is
important because
to
it
demonstrates
crucial
are
certain registers
of semantic intent.
which emotional
to the
activity
at
listen
salesman
to
Much work
words from
function
as
affective
vocabulary markers.
sound
birth.
is
aware of from
their
Limitations
fall
medium
construct
called an artificial
entirely
With
this
technique,
linguists
researchers
in
By
to
speakers,
phonetic, acoustic,
the language's
may
in
be viewed. Otherwise,
its
own phonemic
distribution,
own word
language evolution
to
scenario,
non-affective
vocalizations
were unlikely
behaviors
to
be the
first
emerge.
141
142
Other sound symbolic inquiries use a natural
experiments,
speakers.
speaker's
lexicon. In these
to
contain
"unrelated"
to
contain meanings
arbitrarily. connected
phonemes.
to both these types of
As every
linguist
neurolinguists, physiologists,
and
cultural
Some
perceptual
borders
are
shared
VOT
In
contrast,
many
physiological routines
make imploded
grunts.
or describing
that
species'
physiological production
a widely realized
for ethological
studies
true for
it
human
languages.
is
If
all,
is
because there
general
143
contain a word which carries the meaning
"up,"
their
ultimate
to
later
in
life
than
involved.
layers
To
many
of neuro-motor
Nevertheless,
the
speaker
Language
system.
is,
The paradox
is
that
they
its
is
So,
for
perceptual
easily
events
number of
features
to
be studied. For
example, any speaker might note longer words are rarer in speech
than shorter words.
Even words of
or
specific
expressives,
interjections,
and
elements.
As
experiments
proposing
sound
144
languages modeled upon types of analysis which sometimes
exclude speaking subjects. This type of analysis
to
is
crucial in order
synthesize
differently
dissertation
written
is
and
sporadically
published
research.
My
symbolism
research.
all
Of
identified
distant
internal
historical
their
sound
It
shift
Hamano
1986;
Malkiel
1990).
also can
as
a
symbolism
typically produce a
list
of the
features
subjects.
as
associated
with
semantic
meanings reported by
and nonparametric
speaking
statistics,
Viewed with
their
inferential
associations,
all
normal distributions of
between languages.
or biased
Often,
experiments
non-equivalent
study
in.
three
sound
Chapter
III).
Experimental
145
methodoligies often do not investigate equivalent linguistic
cognitive
structures.
and
Some measure
features
associations
between entire
to
is
be
a
an admirable
it
sound
to
bio-
is
hardly
is
without objection.
More
and
Hamano
(1986)).
Below
last
70
They
human words
at
to
nonarbitrary
sound-meaning processes.
are
proto-
The experiments
also
II
corroborate
numerous individual
this
findings presented in
dissertation
Chapter
solid
stands
upon
theoretical
146
"Size"
Otto Jespersen and Edward Sapir are responsible for early 20th century interest in the search for a linguistic gesture
representing a size concept.
To
justify
their
search,
they theorized
sound symbolism
sense (Jespersen
denial
is
natural
correspondence between
is
sound and
an extreme
1921/1947:396). There
no logic
to
of sound
symbolism
in
1921/1947:397).
majority
of speakers
meanings, Jespersen
sound
symbolism
(Jespersen
1921/1947:378).
"front-back"
/I/.
He
collects
child',
all
vowel, a lax
in
names of
slight,
1922/1949:557).
For Indo-European, Jespersen argues that sound symbolism
fit
to
is
not
necessarily
one present
in
distant
147
be progressive tendencies
more adequate
expressions
(Jespersen
1922/1949:559).
experiments
(Sapir
1929).
it
His
experimental
orientation
launched
the challenge:
"can
in
themselves out
spite
and scales
in
consonants
the
strictly
socialized field
1929:226).
In
contain
"expressive"
1929:226).
Preferential
"expressive"
vocabularies
ones.
It
is
presumed the
referential
vocabularies
would be
less
might be expressed
in
number of
artifical
lexicons
to
represent
In
one
English
all
vowels
/a,
se,
a
e,
lineal
i/
non-English vowels
arbitrarily
'table'.
The subject
was asked
to indicate the to
'table'
or if both
148
Another
list
these
two runs
the
(Sapir
1929:238).
continuum of
lowest vowel
size
/a/
in to
highest vowel
/i/.
When vowel
contrast
differences
the
same direction
as that of the
1929:231).
to
measure
and bordered by
connotative evaluations,
socially
constructed
Many
Stanley
upon
the
this
theme.
Sapir's
student,
Newman
restudied
size-sound
symbolism
produced the most widely varying rankings, then the older, and
the
oldest
showed
the
1933:59).
He
argues
149
acoustic,
kinesthetic,
repeated
other
experimental
tested
small-large
to
/r/,
and dark-bright
be
/br/, /gr/,
with
and /m/,
large
/p/,
/br/,
/gr/,
/gl/,
and
small
/s/,
consonants
and
/s/,
and
bright
consonants
/k/,
and
/I/
(Newman
1933:63).
Newman
indicating
series
also did a
word search
in English for
evidence
a
was inconclusive.
statistical
While Newman's
his
Additionally,
he
fails
to
among
causal explanations.
Which causes an
idea of
kinesthetic
constriction
as
As soon
pitch
was
associated with "small", low pitch with "large". Front vowels tended
to
1933:86).
Since their
they
effectively
test
deduced
the
connotative rankings,
largely
duplicating
Newman
(1933) and
Sapir (1929),
were not
neccessarily
(Bentley
and Varon
Later researchers
tested
further
upon
this
150
the
results a
with
1945).
to
strap-strop
Thorndike,
to
smallness/largeness
ratios.
many words
as possible for
[I]
as
as in
as in
machine',
'bat', [o]
[1]
or
[i],
as in
'bait', [e]
or [el],
[se]
as in
'bite',
[yu] as
in 'beauty', [u],
[u:]
or [yu:] (Thorndike
for
1945:11).
probable
smallness,
largeness,
The and
final
[i]
as
was
the
for [o]
and
[o].
He
states succinctly,
"the theoretical
chance
'small'
that
difference of -1-0.046
[i]
words
in [I] or
words
i.e.)
in [o]
and
[o]
about
in
1700 (.0005
in
and
the corresponding
the
i.e.)
percentage of
'large'
words
is
about
in
16,000 (.00006
The
151
chance for joint occurence
is
less
than
in
250,000,000"
(Thorndike
1945:10).
that at least for English,
German, Russian,
more frequently
for
in
in
ones
size-
unpleasantness
lists
tallying
similar
phoneme word
showed
there
is
small-large
is
symbolism
1945:13).
or
[I]
is
these speculations of
In
of the vowel
it
when considering
sound's
motivation,
is
its
it
is
actually
used to name
(Chastaing
1958:413).
In considering the
vowel
/i/,
she notes
it
is
used
in at least a
dozen
height,
Indo-European languages
quieter forms of talking,
to
represent
smallness,
clarity,
birds,
stages of breathing,
sharpness,
obtains
its
narrowness,
quickness,
lightness,
its
and rapidity.
It
use,
to
but importantly,
its
meaning
is
relation
other sounds.
The
/i/
vowel
musculature.
152
Her
I'll
meaning assigned
first
to the
vowel
led
to
had 30 French
speaking students
darkest vowel.
it
vowel
series
in
The more
frontal
was reported. Next, 20 students rated 4 words, Kig, Kag, Kog, and
to
Kug, according
Kug was
(Chastaing
1962:2).
twilight.
Most common
/u/
for
dawn was
1962:3).
in
/e/,
day
/i/,
and twilight
(Chastaing
Thirty-five
students
were
the word,
Grum,
to best indicate
66%
replaced
the
/u/
with
/i/.
41
and
/e/
lightened,
to
vowels
/o/
and
/u/
Word
to
pairs
students
and they
/i/
were asked
lightest
choose the
or dark pair.
The vowel
was
as
compared with
for
91%
75%
connected
/i/
with day
and
large
/u/
with night. The same percentages held true for small and
1962:5).
(Chastaing
The
surprising.
is
What
innate,
of
153
both.
Chastaing remarks on
this
created
contains
some of
vomit,
the
words
cough,
suck,
and
drink
Most
in
linguists believed
One attempt
to
answer the
/i/
It
distance,
pejorativeness,
time,
age,
gender,
sweet-
good, sensation, and so on. Ultan finds size symbolism represented by a number of sonal
forms
in
27%
is
obtained with
are
reservation though.
from
North Amerind. For the other 16 language phyla, only the following
have an
(15),
N=5
for
their
sample: Austronesian
(9),
Indo-European
Amerind
difficulties
European.
He
symbolism.
nearness
is
reports
33%
The overwhelming
front or high
feature
representing
corroborates
suggests
that
many
earlier
It
also
distance
symbolism
proto-language conceptual
154
fragment because
within
the
it
exists
both
Short
sounds
represented
events
or
singular
or
instances,
or
few instances.
longer,
instance,
many
languages
set
the
and pejorative nature into words with the use of ablauting devices
(Ultan
1978:547). In
"emotional"
speech,
this
example,
in
in
hypocoristic speech,
I
can
call
my
friend
Bobby-Lee,or
can do a
the pejorative
"it
mish-mash
present.
is
(Ultan
appears that
sound symbolism
If
the
numerous sound
entirely
are
labelling
separate
But
it
recognize a brief
list
varied conceptual
styles
construct similar
155
linguistic
least
rules
registers.
As
a fact,
the
we do know
that
where connotative
intent
is
to
be amplified.
Artificial
Lexicons
in
Artifical lexicons
were designed
variants
individual
sounds.
Interesting
of Sapir's
nonsense words
test
(1963) ran
which provided
Not
were likely
/r/,
/t/,
/k/,
and
/z/
/u/,
/o/,
/I/,
/b/,
and
/n/
were pinned
to
Newman
farther,
felt
to
be deeper,
stable,
softer,
/i/
heavier,
/e/
hotter,
wetter,
more smooth,
and
front
and on a scale of
consonants /k/
/k/
Finally,
and
/r/
were
than
happier than
/t/
or
/m/,
/a/
and consonant
was
stronger
/m/,
/i/
and vowels
/o/
/u/
and
happier than
and
156
Lack of information upon how subjects rank nonsense words
compelled Weiss (1964)
its
to
efficacy
to
sound. Here,
magnitude, brightness,
words.
related
Some
to
subjects reportedly
would think of
Latin,
others
a choice
their
make
(Weiss
1964:261).
He
believed early
is
due
achieve significant agreement as a group. His results showed the brightness dimension increased in
response to requesting
1964:262).
this
particular
judgement (Weiss
He comments
that
perception.
for
in
In
other
words,
with
age
to
become known
to
speaker.
Important data fueling a disconfirmation for universal sound
symbolism
to
is
present
144 nonsense
CVC
words
to
unrelated languages.
consonants
and vowels
languages.
common
Tamil
157
warmth,
size,
the
from language
correlation
to
any pair of
languages"
1962:356).
They
have
that
it
fails
of
prosodic-meaning
is
or
feature-meaning
mental event and
it.
sound
is
symbolism.
A phoneme
large
constructed
Further,
the
phoneme and
many
This
to
say,
when
sonogram
is
structures
features
often
experimental design
may have
entirely
common
or
phoneme
test
is
is
the
least divisble
merely because
all
phonemes
are
chosen
four languages
in
no guarrantee they
features
used
sound
symbolism.
158
In a critical review of then recent
sound symbolism
its
case as
universal.
biased
by researchers choosing
it
mimed
is
clear
lost
in
the
translation"
well as
common
people.
As
such,
is
may have
were
Similarly the
mode
of the
stimulus presentation,
controlled
(Taylor
1963:205).
is
Insup
entirely
Kim
probably
learned,
in
and that
we
obtain
phonetic symbolism
patterns
English,
among
those
1963:209).
She restates
tenet
of Saussure;
"a
new hypothesis
must be found
that accounts
associate certain
that
same
sounds
meanings"
(Taylor
1963:206).
more
relative
1961,
Davis
the
word
TAKETE
with
ULOOMU
much
like
African children
English.
159
Johnson, Suzuki, and Olds (1964) tested deaf and hearing high
school and college students. In rating
14 pairs of
artificial
words
Mixed
were found
in
a test of 60
list
Navaho speakers
of antonyms
to
known from
guess the
smooth-rough,
hard-soft
examples were
significant.
From
amount of overlap
similar-sounding words
is
if
does occur
it
to imitative
words such
as
"cricket"
and
"sizzle"
1965:527).
without
data.
How,
for example,
would
COUGH
70%
velar
seen in Chapter
II,
98%
of the examples?
Or
that a
NECK
should show
much
FOOD, why
it
should
over
80%
show
carrying a nasal
160
feature? For both Taylor (1963)
denial
of feature-meaning
association
research.
in
is
argued
with
little
supporting
a retest
sets,
60.8,
significant
twitch, stun, gnaw, cut, sting, ache, grope, rub, lick, kiss, wince,
scald,
whisper,
splendid
(Weiss
1966:100-101). This
easily
seen.
What
is
antonym of
"tickle"
for
example?
case?
Is
it
"torture"
or "pain" in the
imperative
second
person
that high
agreement may be
Many
"Zei-zei
(Suru)" (Weiss
1966:101).
As Hamano noted
undermines
the
results.
list
either (1967).
in
Japanese
161
and that
this
known
as
UPS) (Taylor
1967:238).
Taylor's criticism brought
merely substituted
guessing and
failed
to explain
all
words
as
added
in
word length
culture
a paralinguistic
bonus.
It
how each
agree
are onomatopoetic,
less
One
list
of
COUGH
It
terms
in
the
Appendix
to see
of this
labels
statement.
seems clear
that
"onomatopoeia" or
have refused
analyze.
A
carried
to
out by
rate
from -12
set
translated into 5
their
sort
words of 5 languages.
He found
that
for
antonym
class
was
that
it
carried
162
because,
as
predicted,
"sense-expressing
is
it
cultures
to
differently
communities
(Gebels
1969:312).
One such
Russian
subjects
Two
hundred
were asked
to
to
nonsense forms
bright and
unhappy connotations.
the
it
would be
words
as
specific
also
argues that
diffused
secondary associations
1970:113).
may become
linguistically
(Crockett
163 Where
the secondary sound
symbolism might
is
lie
within the
interesting
unclear.
An
this
in
monotone
voice,
all
significant in
expressive voice
the
mode
of presentation.
Interestingly
enough, for
expressive voice
the
happy-sad,
79%
was
fast-slow,
and
this
was
true
form as well
(Kunhira
1971:428).
structural
phoneme elements
in
directing
cognition
toward
full
Further,
it
does not
as a
compare
a false
set
phonemes
further
analyze.
list
CVC
164
elliptical
or angular drawings.
They found
/a/
that
the
vowel
/i/
was
and
for for
triangles,
/u/
least
preferred.
The vowel
was preferred
smaller items and the vowel /a/ for larger ones. Consonants were
not consistently tagged to either type of figure.
They remark
undetermined,
that there
seems
to be
"some, as
yet,
factor
figures
of different size"
1971:168).
Tarte and Barritt chose the continua of vowels from /a/ to /u/ to
/i/
to
represent large-to-small
oral
cavity
size,
low back-to-high
front in
diffuse/acute
terms
of distinctive
features
theory
for
their
1971:168).
Their results
suggest that
with this method, the vowel continua was shown associated with
the
size
/a-u-i/
They
all
astutely remark,
"what
is
not clear
whether any or
of these
factors
are
(Tarte
and Barritt
1971:168).
252
case,
of
CVC
for large
with
small,
/u/
/i/
with triangles
165
(Tarte
phoneme
with
/g/,
By
replacing
the
size
/s/
the
same
results
that
dimension was
1974:94).
muted and
the
His
experiments suggest
of these sorts from related languages. Both English and Czech are
Indo-European.
Symbolism Experiments
a flurry of
the
early
In
1930's.
Few
phonemic
stimuli.
included:
5.
1.
bird-worm,
6.
2.
red-green,
7.
3.
peace-war,
8.
sweet-bitter,
9.
fast-slow,
white-black,
10.
square-circle, soft-hard,
16.
good-evil,
smart-dull,
17.
praise-deprecate,
far-near,
15.
11.
12.
13.
high-low,
18.
14.
kite-boat,
19.
old-young,
20.
hot-cold,
are-are not,
22.
blue-yellow,
thick-thin,
big-small, 21.
24.
right-
clear-muddy,
enemy-friend,
23.
crooked-straight,
1933:283).
to
75%
this
of the
result caused
Of
itself,
the arbitrary
166
criticism
showed
that
"marked" terms
in
the
vocabulary of
at
rates
higher than
50%
or chance levels.
was done
pairs
in
21
was formed
they were
wrong. The highest rate was for English-Hindi, followed by EnglishChinese and English-Czech. In further analysis,
significant
it
was shown no
difference
existed
items did
make
difference.
Somehow,
at
.01
Eng-Chinese, Eng-Hindi
(bright-dark),
Eng-Hindi
Czech
(hard-soft),
167
many), Eng-Czech (thunder-lightning), and Eng-Chinese (widenarrow) (Brown, Black, and Horowitz 1955:391).
antonyms
is
supposed, but
is
not proven.
Word
length,
while
when using
categories
a natural
liable
lexicon data
to
set.
more
correct guessing
unclear,
though
is
types of
in
Chapter
is
III.
an important sub-segment of
Another similar
scheme was
to
test
the correct
guessing of 25
English-Croatian, English-Japanese,
list
and Japanesein
was
the
Tsuru and
trials,
(1933).
In
the English-Japanese
and English-Croatian
at
significant
.001
probability.
The
results
of Croatian
Brooks
1956:250).
168
Croatian presented pairs were far below any
level.
statistical
significance
systems,
(Maltzman,
Morrisett,
method
reflect
is
the
auditory
or
synaesthetic
Fries'
list,
or
kinesthetic
is
associations?
With the
Tsuru and
extrapolation
impossible.
Brackbill
and
Little
(1957).
Essentially
duplicating
meanings of word
English-Hebrew,
of English-Japanese, English-Chinese,
Chinese-Japanese,
Chinese-Hebrew,
and Japanese-
Hebrew
items.
The
.01
for
1957:318).
for
Unlike
other studies,
English-
pairs
same
for
Foreign-Foreign word
made no
Though
difference.
their study
modes of data
presentation,
and
this
is
commendable, the
169
experiments return weak inference for strong data.
Exactly what
is
unclear.
They note
of
that
word
lengths,
agreement of subjects as
(Brackbill
the sameness of
meaning of word
and Little
1957:318).
and even
graphically
Brown and
Nuttal
Morrisett,
with suspicion.
"first",
It
included
"when",
"this"
and others.
for English,
at
list
was created
levels
all
1959:445).
(1958) to get
1.
word-meaning
fitness.
belong, 7. knee,
scales:
8.
sun,
9.
write.
a semantic
differential
fit
scale
according to whether
its
carried
meaning and on
connotative
meaning was
angular-rounded,
weak-strong,
rough-
170
smooth,
relaxed,
active-passive,
small-large,
cold-hot,
good-bad,
tense-
wet-dry,
fresh-stale
(Wertheimer
1958:413).
Not
words
li-
^-test,
or binomial expansion,
level.
the difference
is
significant
beyond the
.01
Apparently
than
fitting
qualities
non-fitting
to
words"
1958:413).
Subjects
indicate
when
particular
word
lost
its
meaning
words
all
after
disappear in
condition
of saturation
it
(Wertheimer 1958:414).
to
fails
sorts
of qualities
to
would
object
the
it
because as a metal
symbolism
/i/?
Even
stimulus
is
interesting.
should be possible,
if
it
is
so,
to
measure
areas
with
PET
memory
of the brain
for various
171
Further,
the
such
PET
scans
the
may
brain channels
to
memory
areas.
and "referential"
vocabularies
different
to
Wertheimer
CVC
a consonant
7 point scales.
great
many
I
of these
CVC
combinations
are actual
this
reason,
to
determine similarity of
the
potency dimension
(.64).
significant at the
level.
Miron remarks
reliable
means
the
1961:626).
To note Miron's
and
/p/;
Japanese
/i/
and
the
least
Japanese
/e/
and
B.)
the
highest ranked
/g/;
Japanese
least highly
were; English /i/ and /p/; Japanese /e/ and /s/ and; C.) the highest
ranked activity vowel and consonant were; English /u/ and /n/;
Japanese /a/ and /n/: the least highly ranked activity vowel and
172
consonant were; English /i/ and /c/; Japanese /a/ and /p/ (Miron
1961:628-629).
Miron's study can be criticized for the choices
selecting constituents for
the vowels
[i,
it
made
in
its
e,
a,
o, u],
which
He
and
s],
two stops
the
[p
and
g],
What
is
exactly
makes any of
this
phonemes
evaluated
unclear through
clearly, both
design.
More
What makes
it
stop
Or
is
it
cavity,
suffers unit
/p/
due
to
an
the
significant
of sound
problematic because
Affricates
are
the
phonemes
the
rarest
consonantal
his ten
phonemes
list.
universally,
two
in
phoneme
This
real
is
in
numbers of
affricateless
tongues.
"pleasant" and
these
remarks concur
173
with trends seen in a large number other languages. His remarks
lead
"unpleasant"
and
"strong"
sound-meaning
Hawaiian
large,
was allowed
to take
or large
a large
and
for
females.
Although white
tokens were associated with small and soft words, the results were
opposite for Hawaiian words (Roper, Dixon, Ahern, and Gibson
1978:95).
This study
is
significant in that
it
demonstrates gender
for
associations
specified
word
is
weakest
in
CVC
is
words
to
stands, the
word
is
boys and
choose
in
loudness.
174
"Goodness-of-Fit Sound"
Symbolism Experiments
made choices
when
their
choices
indicated
selective
meaning-sound associations
were unclear. Many
in
their reasons
for success
this
problem
mind. They
wished
to
selection
procedures of sound
symbolism.
An
signs
as:
fear,
madness,
signs
with meanings
associated with the test word and two or three which were
test
there
1952:23).
He remarked
that
"almost
is
some associated
it
object, but
it
the evidence,
that
the
influencing choice"
(Hall
1952:23).
175
Hall's study
is
not because
it
variety of
schemes
in
fitting
signs,
and
where
less
apprehension
is
He
states
that
agreement
appropriate
signs
is
high,
some
of obvious conventional
seems
appropriateness
the
verbal
setting
are
both
the
quickest choices
this
is
true,
been done and Hall's study reaches only general conclusions. The
sign
visual
experiments.
more streamlined
retest of Hall,
McMurray
test
using the
semantic differential.
justice,
ten
word
list
was
created;
rhythm, wrong,
serene,
enthusiasm. Each of these words was paired with two sign drawing
modified after Hall (1952). Subjects were then asked to pick one or
the
other
signs
to
word.
176
The 10 words and
the
scores.
rounded,
cold-hot,
weak-strong,
rough-smooth,
active-passive,
high-low,
fast-
good-bad,
tense-relaxed,
heavy-light,
or
kind-cruel,
sick-healthy.
signs
slow,
hard-soft,
ugly-beautiful,
"the
green-red,
ratings
McMurray concluded
found
to
mean
of the chosen
were
be closer to the
signs"
mean
ratings of the
of the non-chosen
(McMurray 1958:312).
is
similarity.
The kinds of
similarity
is
this
experiment.
is
choice
in
of words.
It
would be no surprise
find
worldwide consensus
believe a
high probability exists that most subjects would not choose a circle
over an S to represent
it.
Further,
Another
15
test
men and
women
The same
test
was regiven
to
540
177
solving
its
importance to
all
sound symbolism
unstated.
words do not
have equal connotative value and that meanings and sound cluster
on occasion. The manner of these occasions awaits further
investigation.
was seen
for
certain
others.
(or a
"very cruel"
fraud (1.8), grief (1.9), hate (1.2), heartless (1.2), hurt (1.4),
(1.8),
mad
nasty (1.6), pain (1.7), putrid (1.9), rage (1.9), scalding (1.5),
severe (1.8), sin (1.9), starving (1.4), sword (1.7), thief (1.8),
tornado (1.3), trouble (1.9), war (1.2) (Jenkins, Russell, and Suci
1958:695-699).
By
itself,
the
to
list
words according
But
that
if
the
to
contain.
"cruel"
their
god
(6.1),
happy
(6.6),
home
(6.3),
joy
(6.2),
lenient (6.2),
178
(6.5),
music
(6.2),
relaxed (6.0), sister (6.0), sky (6.2), sleep (6.1), sunlight (6.3),
sweet (6.1), and trees (6.2) (Jenkins, Russell, and Suci 1958:695-
699).
is
immediately desirable
suggested the "cruel"
the fashion
of this dissertation.
It
can be
and stops than the "kind" words. Other experiments have found
this
is
conservative.
Conversely,
in
it
can
"kind"
A
contain
tally of the
that 6/26
(23%) words
glottals,
For
this
the emergent
the
word category
"kind"
carries
twice as
many
stops
as
an
follow-up
test
to
correct this
179
was performed on 342 male
(1966).
enlistees in the U.S.
Navy by Heise
Subjects ranked
bipolar scales.
The
test
was opposed
in
comparison with a
list
of words which
As
connotative potency,
evaluation,
found
Igl
"soft"
(Heise 1966:23).
Nevertheless,
much
earlier
sound
as
y].
symbolism
studies.
[a, a,
being potent:
k, r,
['9,
'sr,
g,
1,
9].
"good" were:
dl (Heise
[g,p,v].
1966:18-19).
This study
fails
to identify
the printed
controlled.
"hard",
is
considered
"soft"
and
/k/
Using natural
It
words makes
easily
could just as
180
Finally, Heise's subjects
were a
select group.
They were
all
male and
their
situation
as
inductees
may have
influenced their
impending indoctrination
this
It
is
not clear
how phonemes
act
real
artificial
language examples,
the results
they produce.
Synaesthetic
Studies
into
Sound Symbolism
is
easily associable
a
Synaesthesia
is
type of sound
symbolism
in
their
structural
symbolism experiments,
capacities to consistently
debate rages
categorize
disparate
senses
is
universal or culturally
There
is
An
10 selections of
various classical
Wagner's Fafnir,
on.
The
10 sets of adjectives.
spiritual,
lofty.
181
awe-inspiring,
F;
dignifies,
sacred,
solemn, sober,
serious
or category
Once
to
thinking
1942:157).
purple.
They could
gray,
also
of brightness
through
white,
medium
mixture, or dark
mixture
responses.
Their most striking result was that the peaks on
all
three
measures of vision
the
that
mood
1942:161-163).
as
The
classical
follows:
tender-blue,
leisurely-green,
orange,
They
One
cover the range of somber tone, nor did a couple of lively pieces
cover
tonal
all
it
features
182
certain piece of
music "leisurely"?
Why
its
Even
Kay
1969).
In
Odbert, Karwoski,
at
higher
In
the
to
a language's lexicon.
this
sensory-sound
Since
it
was evident
to
researchers from
that
some
subjects
this
experiment exploited
Osgood (1942)
visualizers
group.
The
first
group merely one gray pencil. Essentially, both groups drew the
same types of
Osgood 1942:212).
further
test
upon the
culture
contains
and transmits
common
analogies
183
depressing, heavy, happy, bass, alive, relaxed, loud, fast, and
harmony were
down,
thick,
rated
angular,
dark,
"in
far,
moving
adjectives.
They remark,
way
that
visualizers
and Osgood
1942:213).
from the
standpoint
causality
of
this
particular
experimental
design,
synaesthetic
remains
unclear.
Individuals
may
acquire
mood-music-
associations
(bass
tones
treble
from
some
senses" neural
What
describing
they do present
is
the
synaesthetic
later
tests
instructive
there
is
because many
Principle
the
color and
hearing perceptions.
When
color or auditory
adjectives
are used in
order to
know
may come
184
in
when
mood
or inner
imagery,
are
used.
states
may be
it
this
can
heavy-deep,
and
deep-dark
(Karwoski,
homonymic polysemy
word
its
some of
these
synaesthetic
bright
events.
The
light
depending upon
context.
Fourth, the Principle
Gradients
states
need be represented
the
visual
response"
subjects,
within
it.
Gradients
number
of visual
185
polarities
may
A
or
When
and
far.
These
demonstrate
within
five principles
have been
of
listed
because they
cross-modality
events
the
complexity
disentangling
real
cultural
backgrounds.
analysis
Further
experiments
attempted
further
along
Jakobson,
the
sound-color
has been
that
is
Masson suggested
map
a
similar topographically
to
map
there
there
(Masson 1952:41). To
date,
evidence for
this.
synaesthetic tendencies
and asked to choose whether the term meant up-down, and so on.
vertical-horizontal,
186
Results were an interesting mix. English speakers felt "heavy"
was down,
colorless,
thick,
dark, concentrated,
speakers saw
"heavy"
as
as
dark,
near,
1960:149).
are judged
13
different visual
possible
(Osgood
all
vs.
Spanish 61%,
and Navaho
Japanese
69% (Osgood
all
three
speaking groups
it
was
large
was down,
thick,
He
is
common
connotative
framework
denotative,
for
humans, and
structural
requirements of symbolic
language as
we
187
know
it.
One
type of synaesthesia
may be
innate,
the
common
warm and
the
blue spectrum as
may
is
dimension with
large,
which
approaches or
is
approached,
increases in
its
increases in
visual
loudness (Osgood
differential
1960:168).
The semantic
was used
to test
Osgood's remarks
He
tested ratings
He found
results
which
led
him
to
conclude that
to
specific
culture influence
a),
the
common
is
e.g.
night
dark,
warm,
red,
and
b).
cultural
conventions crossing
1970:625).
second
the day
Sunday
for
1970:625).
synaesthesia.
He even remarked
that
the
denotative
meaning of
meaning
similarity
judgements,
and
association
18^
Still,
his
among
speakers.
10%
subjects
in
are
categorized
that
brighter
than
their
(Marks
1982).
He argues
in
this
similarity
the
modalities
(Marks
shifts
(Williams 1976).
He argued
that English,
as well as
other
languages, regularly
to
another.
become
received
taste
on.
To
date,
his
scant
attention
or
corroboration.
Summary
of
189
and social scheme
arbitrary
to
explain results
which
This
strain
the
well-worn
sound-meaning
hypothesis.
"arbitrary"
sound-
beliefs
about insufficiently
century.
intent
was
clear.
studying
speakers
of foreign
or native
similarity
in
historically
unrelated
this
that
"the theory
single
many
the
heirarchies
established
may
(Weiss
1964:456).
Such
century to
principle
this
come
these conclusions:
"the basic
and inescapable
is
of the arbitrariness
of language
symbols
neither
(Ultan
basic
sensing
(light-dark,
small-large
windy-calm,
contrasts
is
"motherese" and
its
d.)
the
degree to
190
which sound symbolism expresses innate or genetically inherited
perceptions
is
unknown,
in
is
e.)
its
presence
f.)
is
expressed as large
numbers of words
some languages,
large
symbolism events
and
is
pervasive in
many
languages.
g.)
finally,
no
a
it
and bio-culturally
phono-
mental
"fit"
for
Summary
This dissertation began by raising questions about the
Saussurean
arbitrary
sound-meaning
hypothesis.
Its
general
it
was
importance to
It
an
language origins.
it
holds that a
a
that
find
adaptive
value in
signifiers
meaning with
signs.
The more
any member
is
is
signified.
Hewes
(1983),
Homo
Homo
erectus
set
of
dissertation.
They were
tested
upon
geographically and
191
192
genetically distanced
sample of languages
in
Chapter
tests.
II
and
statistical
sound symbolism
world languages,
in
this
detailed in
all
Chapter
III.
virtually
language phyla.
Its
absence in some phyla was due to lack of research data and also
imprecise
Sound symbolism
tests
universal than
human evolutionary
use
a
history
is
incomplete because
experiments
In contrast,
disparate
methodology.
that the
my
as
with
test,
23 of the 63
at
words,
and
MOUTH,
association
18 predictions
significant.
made
words and 9 or
easiest
50% were
to
predict.
They included:
and
COUGH, VOMIT,
SPIT,
DRINK.
group and
193
1 1
or
33% were
significant.
The
final
dificult to predict.
WATER, FOOD,
significant.
and
DOG,
12 hypotheses were
made and
or
25% were
These
large
in
number of
the
glottochronological
necessary to indicate a
involves
the
was
significant at
to
predict
feature-meaning association
was
(2)
(1) palatal,
(1)
(1)
back vowel,
(1)
fricative,
(1)
labio-velar,
resonant,
front vowel,
alveolar.
limited to one
few features
as
it
shows
that
the
few sub-phonemic
features.
tests.
For the
194
Kruskal-Wallis
features
test,
bilabial,
at
velar,
affricate,
stop,
and glide
results
were predicted
suggesting
significant
levels.
These
in
were
important in
the
features
primary
the
reconstruction
Homo
erectus.
bilabial
Two
and
of the
It
velar.
is
owing
human language,
in
bilabial
articulations
articulation,
Further,
as
manners of
three
features
are
in
countless
mammalian vocal
the
repertoires.
However,
if
they
indeed
at
basis
in
and phonemic
distinctions
made
present
is
necessary to show
Affricates, for
They might
be better
known
could either
showed
that
my
a
63
data set
should
associations.
Two
The
first is
simple, though
it
other scholars.
is
Skeptics only
195
need
to
the dictionaries,
and
tally
the
features
they
predict.
Theoretical
Weaknesses
unknown
this
to
century,
of
all
to
is
One
fault in
this research
is
small.
is
extent
complete
is
no
less
small.
Splintering
development,
psycholinguistics,
semiotics,
paralinguistics,
sociolinguistics,
ethnolinguistics,
languages
is
unknown, though
in
as
vast.
of phonetic
variation
individually
described languages
10 of the
16
semantically
basic,
words.
to
The extrapolation of
to
languages and
faith.
proto-language phenomena
manner of
statistical
196
The periods of human development
conclusions about what was of importance
are large. Presumptory
at
anytime
in
distant
modern
word
its
That
is,
is
that the
in
is
largely
unconnected
doubtful.
The extent
that
is
now
reach.
is
to
rank languages, or
As
discussion
of hypotheses in
is
Chapter
I,
sometimes
sound-meaning
and
i.e.),
metaphor
(NOSE
(TOOTH
and dentality,
acoustic mimicry
(COUGH
and stopping,
i.e.),
or kinesthetic
is
metaphor
(WATER
and labio-velarity,
i.e.).
Which metaphor
used
become
labelled in
my
norm
in
most dictionaries
is
that
known only
his
own
design.
197
Future
Research
Children enter
of
human
human
specific
vocalization. There
number of sound
is
why
at
same
levels
of
language competence
part
of the
ways
It
in
all
societies.
may
humans and
this
is
more
development.
children
so,
sound symbolism
is
play with
a
much
It
predominantly
that
arbitrary
sound-meaning language.
a tacit level of language
might also be
humans contain
numerous language
achieve parsimony.
a sound
symbolism vocabulary
an
understanding
of rudimentary
language,
language
198
development, and human cognition. Given
interesting
to
this
impetus,
it
would be
to a setting
in to
is
which a
develop
a
one
in
which
providing access to
methods.
There
is
is
organized in such a
different
way
to
times
for
vocabulary
items.
elicit
various
in
this
area
may
also
be usefully
vocabulary.
There
systems.
It
is
find
sound symbolism
already
known
that contact
often
intermediate
between
call
and
phoneme
structures.
199
Finally, as stated previously, studies into
unlock
proto-language
and indicate
semantically
modern instrumentation,
humans used
symbolism
traits
their
Sound
relates
the
of an object
vital
imbued
powers. In
identifying
symbolic vocabularies, a
emerge. This
may
among our
ancestors.
APPENDIX A 16 CONCEPTS
Language gloss
[tut]
"breast"
of female, n.
1.
Afro-Asiatic
lAmharic
lArabic [Gadi]
IBurji
[ununa]
IHausa
[mama]
4.Austronesian
ISomali [naaske:du]
4Maori
[rei]
4Palauan [tut]
4Tahitian [u]
4Tolai [au]
4Tonga [fatafata]
7.Dravidian
7Kolami [pom:e]
7Manda [may]
7Pengo [may]
7Tamil [mey]
8Tndo-Pacific
8Hiri
Motu
[rata]
SSiane [ami]
SGadsup [naami]
STairora
[maama]
9.Niger-Khordofanian
9Bini [ewuere]
200
201
9Bini [ewuere]
9Ife
[pmu]
9Igbo [ara]
9Mbukushu [dyere]
9Yula [hyr
le]
10. North
Amerind
lOApache [ipe]
lOBlackfoot [mon:IkIs]
lOCakchiquel [^'um]
lOMicmac [pesgun]
lOHopi [pi:hu]
11. South
Amerind
llQuechua [coco]
llAmahuaca
[xoci]
llCashibo [soma]
llChama [soma]
llChaninahua [pa^oti]
13.Nilo-Saharan
ISKanuri [teg am]
13Kaure [yfre]
ISErenga [juud]
13Mararit [slid]
13Tama
[ojut]
16. Sino-Tibetan
16Cantonese [nin]
[nums]
17. Altaic
16Newari [dudu]
17Japanese
[mune]
17Korean [cut]
17Mongolian [oeboer]
17Turkish [gogus]
202
17Manchu [hunhun]
2 Language gloss "chew"
v.t.a.,
1.
v.t.
Afro-Asiatic
lAmharic [ahfiaka]
1
Arabic
[yam dag' u]
IBurji [lek'ans]
IHausa [tauna]
ISomali [alalinaya]
4.Austronesian
4Hawaiian
[mama]
4Palauan [meriget]
4Tahitian
[mama]
4Tanga [ug]
4Tonga [lamu]
6.
Indo-European
6Croatian [zvakati]
6Icelandic [lygyu]
6Pali [cabati]
6Rumanian [rumega]
6Spanish [maskar]
7.Dravidian
TKannada [avudu]
7Kui [muht]
7Kuwi [hok-]
7Pengo [muh-]
7Telegu [nemarueu]
S.Indo-Pacific
SHiri
Motu [ania]
9.Niger-Khordofanian
9Mbukushu [tahuna]
203
9Nyanga [kutafuna]
9Shilluk
[nyam]
9Swahili [tafuna]
9Xhosa [hlafuna]
10. North
Amerind
lOChontal [di^ij'ma]
lOMicmac [alisgopgl
lONavaho
['as]
lOOjibwa [sa:sa:kotn]
lOZoque [wyajsu]
11. South
Amerind
llAymara [turula]
llCavinena [nako]
llChaman [naka]
llJaqaru [cakca]
llTacanan [hobol
12.Uralic
12Finnish [pureskela]
15.Austro-Tai
15Khmer
[d.lar]
15Pearic [ke:t]
15Thai [k'io]
16. Sino-Tibetan
16Cantonese [jiuh]
16Gurung [geba]
16Lahu [be]
16Mandarin
[jiao]
16Newari [tap]
17. Altaic
ITJapanese [sosaku]
ITKorean [si^ipda]
17Manchu [nlyar]]
17Mongolian [zaglah]
204
nXurkish [eigne]
3
v.t.,v.i.
1.
Afro-Asiatic
lAmharic
1
Arabic [su'aal]
IBurji [k'ufay]
IHausa
[tari]
ISomali [qufa'aya]
4.Austronesian
4Fijiian [vu]
4Indonesian [batuk]
4Nukuoro [kobe]
4Tahitian [mare]
4Tikopia [tare]
6.
Indo-European
6Czech [kalati]
6Hindustani [khansi
6Norwegian [hoste]
6Polish [kaszlek]
6Portuguese [tose]
7.Dravidian
7Pengo [kroki]
7Malto [inqe]
7Kurukh [iukhna]
7Manda [kruk-]
7Konda [kok-]
S.Indo-Pacific
SBagupi [doro-]
SBikol [abo]
SGarus [dalu^-]
SHiri
Motu [huahua]
8Kare [dagAl-]
9.Niger-Khordofanian
9Fula [d'oya]
205
9Igbo
[i
kwa]
9Mbukushu [dikohwera]
9Shona [kosora]
9Swahili [kohoa]
10. North
Amerind
lOBlackfoot [sals:klna:]
lOChoctaw [hotilhko]
lOHopi [oho]
Amerind
llAymara [k'ajaha]
llCashibo [?oko]
llChacobo [?oko]
llChama [oho]
llGuarani [hu'u]
16. Sino-Tibetan
16Cantonese [kat]
16Lahu
[ci]
16Lisu [tssctt]
16Mandarin [kesou]
16Tibetan [16k 9 p]
17. Altaic
njapanese [seki]
IVKorean [kic'im]
ITMongolian [xanad]
17Turkish [oksuruk]
ITKurdish [qoz]
Arabic [kalb]
IBurji
[woccoo]
IHausa [kare]
IHebrew [kalab'j
1
Somali [el]
3.Austroasiatic
3Alak [coo]
3Lawa
[so'^]
3Mon
[kl9]
SSouei [^acool
3 Vietnamese
[k'uyen]
4.Austronesian
4Fijian [koli]
4Hawaiian
[ilio]
4Indonesian [anjig]
4Kemak
[asu]
4Tolai [pap]
T.Dravidian
7Gondi [nai]
7Konda
[nukuri]
7Mayalam [nay]
TPengo [neku.r]
7Tamil [nay]
S.Indo-Pacific
SAmele
[pa]
SKare [kui]
SMawan [kwA:r]
SSihan [pAy]
SSilopi
[wAy]
9.Niger-Khordofanian
9Basa [gbe]
207
9Ife
[ads a]
9Igala [abla]
9Mbukushu [mbwa]
9Yoruba [ads a]
10. North
Amerind
lOBiloxi [cuhki]
lOCrow [biegye]
lOHopi [puko]
lOMenomini [tihseh]
lOTzotzil [^'i?]
11. South
Amerind
llAmahuaca [paihega]
llJaqaru [hai q'u]
llLenca [aguingge]
llTarascan [axuni] "deer" "animal"
llTotonac [kuri]
13.Nilo-Saharan
13Erenga [wui]
13Fongoro
[bisi]
ISSinyan [bisi]
13Tama
13Yulu
[wi]
[bisi]
16. Sino-Tibetan
16Atsi [khiii]
16Burmese
[khiji]
16Cantonese [gau]
16Mandarin [dou]
16Tibetan
[c'l]
v.t.i.,v.i.,
n.i.
I.Afro- Asiatic
lAmharic [tatta]
lArabic [yasrabu]
208
IBurji [d'uw]
IHausa
1
[sa]
Somali [aba]
3.Austro-Asiatic
3Cambodian [phsk]
3Lawa [hu^]
3Muong
[^og]
3Thin Pook]
3Vietnamese ['uer)]
4.Austronesian
4Fijiian
[gunuva]
4Indonesian [minuinani]
4Nukuoro [unu]
4Pascuense [unu]
4Tonga [inu]
6. Indo-European
6Albanian
[pi]
6Bengali [panio]
6French [bwar]
6Gaelic [dyoc]
6Lithuanian [gerti]
9.Niger-Khordofanian
9Mbukushu [kunwa]
9Ndebele [-naGa]
9Shona [cekunwa]
9Swahili
[nywa]
10. North
9Zulu [p'uza]
Amerind
lOBIackfoot
[si
ml]
lOCakchiquel [kum]
lOHopi [hiiko]
lOOjibwa [minikwe:]
209
lOSquamish
[taq']
11. South
Amerind
llHuitoto [yirode]
llQuechua
[u plan a]
llReseigaro [-i^du]
13.Nilo-Saharan
13Erenga
[lifo]
13Fongoro [auw]
13Kara [ay a]
IBMerarit
[fa]
13Mileri [liyo]
16. Sino-Tibetan
16Cantonese [yam]
17Japanese
[nomu]
17Manchu [omimbi]
17Mongolian
[o:'r]
HTurkish
6
[ic]
Language gloss
I.Afro-Asiatic
lAmharic [balla]
1
Arabic [ya'kulu]
IBurji [it-]
IHausa
[ci]
ISomali [naya]
S.Austro-Asiatic
210
3Cambodian
[sii]
SChaobon [caa^]
3Lawa [som]
3Mon
[cea'']
3Vietnamese [ag]
4.Austronesian
4Fijiian [kai]
4Indonesian
[makan]
4Kemak
4Tonga
[a]
4Maori [haupa]
[kai]
S.Indo-Pacific
8Awa [nono]
8Bena Bena [na-]
8Fore [na-]
SKamano-Yagiria [no
8Rao [mi]
9.Niger-Khordofanian
9Mbukushu [kudya]
9Ndbele [-dla]
9Shona [-dya]
9Xhosa [-tya]
9Zulu [dla]
10. North
Amerind
lOBlackfoot [o:wat]
lOChorti [we']
lOHopi [noosa]
lOKwakiutl [hemx^i d]
lOOjibwa [miicimaw]
11. South
Amerind
llAmahuaca [cocoquin]
llGuarani
[u]
21
llJaquaru [palu]
llTotonac [hua]
llTupi [umbau]
13.Nilo-Saharan
BErenga
[rjgAn]
13Fongoro [us a]
13Merarit [sin]
ISMileri [QAn]
13Tama [gan]
15.Austro-Tai
15Chrau
[sa]
15Katu [ca]
15Mon
[g']
ISPearic [ca]
ISSedang [ka]
16. Sino-Tibetan
16Cantonese [sihk]
16Gurung [cab
16Mandarin
a]
[cf]
16Newari [khan]
16Tibetan [see]
Language gloss"food"
I.Afro-Asiatic:
lAmharic [mabsl]
1
Arabic [ta'a:m]
IHausa [abinsi]
ISomali [unlo]
IBurji
[it
ay]
2.
Australian
e.g.)
2Gumbaynggir [yul'a]
212
2Dhuwal
[n'aGa]
2Wailbri [magari]
3.Austro-Asiatic
3Mon [ksna^]
4.Austronesian
4Hawaiian
4Indonesian
[hiai]
[makanan]
4Tagalog [pagkain]
4Tolai [nian]
4Tonga
[kail
6.
Indo-European
6Czech [potrava]
6French [alima]
6Hindi
[k'
ana]
6Lithuanian [maistas]
6Russian [eda]
7.Dravidian
7Telegu [era]
7Tamil [unti]
7Toda [un]
7Tulu [uta]
7Brahui
[irag']
9.Niger-Kordofanian
9Ewe [nudlidu]
9Ndebele [ukudla]
9Bobangi
[boli]
9Swahili [cakula]
9Xhosa [ukutya]
10. Amerind-North
lOBlackfoot [ao:wahsIn]
lOChontal [galg'ejuaw]
lOCrow
[ba:ru;k]
lOHopi [nuva]
213
1.
Amerind-South
llAymara [mankka]
llGuarani [tembi'u] llTupi [miu]
llHuitoto [ecagoi]
llTotonac [tahua]
16. Sino-Tibetan
16Mandarin
[si
rwu]
16Tibetan [saja]
16Newari [ann]
16Cantonese [caan]
17Altaic
nJapanese [sokumotsu]
17Turkish [y
z]
IVKorean
umsik]
nUzbek [owkat]
ITAzerbaijaini [xuraek]
3Jehai [tansd]
3Kensui [hah]
3Mon
[paig]
Beri [ksnut]
SSemaq
3 Vietnamese
[mi eg]
4.Austronesian
4Fijiian [gusu:na]
4Kemak
[i:borro]
4Malayan [mulut]
4Ponapean [ahu]
4Tagalog [bibig]
T.Dravidian
214
VKannada [kaltu]
VKonda
[gadli]
7Malayalam [karuttu]
7Tamil [karuttu]
7Tulu [kantelu]
S.Indo-Pacific
8Hiri
Motu [udunal
8Kare [kase-]
SManit [egere-]
8Rao [dototno]
SSilopi [owe-]
9.Niger-Khordofanian
9Bobangi [munye]
9Igbo [onu:]
9Mbukushu [kanwal]
9Shona [muromo]
9Sango [yanga]
10. North
Amerind
lOCakchiquel
[ci']
lOHopi [mo'a]
lOKwakiutl [sems]
lOMenomini
[to:n]
lOMixtec [yuhu]
11. South
1 1
Amerind
Aymara
[laka]
IJaqaru [simi]
[yipota]
UOuyana
llBotocudo [himpma]
1
llnga [sim]
13.Nilo-Saharan
13Erenga [kul]
13Fongoro [tara]
215
13 Kara [ta]
13Merarit [^awl]
IBNubian
16Tibetan
16Lisu
[agil]
16. Sino-Tibetan
[k'a]
[manA]
16Lahu [mags]
16Akha [mobef]
16Burmese [meisei]
17. Altaic
nJapanese [kuci]
17 Korean [ip]
17Kurdish [detn]
ITTurkish [agiz]
nUzbek
[orrjz]
I.Afro- Asiatic
lAmharic [angal]
1
Arabic ['unuq]
IBurji
[marmari]
IHausa [wuyu]
ISomali [lukunta]
3.Austro-Asiatic
SKhmu?
3Kuy
[kak]
[tskoor)]
3Mon
[ka?]
3Souei [takoog]
3 Vietnamese
[ko^]
4.Austronesian
4Fijiian [do
mo]
[a:i]
4Hawaiian
4Indonesian [leher]
216
4Maori [hakii]
4Ponapean [kasag]
7.Dravidian
7Konda
[gadli]
VKota [kartl]
7Kuru>k' [k'es]
7Mayalam [karutu]
7Tamil [karutu]
S.Indo-Pacific
SGirawa [pstu]
SMunit [ha]
SMurupi [gutnara]
8Nake
[fA:-]
8Rao [bagrs]
9.Niger-Khordofanian
9Mbukushu [eiggo]
9Mvumbo
[tsiug]
9Shona [tnutsipa]
9Swahili [ku]
9Zulu [Iggila]
10. North
Amerind
lOJacaltec [nuk]
lOKwakiutl [k'uk'un'a]
lOMicmac
[j
hag an]
lONavaho [akos]
lOZoque [kAkA]
11. South
Amerind
UAymara [kunka]
llCavinena
[e:piti]
llChama
[e:piki]
llGuarani [aju]
llHuitoto [kimaigo]
15.Austro-Tai
ISBriou [takog]
217
15Chrau
[r|ko]
15Katu [luar]
ISPearic [k3:k]
ISSedang [krbk]
16. Sino-Tibetan
16Burmese
[le]
16Cantonese [geg]
16Lisu [kstsi]
16Mandarin [bwodz]
16Tibetan [smgul] 10 Language gloss "nose"
n.,
n.i.
I.Afro-Asiatic
lAmharic [afsnca]
lArabic [manahir]
IBurji [suna]
IHausa [hansi]
ISomali [san]
3.Austro-Asiatic
3Alak [muh]
3Cambodian [cramoh]
3Vietnamese [muy]
3Muong [muy-]
3Lawa [maah]
4.Austronesian
4Fijiian
[uku:na]
4Hawaiian [ihu]
4Indonesian [hidug]
4Maori [ihu]
4Tagalog
[ilog]
S.Indo-Pacific
218
8Gal [no-]
SGumalu
[nit-]
SKare [neme-]
8Rao
[ra:t9]
SSihan [msde-]
9.Niger-Khordofanian
9Ewe
9Igbo
[got!
[i
mi]
9Shona [mhuno]
9Swahili [pua]
9Xhosa [impumlo]
10. North
Amerind
lOSquamish [ma'qsn]
lOQuiche [txa'm]
lOHopi [yaqa]
lOMicmac [sigon]
lONavaho
['aci
i
h]
11. South
Amerind
llHuitito [dofo]
llQuechua [singa]
llReseigaro [-hitako]
llTotonac [quincan]
llTupi [tin]
13.Nilo-Saharan
13Erenga [mi si]
13Tama
[a
mil]
13Runga [mondu]
13Bora Mabang [boji]
13Mileri [misi]
15.Austro-Tai
15Chrau [muh]
15Katu [moh]
219
15Pearic [mstot]
15Sedang [mbh]
15Thai [ya:lmuk]
16. Sino-Tibetan
16Newari ['nas]
16Tibetan [nskuli]
16Mandarin
[bi
dz]
16Cantonese [beih]
16Burmese [hna]
11
Language gloss
"spit"
v.t.
or
v.i.
etc.
1.
1
Afro-Asiatic
Arabic [busaaq]
IBurji [tuf]
IHausa [tofa]
1
Somali [anduuf]
lAmharic [laffa]
S.Austro-Asiatic
3 Vietnamese
[fun]
SKensiu [bej]
3Kintaq [bej]
3Bateg
[tsf]
3Temoq
[6 oh]
4.Austronesian
4Hawaiian [kuha]
4Indonesian [ludah]
4Manam [mwar|o]
4Tahitian [tub a]
4Tonga
[a'a'nu]
6.
Indo-European
6Hindustani [0uk]
6Icelandic [spyta]
6Lithuanian [yiesmas]
6Pali
[bhuhesike]
220
9Mbukushu
[61 pa]
9Ndebele [k'afula]
9Shona [-pfira]
9Swahili [tema]
9Zulu [p'umisa]
10. North
Amerind
lOCrow [^U9]
lOHopi [toha]
lOKwakiutl [kwis^id]
lOMicmac [lusgwalign]
lOSquamish [pa'xn]
11. South
Amerind
llGuarani [udqvu]
llHuitoto [tuanole]
llQuechua [tucana]
llReseigaro [choo]
llTotonac [cujmak'an]
12.Uralic
12Finnish [sylkea]
12Hungarian [pokni]
IS.Nilo-Saharan
13Twampa
[t'ak']
15.Austro-Tai
15Briou [kucoh]
15Chrau [choh]
15Katu [kalwiq]
ISPearic [chu:s]
15Sedang [ka'cow]
16. Sino-Tibetan
16Cantonese [tou]
221
16Mandarin [tut an]
16Tibetan [lupa]
17. Altaic
nJapanese [^ubaki]
IVKorean [c'impaet']
17Turkish [tukur]
ITAzerbaijaini
[tupur-]
v.t.,
v.i.
etc.
I.Afro-Asiatic
lAmharic [tnattata]
1
Arabic
[yamussu]
IBurji [t'unt']
IHausa [cotsa]
ISomali [nuugayya]
3.Austro-Asiatic
3Kensiu [jshud]
3Temiar [jod]
3Semai [no:^]
3Semaq
Beri [sok]
[jot]
3Bateq Nong
4.Austronesian
4Kemak
[tnus]
[sir]]
4Manam
4Maori [mo mi
4Tahitian [ote]
4Tonga [huhu]
6. Indo-European
6Icelandic [syuga]
6Lithuanian [ciulpti]
6Rumanian [suge]
7.Dravidian
222
7Toda
[ixc-]
7Tamil [un]
7Kota [un]
7Telegu [kuducn]
7Kuwi [undali]
9.Niger-Khordofanian
9Igbo [ira]
9Mbukushu [yamwa]
9Shona [svetu]
9Swahili [fyondu]
9Xhosa [ncanca]
10. North
Amerind
lOBlackfoot
[s:ta:]
lOCrow [daci]
lOIxil [^'ub']
lONavaho
['eesto't]
lOWinnebago [wi:kom'
11. South
Amerind
llCashibo [cucuka]
llMarinahua [coco]
llShipibo-Conibo [^oyo]
llTacanan [coco]
llChacobo [coco]
13.Nilo-Saharan
13Miza [o-ndro]
130jila [ndro]
13Logo [ndro]
ISLugbara [ndru']
13Lokai [ndro]
17. Altaic
nJapanese [suu]
17Korean [bal]
223
17Manchu [jembe]
IVTurkish [em]
17Uzbek [simip]
13
v.t.,v.i.
Afro-Asiatic
Arabic [yabtaliu]
IHausa [ha'diya]
ISomali [liquaya]
IBurji
[d'eem-]
lAmharic [wala]
4.Austronesian
4Fijiian [liloma]
4Hawaiian
[iale]
4Indonesian [teguk]
4Nukuoro [holo]
4Tahitian [horotnii]
6.
Indo-European
6 Albanian [kaptoy]
6Bengali [khoao]
6Croatian [gutati]
6French [avaye]
6Lithuanian [ryti]
7.Dravidian
7Tamil [virukku]
TKodagu [mugg-]
7Telegu [mringu]
7Konda [erg-]
7Toda
8Hiri
[irk-]
S.Indo-Pacific
Motu [hadonoa]
8Kare [arjgAn-]
SGirawa [ni^'ane-]
224
SMunit [kurtiys-]
SKamba [unub-]
9.Niger-Khordofanian
9Ewe [minu]
9Igbo
[i
16]
9Mbukushu [mina]
9Shilluk
[mwoni]
10. North
9Zulu [gwlga]
Amerind
lOChoctaw [balakaci]
lOCrow [apahik(y)]
lOTzotzil [bik']
lOMohawk [atskahu]
lOYokuts [meeki]
11. South
Amerind
llGuarani [moko]
llQuechua [miypuna]
llHuitoto [cicode]
llTupi [umocone]
llTotonac [hua]
12.Uralic
12Finnish [niela]
16. Sino-Tibetan
16Newari [gras]
16Cantonese [tan]
16Tibetan
[mTkeuu laan]
16Gurung [k'lxyoba]
16Burmese [tnyou]
17. Altaic
17Japanese [notnikomu]
17Turkish [yutma]
17Korean [samk'i]
ITManchu
[nur|]
225
14 Language gloss: "tooth"
I.Afro- Asiatic
lAmharic [tars]
1
Arabic [asnaan]
IHausa [haic'ora]
1
Somali
[iligl
3.Austro-Asiatic
3Alak [canah]
3Cambodian [tmih]
3Kuy [kanssy]
3Mon
[ns]
3 Vietnamese
[nan]
4.Austronesian
4Hawaiian [naniho]
4Indonesian [gigi]
4Tonga
[nifo]
[ui
4Palauan
ngel]
4Tahitian [niho]
S.Indo-Pacific
SAngoram
8Hiri
[sisig]
Motu [isena]
8Kare [ogo-]
SMunit
[ai-]
8Rao [traga]
9.Niger-Khordofanian
9Bobangi
[lino]
9Dogon [tonu]
9Mbukushu [dyegho]
9Zulu [izinyo]
9Swahili [jino]
10. North
Amerind
lOZoque
[tAJo]
lONavaho ['awo']
lOMenomini [pet]
lOChontal [lahay]
lOBlackfoot [mohI:kIn]
11. South
Amerind
llAymara
[k'aci]
llHuitoto [izido]
llQuechua [quiru]
llTotonac [tatzan]
llTupi [ainha]
13.Nilo-Saharan
13Bora Mabang [sat^ik]
ISMasalit [k a cine]
13Merarit [r|or|od]
13Runga [sAdi]
13Tama
[rjiit]
15.Austro-Tai
15Briou [kaneig]
ISChrau
[se'c]
15Katu [kaniag]
15Pearic [kho:y]
ISSedang [haneq]
16. Sino-Tibetan
16Burmese [swe]
16Cantonese [gah]
16Mandarin [ya]
16Maru
[tsoi]
16Tibetan [so]
15
227
v.t.,
v.i.
I.Afro-Asiatic
Arabic [qay'l
IBurji
[huusad']
IHausa [amai]
1
Somali [yux(w)9t]
3.Austro-Asiatic
3Vietnamese
3Kensiu [ka^]
[6i]
3Semai [ke:?]
3Temoq [ku^]
3Sre [ha?]
4.Austronesian
4Indonesian
[
m un
ah]
4Manam [kulena]
4Nukuoro [hagaku]
4Tagalog [sumuka]
4Tahitian [tu:tu:]
6.
Indo-European
6Czech [zvraseti]
6Dutch [braken]
6French [vomir]
6Nepali [okeunu]
6Norwegian [kaste]
S.Indo-Pacific
SBagupi [pa-]
SGirawa [?es-]
SKare [pas a-]
SPanim [buhade-]
8Hiri
Motu [tnumuta]
9.Niger-Khordofanian
9Bobangi [lua]
228
9Ndebele [hlanza]
9Swahili
[kokomoa]
9Mbukusu [ru0al
9Ewe [dexe]
10. North
Amerind
OBiloxi [kna]
OCrow [kara]
OKwakiutl [gokwaia]
OOjibwa [sikakowe:]
OTzotzil [k'sb]
11. South
Amerind
IReseigaro [i^kapu]
ITotonac [irp'atlanan]
IGuarani [gue'e]
IHuitoto [ctcuede]
IJaqaru [ahri]
15.Austro-Tai
5Briou [kuta]
5Chrau [hoq]
5Katu [kata]
5Pearic [chsQul]
5Sedang [he a]
16. Sino-Tibetan
6Atsi [phat]
6Cantonese [gau]
6Lisu [pe^]
6Mandarin
[tii]
6Tibetan [clikps]
n.i.,
n.
I.Afro-Asiatic
Amharic [wsha]
Arabic [maa']
229
IBurji
[waa]
IHausa [ruwa]
1
Somali [biyyo]
3.Austro-Asiatic
3Brao [daak]
3Bru [daa?]
3Mon
[dac]
3Muong [dak]
3 Vietnamese
[niak]
4.Austronesian
4Fijiian [wai]
4Kemak
[bi:a]
4Manam
[dag]
4Tahitian [vai]
4Tolai [tava]
S.Indo-Pacific
8Bemal
[ze]
SGende [nogoi]
SSihan [va]
9.Niger-Khordofanian
9Igbo
[mmi
ri
9Shona [mvura]
9Swahili [maji]
9Ndebeie [amanzi]
9Xhosa [amanzi]
10. North
Amerind
lOChoctaw [ficak]
lOChorti [ha]
lOHopi [paaliu]
lOMicmac [samgwan]
lOKwakiutl ['wa:p]
11. South
230
Amerind
llHuitoto [jainoi]
llJaqaru
[uma]
llQuechua [yacu]
llTotonac [c'ucut]
llTupi
[i]
13.Nilo-Saharan
13Fongoro [aiAn]
ISKara [mana]
13Logo
[yi]
16. Sino-Tibetan
16Burmese [yei]
16Cantonese [seui]
16Gurung [kyu']
16Mandarin [swei]
16Newari [na]
17. Altaic
17 Japanese [mizu]
ITKorean [mul]
17Manchu [muke]
17Mongolian
17Turkish
[us]
[su]
16
GLOSSES
Afro-Asiatic
1976. Concise Amharic Dictionary:
I-Amharic-Semitic::Leslau,
W.
Weisbaden: O. Harrassowitz.
l-Burji::Sasse, H.J.
1982.
An Etymological Dictionary of
Burji.
Hamburg: H. Baske.
l-Hausa-Chadic::Bargery, G.P.
1934.
A Hausa-English Dictionary
Press.
l-Hebrew-Semitic::Ben-Yehuda, E.&Weinstein, D. 1964. Ben Yehuda's Pocket English-Hebrew, Hebrew-English Dictionary. York: Washington Square Press.
1-Somali-Cushitic:: Abraham, R.C.
New
1966. Somali-English,
Press.
English-
London
Australian
2-Aranda::Yallop, C. 1977. Alywarra, An Aborigine Language of Central Australia. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal
Studies.
2-Dhuwal::Holmer, N.M. 1983. Linguistic Survey of Southeastern Queensland. Sydney: Australian National University.
2-Diyari:: Austin, P.
1981.
Australia.
231
232
2-Gumbaynggir::Dixon, R.M. 1979. Handbook of Australian Languages. Canberra: Australian National University Press.
2-Wailbri::Reece, L.
1979. Dictionary of Wilbri Language. Sydney:
University
of Sydney.
3.
Austro-Asiatic
3-Alak::Huffman, F.E. 1977. An examination of lexical correspondences between Vietnamese and some other Asiatic languages. 43 :171-198.
3-Bateg::Benjamin,
prehistory in the
Austro-
G.
1976.
Austroasiatic
subgroupings and
Studies. Edited by P. N. Jenner Thompson,L.C., and Starpsta,S. 37-128. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Malay Peninsula.
In Austroasiatic
subgroupings and Studies. Edited by P. N. Jenner Thompson,L.C., and Starpsta,S. 37-128. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
3-BateqNong::Benjamin, G.
1976.
Austroasiatic
prehistory in the
Malay Peninsula.
In Austroasiatic
3-Brao::Huffman, F.E. 1977. An examination of lexical correspondences between Vietnamese and some other Asiatic languages. 43 :171-198.
Austro-
3 -Bru:: Huffman, F.E. 1977. An examination of lexical correspondences between Vietnamese and some other AustroAsiatic languages. 43 :171-198.
Dictionary. London:
3-Jehai::Benjamin,
prehistory in the
G.
1976.
Austroasiatic
subgroupings and
Studies. Edited by P. N. Jenner Thompson,L.C., and Starpsta,S. 37-128. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
In Austroasiatic
Malay Peninsula.
3-Kensui::Benjamin, G.
prehistory in the
1976.
Austroasiatic
subgroupings and
Studies.
Malay Peninsula.
In Austroasiatic
Edited
233
by P. N. Jenner Thompson,L.C., and Starpsta,S. 37-128. Honolulu:
University of Hawaii Press.
3-Khmer::Huffman, F.E.&Proum, I. 1978. English-Khmer Dictionary. New Haven: Yale University Press.
3-Khmu?::Huffman, F.E. 1977. An examination of lexical correspondences between Vietnamese and some other AustroAsiatic
languages.
43
:171-198.
3-Kintaq::Benjamin, G.
prehistory in the
1976.
Austroasiatic
subgroupings and
Studies. Edited N. Jenner Thompson,L.C., and Starpsta,S. 37-128. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
In Austroasiatic
Malay Peninsula.
by
P.
3-Kuy::Huffman, F.E. 1977. An examination of lexical correspondences between Vietnamese and some other AustroAsiatic languages. 43 :171-198.
3 -Lawa:: Huffman, F.E. 1977. An examination of lexical correspondences between Vietnamese and some other AustroAsiatic languages. 43 :171-198.
Dictionary
3-Muong::Huffman, F.E. 1977. An examination of lexical correspondences between Vietnamese and some other AustroAsiatic languages. 43 :171-198.
3-Semai::Benjamin, G.
prehistory in the
1976.
Austroasiatic
subgroupings and
Studies. Edited N. Jenner Thompson,L.C., and Starpsta,S. 37-128. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
In Austroasiatic
Malay Peninsula.
by
P.
3-SemaqBeri::Benjamin, G.
prehistory in the
1976.
Austroasiatic
subgroupings and
Studies. Edited by P. N. Jenner Thompson,L.C., and Starpsta,S. 37-128. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
In Austroasiatic
Malay Peninsula.
234
3-Souei::Huffman, F.E. 1977.
An
examination of lexical
correspondences
Asiatic
languages.
3-Sre::Benjamin, G.
prehistory in the
1976.
subgroupings and
Studies. Edited N. Jenner Thompson,L.C., and Starpsta,S. 37-128. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
In Austroasiatic
Malay Peninsula.
by
P.
subgroupings and Studies. Edited by P. N. Jenner Thompson,L.C., and Starpsta,S. 37-128. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
3-Temiar::Benjamin, G.
1976.
Austroasiatic
prehistory in the
Malay Peninsula.
In Austroasiatic
3-Temoq::Benjamin, G. 1976. Austroasiatic subgroupings and Malay Peninsula. In Austroasiatic Studies. Edited by P. N. Jenner Thompson,L.C., and Starpsta,S. 37-128. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
prehistory in the
3 -Thin:: Huffman, F.E. 1977. An examination of lexical correspondences between Vietnamese and some other AustroAsiatic languages. 43 :171-198.
3-Vietnamese-Vietmuong::Dinh-Hoa, N.
Dictionary. Tokyo: Charles E. Tuttle
4.
1966.
Vietnamese-English
Publishers.
Company
Austronesian
1979. A Fijian and English and an English and Fijian Dictionary. London: Sampson, Low, Marston, and
4-Fijian::Hazelwood, D.
Company.
4-Hawaiian::Pukui, M.K.&Ebert, S.H. 1957. Hawaiian-English
Dictionary. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
1967.
235
4-Maori::Biggs, B.&Reed, A.H.&Reed,A.W. 1966. English-Maori
Dictionary.
Sydney: Wellington.
4-Nukuoro:: Carroll, V.&Soulik, T. 1973. Nukuoro Lexicon. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
de
la
De
New
4-Ponapean::Rehg, K.&Sohl, D.G. 1979. Ponapean-English Dictionary. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
1978.
Sydney:
University of Sydney.
4-Tikopia::Firth, R.
1985. Tikopia-English.
Auckland:
Auckland
University
Press.
Territory of
Papua
New
Guinea:
Summer
Institute
of Linguistics.
Indo-European
236
6-Bengali::Dabbs,
J. A.
1962.
A&M
Modern Languages.
6-Croatian::Bogadek, F.A. 1944. Cassell's
Croatian-English Dictionary.
New
Company.
6-Czech::Cermak, A. 1963. English-Czech, Czech-English.
New
York:
Saphrograph
Company.
6-Dutch::PrickvanWely, F.P.H. 1971. Cassell's English-Dutch, DutchEnglish Dictionary. London: Cassell and
6-French::Girard, D. et
al.
Company
Cassell's
Ltd.
1973. The
New
French
Dictionary.
New
6-Gaelic::Macalpine, N. 1955.
A Pronouncing Gaelic-English
MacLaren and Sons.
6-Hindi-Urdu-Iranian::Craven, T.&Chitambar, J.R. 1932. The New Royal Dictionary: English into Hindustani and Hindustani into English. Lucknow: Methodist Publishing House.
6-Icelandic::Bogason, S.O.
1966. Icelandic-English
and EnglishF.
Isafoldarprentsmaija H.
1915.
Modern English-Norwegian
6-01dEnglish::Jember, G.K. 1975. English-Old English, Old-EnglishEnglish Dictionary. Boulder: Westview Press.
1955. English-Pali Dictionary. Colombo, Ceylon: The Pali Text Society.
6-Pali::Mahathera, A.P.B.
237
6-Polish::Stanislawski,
J.
1988.
English Dictionary.
New
York:
Random House.
6-Portuguese::Avery, C.B.&Houaiss, A. 1964. The New Appleton Dictionary of the English and Portuguese Languages. New York: Appleton -Century -Crofts.
6-Rumanian::Schonkrok, M. 1961. Rumanian-English and EnglishRumanian Dictionary. New York: Frederick Ungar Publishing.
6-Russian::Katzner, K.
1984. English-Russian, Russian-English.
New
Espanol Diccionario.
New
Dravidian
7-Brahui::Burrow, T.&Emeneau, M.D. 1961. A Dravidian Oxford: At The Clarendon Press. Etymological Dictionary.
A Dravidian Etymological
7-Kannada::Burrow, T.&Emeneau, M.D. 1961. A Dravidian Etymological Dictionary. Oxford: At The Clarendon Press.
7-Kodagu::Burrow, T.&Emeneau, M.D. 1961. A Dravidian Etymological Dictionary. Oxford: At The Clarendon Press.
7-Kolami::Burrow, T.&Emeneau, M.D. 1961. A Dravidian Etymological Dictionary. Oxford: At The Clarendon Press.
7-Konda::Burrow, T.&Emeneau, M.D. 1961. A Dravidian Etymological Dictionary. Oxford: At The Clarendon Press.
7-Kota::Burrow, T.&Emeneau, M.D. 1961.
A Dravidian Etymological
238
7-Kui "Burrow, T.&Emeneau, M.D. 1961. A Dravidian Etymological Dictionary. Oxford: At The Clarendon Press.
7-Kurukh::Burrow, T.feEmeneau, M.D. 1961. A Dravidian Etymological Dictionary. Oxford: At The Clarendon Press.
A Dravidian Etymological
7-Manda::Burrow, Y.&Emeneau, M.D. 1961. A Dravidian Etymological Dictionary. Oxford: At The Clarendon Press.
7-Mayalam::Burrow, Y.&Emeneau, M.D. 1961. A Dravidian Etymological Dictionary. Oxford: At The Clarendon Press.
7-Pengo::Burrow, T.&Bhattacharya, S. 1970. The Pengo Language, Grammar, Text, and Vocabulary. London: Oxford at the Clarendon
Press.
A Dravidian Etymological
7-Telegu::Burrow, Y.&Emeneau, M.D. 1961. A Dravidian Etymological Dictionary. Oxford: At The Clarendon Press.
A Dravidian Etymological
A Dravidian Etymological
Indo-Pacific
Croom Helm.
8-Angoram::Foley, W.A. 1986. The Papuan Languages of Guinea. London: Cambridge University Press.
New
239
8-Awa::Foley, W.A. 1986. The Papuan Languages of London: Cambridge University Press.
New
Guinea.
8-Bagupi::Z'graggen, J. A. 1980. A Comparative Word List of the Mabuso Languages Madang Province Papua New Guinea. Canberra: The Australian National University.
8-Bemal::Z'graggen, J. A. 1980. A Comparative Word List of the Mabuso Languages Madang Province Papua New Guinea. Canberra: The Australian National University.
8-BenaBena:Foley, W.A. 1986. The Papuan Languages of Guinea. London: Cambridge University Press.
8-Bikol::Mintz,
New
Hawaii Press.
8-Fore::Foley, W.A. 1986. The Papuan Languages of London: Cambridge University Press.
New
Guinea.
8-Gadsup::Foley, W.A. 1986. The Papuan Languages of London: Cambridge University Press.
New
Guinea.
8-Gal::Z'graggen, J. A. 1980. A Comparative Word List of the Mabuso Languages Madang Province Papua New Guinea. Canberra: The
Australian
National
University.
8-Garus::Z'graggen, J. A. 1980. A Comparative Word List of the Mabuso Languages Madang Province Papua New Guinea. Canberra: The Australian National University.
8-Gende::Foley, W.A. 1986. The Papuan Languages of London: Cambridge University Press.
New
Guinea.
J. A. 1980. A Comparative Word List of the Province Papua New Guinea. Canberra: Languages Madang Mabuso The Australian National University.
8-Girawa::Z'graggen,
8-Gumalu::Z'graggen, J. A. 1980. A Comparative Word List of the Mabuso Languages Madang Province Papua New Guinea. Canberra: The Australian National University.
240
8-HiriMotu::Dutton, T.E.&Voorhoeve, C.L. 1974. Beginning Hiri Australian National University.
Motu. Canberra:
New
8-Kamano-Yagiria::Foley, W.A. 1986. The Papuan Languages of Guinea. London: Cambridge University Press.
8-Kamba::Z'graggen, J. A. 1980. A Comparative Word List of the Mabuso Languages Madang Province Papua New Guinea. Canberra: The Australian National University.
8-Kare::Z'graggen, J. A. 1980. A Comparative Word List of the Mabuto Languages Madang Province Papua New Guinea. Sydney:
Australian
National
University.
Note on the
Manam Language
of
8-Manit::Z'graggen, J. A. 1980. A Comparative Word List of the Mabuso Languages Madang Province Papua New Guinea. Canberra: The Australian National University.
8-Mawan::Z'graggen, J. A. 1980. A Comparative Word List of the Mabuso Languages Madang Province Papua New Guinea. Canberra: The Australian National University.
8-Munit::Z'graggen, J. A. 1980. A Comparative Word List of the Mabuto Languages Madang Province Papua New Guinea. Sydney:
Australian
National
University.
8-Murupi::Z'graggen, J. A. 1980. A Comparative Word List of the Mabuso Languages Madang Province Papua New Guinea. Canberra: The Australian National University.
8-Nake::Z'graggen, J. A. 1980. A Comparative Word List of the Mabuso Languages Madang Province Papua New Guinea. Canberra: The Australian National University.
8-Panim::Z'graggen, J. A. 1980. A Comparative Word List of the Mabuso Languages Madang Province Papua New Guinea. Canberra: The Australian National University.
241
8-Rao::Stamhope, J.M. 1980. The Language of the Rao People, Grengabu, Madang Province, New Guinea. Canberra: Australian
National
University.
8-Siane::Foley, W.A. 1986. The Papuan Languages of London: Cambridge University Press.
New
Guinea.
8-Sihan::Z'graggen,
J. A.
1980.
A Comparative Word
List of the
National
University.
J. A.
8-Silopi::Z'graggen,
1980.
A Comparative Word
List of the
National
University.
8-Tairora::Foley, W.A. 1986. The Papuan Languages of London: Cambridge University Press.
8 -Tolai:: Franklin, K.J.
New
Guinea.
Ukarumpa,
New
Guinea:
Summer
Institute
of Linguistics.
9.
Niger-Khordofanian
Akademische
Druck-u
Verlagsanstalt.
1963. Polyglotta Africana. Graz:
9-Bini::Koelle, S.W.
Akademische
Druck-u
Verlagsanstalt.
1964.
9-Bobangi::Whitehead,
J.
Grammar and
Dictionary of the
Press.
New
Jersey:
Gregg
9-Dogon::Caiame-Giraule, G. 1968. Dictionaire Dogon, Dialecte, Langue, et Civilization. Paris: Libraire C. Klincksieck.
9-Ewe::Westermann, D. 1973. Evefiala or Ewe-English Dictionary, Gbsela Yey or English-Ewe Dictionary. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer.
9-Fula::Swift,
242
9-Ife::Koelle,
Akademische
Druck-u
Verlagsanstalt.
1963. Polyglotta Africana. Graz:
9-Igala::Koelle, S.W.
Akademische
Druck-u
Verlagsanstalt.
9-Igbo::Williamson, K.
1972. Igbo-English Dictionary based on the Onitsha Dialect. Benin City, Ethiopia: Ethiopia Publishing Company.
1971.
Longman, Rhodesia:
9-Nyanja::Price, T.
Literature
Bureau.
1960.
Hartford
Seminary
Foundation.
J. A.
9-Shilluk::Heasty,
1984. English-Shilluk,
Shilluk-English
Dictionary.
Doleib
Hill,
The American
Mission.
Literature
CapeTown:
243
9-Yulu::Koelle, S.W. 1963. Polyglotta Africana. Graz:
Akademische
Druck-u
Verlagsanstalt.
9-Zulu::Doke,
C.M.&MckMalcomb, D.&Sikanana,J.M.A.
Witwatersrand
North Amerind
10-Apache::Porter, J.C.
Apache
or Inde
Mexico. In Museum of Anthropology Linguistics Series. Edited Anthropological in Publications Occasional by C. J. Condie. Greeley, Colorado: University of Northern Colorado.
New
10-Biloxi::Swanton, J.R.&Dorsey, J.O. 1912. The Biloxi and Ofo Languages. Washington: Washington Government Printing Office.
10-Blackfoot::Frantz, D.G.&Russell, N.J. 1989. Blackfoot Dictionary of Stems, Roots, and Affixes. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
10-Cakchiquel::Carmelo, S.S.M. 1940. Diccionario CakchiquelEspanol, Recopilado par Carmelo de Santa de Santa Maria. Managua: Tipografia Nacional.
10-Choctaw::Byngton, C. 1915. A Dictionary of the Choctaw Language. Washington: Washington Government Printing Office.
1971. Chontal to Spanish-English; Spanish to of Arizona Press. University Chontal. Tuscon:
10-Chontal::Turner, S.
10-Chorti::Mayers, M.K.
The Hague:
Mouton.
10-Crow::Lowie, R. 1960. Crow
Word
Lists:
Crow-English; English-
Crow Word
Lexicon. Philadelphia:
10-Ixil::Mayers,
Mouton.
244
10-Jacaltec::Mayers,
Hague: Mouton.
10-Kwakiutl::Boas, F. 1906. Kwaikiutl Texts.
New
York: E. Stechert
and
Company.
10-Menomini::Bloomfield, L. 1975. Menomini Lexicon. Milwaukee: Milwaukee Public Museum Publications in Anthropology and
History.
Ottawa: National
10-Navaho-Athapascan::Young, R.W.&Morgan, W. 1980. The Navaho Language: A Grammar and Colloquial Dictionary. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.
10-Ojibwa::Piggott, G.L.&Graf stein, A. 1983. Museums of Canada.
An Ojibwa
Lexicon.
Ottawa: National
Orleans:
New
Grammar,
Texts, Dictionary.
10-Tzotzil::Laughlin, R.M. 1975. The Great Tzotzil Dictionary of San Lorenzo Zinacantan. Washington: Smithsonian Contributions to Anthropology.
10-Winnebago::Radin,
Themselves.
P.
Baltimore:
S.S.
10-Yokuts::Newman,
New
245
10-Zoque::Hamson, R.&Harrison, M.B. 1984. Vocabulario Zoque de
Rayon. Verano: Institute Linguistico de Verano.
11.
South Amerind
1968.
ll-Amahuaca-Pano-Tanoan::Key, M.R.
Phonology. The Hague: Mouton.
Comparative
Tacanan
ll-Aymara-Quechumaran::Ebbing,
Diccionario Aimara. La Paz:
J.E.
1965.
Grammatico y
Don Bosco.
1948.
ll-Botocudo::Monteiro, C.
Vocabulario
Portugues-Botocudo.
Paulista.
The
Hague: Mouton.
ll-Cavinena::Key, M.R. 1968. Comparative Tacanan Phonology.
The
Hague: Mouton.
ll-Chacobo-Pano-Tanoan::Loukota, C. 1968. Classification of South American Languages. Los Angeles: UCLA.
ll-Chama::Key, M.R. 1968. Comparative Tacanan Phonology. The Hague: Mouton.
ll-Chaninahua::Key, M.R. 1968. Comparative Tacanan Phonology.
Townsend.
ll-Inga::Levinsohn, S.
1976.
Mouton.
246
ll-Jaqaru::Hardman, M. 1966. Jacaru: Outline of Phonological and Morphological Structure. The Hague: Mouton and Company.
ll-Lenca::Rivard,
Dictionary.
J.J.
1988.
Maya-Spanish
Spanish-Maya
New
Anthropology.
-Guyana: :Loukota, C. 1968. Classification of South American Languages. Los Angeles: UCLA.
11
Grammar and
Quechua
Institute
Linguistico de
Verano.
Hague: Mouton.
ll-Tarascan::Friedrich, P. 1971. The Tarascan Suffixes of Locative Space. Bloomington: University of Indiana Press.
ll-Totonac::Aschmann, H.P. 1973. Diccionario Totonaco de Papantla, Veracruz, Totonaco-Espanol, Espanol-Totonaco. Verano: Instituto Linguistico de Verano.
ll-Tupi::Mello, G. 1967. Dicionario Sao Paulo: Folco Masucci.
12.
Tupi-Portugues, Portugues-Tupi.
Uralic
n. Nilo-Saharan
13-BongoBagirmi::Doornbos, P.&Bender, M.L. 1983. Languages of Wadai-Darfur. In Nilo-Saharan Language Studies. Edited by M. L.
247
Bender. 43-79. East Lansing: African Studies Center Michigan State University.
13-BoraMang::Doornbos, P.&Bender, M.L. 1983. Languages of Wadai-Darfur. In Nilo-Saharan Language Studies. Edited by M. L. Bender. 43-79. East Lansing: African Studies Center Michigan State
University.
13-Erenga::Doornbos, P.&Bender, M.L. 1983. Languages of WaidaiDarfur. In Nilo-Saharan Language Studies. Edited by M. L. Bender. Lansing: African Studies Center University of Michigan.
13-Fongoro::Doornbos, P.&Bender, M.L. 1983. Languages of Wadai Language Studies. Edited by M. L. Bender. 43-79. East Lansing: African Studies Center Michigan State
Darfur. In Nilo-Saharan
University.
13-Kanuri-Saharan::Lukas,
J.
1967.
Dawson's.
13-Kara::Doornbos, P.&Bender, M.L. 1983. Languages of Wadai Darfur. In Nilo-Saharan Language Studies. Edited by M. L. Bender.
43-79. East Lansing: African Studies Center Michigan State
University.
aspects of Logo phonology. In Edited by M. L. Bender. 272-279. Nilo-Saharan Language Studies. State University. Michigan Center Studies African Lansing: East
Some
13-Lokai::Tucker, A.N. 1940. The Eastern Sudanic Languages. London: Oxford University Press.
13-Lugbara::Tucker, A.N. 1940. The Eastern Sudanic Languages. London: Oxford University Press.
13-Masalit::Doornbos, P.&Bender, M.L.
Darfur. In Nilo-Saharan
Language
Studies. Edited by
University.
248
13-Merarit::Doornbos, P.&Bender, M.L.
Darfur. In Nilo-Saharan
Language
Studies. Edited by
Language
Studies. Edited by
13-Miza::Tucker, A.N. 1940. The Eastern Sudanic Languages. London: Oxford University Press.
13-Nubian::Armbruster, C.H. 1965. Dongolese Nubian, a Lexicon, Nubian-English, English-Nubian. Cambridge: At The University
Press.
13-0jila::Tucker, A.N. 1940. The Eastern Sudanic Languages. London: Oxford University Press.
13-Runga::Doornbos, P.&Bender, M.L. 1983. Languages of WadaiLanguage Studies. Edited by M. L. Bender. 43-79. East Lansing: African Studies Center Michigan State
Darfur. In Nilo-Saharan
University.
13-Sinyan::Doornbos, P.&Bender, M.L.
Darfur. In Nilo-Saharan
Language
Studies. Edited by
University.
Darfur. In Nilo-Saharan
13-Tama::Doornbos, P.&Bender, M.L. 1983. Languages of WaidaiLanguage Studies. Edited by M. L. Bender. Lansing: African Studies Center University of Michigan.
13-Twampa::Thelwall, R. 1983.
Twampa
Phonology. In Nilo-
Saharan Language Studies. Edited by M. L. Bender. 323-335. East Lansing: African Studies Center Michigan State University.
13-Yulu::Doornbos, P.&Bender, M.L. 1983. Languages of WadaiDarfur. In Nilo-Saharan Language Studies. Edited by M. L. Bender. East Lansing: African Studies Center Michigan State University.
249
15.
Austro-Thai
15-Brou. 1966. Mon-Khmer subgrouping in Vietnam. In Austroasiatic Studies. Edited by P. N. Jenner Thompson,L.C., and Starosta,S. 195-213. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
15-Chrau. 1966. Mon-Khmer subgrouping in Vietnam. In Austroasiatic Studies. Edited by P. N. Jenner Thompson,L.C., and Starosta,S. 195-213. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Mon-Khmer subgrouping
in
Vietnam.
Starosta,S.
Studies. Edited by P. N. Jenner Thompson,L.C., and 195-213. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
15-Pearic::Headley, R.K. 1978. English-Pearic Vocabulary. In MonKhmer Studies VIZ. Edited by P. N. Jenner. Honolulu: University of
Hawaii Press.
15-Sedang::Thomas, D.D. 1966. Mon-Khmer subgrouping in Vietnam. In Austroasiatic Studies. Edited by P. N. Jenner Thompson,L.C., and Starosta,S. 195-213. Honolulu: University of
Hawaii Press.
15-Thai::Robertson, R.G. 1980. Robertson's Practical English-Thai Dictionary. Tokyo: Charles E. Tuttle Company.
16.
Sino-Tibetan
16-Akha::Burling, R.
1967. Proto-Lolo-Burmese.
The Hague:
Mouton.
16-Atsi::Burling, R.
1967. Proto-Lolo-Burmese.
New
York:
1970. Cantonese
Dictionary,
Cantonese-English English-Cantonese.
Press.
New
250
Pacific Linguistics
16-Gurung::Glover, J.R.&Gurung, D.B. 1979. Conversational Gurung. Series D no. 13. Sydney: Australian National
University.
16-Lahu-Lolo-Burmese::Matisoff,
J. A.
1988.
1967. Proto-Lolo-Burmese.
16-Mandarin-Sinitic::Cowie, A.P.&Evison, A. 1980. Concise EnglishChinese Chinese-English Dictionary. Hong Kong: Oxford University
Press.
16-Maru::Burling, R.
1967. Proto-Lolo-Burmese.
The Hague:
Mouton.
16-Newari::Jorgensen, H.
1936.
A Dictionary
of Classical Newari.
Dictionary.
Altaic
17-Azerbaijaini::Householder, F.W. 1965. Basic Course in Azerbaijani. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
17-Japanese::Kondo, K.C. 1947. Romanized English-Japanese Dictionary with Chinese Characters. Tokyo: Japan Publishing
Trading Company.
17 -Korean ::Underwood, J.V. 1954. Concise English-Korean Dictionary Romanized. Tokyo: Charles E. Tuttle Company.
17-Manchu::Norman,
Seattle:
251
Dictionary.
17-Turkish::Iz, F. 1978. The Oxford English-Turkish Dictionary. London: Oxford University Press.
New
York:
253
Table C-2. Ethnoanatomical Glosses and Consonantal
254
Physiolo
255
Physiological
256
Table C-5. Culturally Primary Glosses and Vowel Codin g Tallies
Glosses:
257
Table C-6 Culturally Primary Glosses and Consonatal Coding Tallies
Glosses:
INITIAL
Table D-1
Consonantal
Bilabial
Raw
Dental-
Palatal
Nose (27)
Alve Food
(43)
Suck (17)
LabioVelar Water
Velar
(8)
Glottal
Neck
Cough
(35)
(28)
Nose (15)
Swallow
(22) Breast
Drink (8)
Cough
Vomit
(13)
(39)
Eat (11)
Dog
(7)
Swallow
(23)
(13:
(21)
Chew
(20)
Swallow
(38) Suck (37)
Vomit
(23: Spit
(11)
Food (19)
Chew
Dog
(11)
Food
(4)
Dog
(22)
Tooth (10)
Mouth
(19)
Chew
(18^
(36)
(10)
Vomit
(3)
Chew
(22)
Swallow
(9)
Water
Spit
Mouth
(35)
Tooth
(9)
Mouth
Eat (3)
(3)
Mouth
(22) Tooth (20)
Drink (8)
(18)
Nose (34)
Breast (8)
Chew
Dog
(7)
Swallow
(3)
Food (19)
Spit
(7)
Vomit
10
(16^ Breast
Food
(32)
(7)
Neck
Suck
Tooth
(2)
(16)
Eat (7)
(33)
Dog
(14)
Vomit
Water
(7)
(6) (5)
Eat (14)
Mouth
(5)
Suck (12)
Neck
(32)
Nose
Neck
(11)
Cough
(4)
Eat (10)
Vomit
(4)
(3)
Breast (1)
Nose (11)
Suck
Breast
(8)
Breast (4)
Cough
Tooth
(6)
(3)
Chew
Nose
(1) (0)
Suck
(4)
(4)
Dog
(26)
Neck
(2)
(7)
Food
258
259
Table D-2
Manner
of Articulation
Raw
260
APPENDIX E
262
Table E-2
Actual Rankings of 16 Glosses on 15 Tested Features (8-15 )
Round
264
Table F-2 Consonant Phonetic Coding Characters
REFERENCES
Andre,
J.
1966
Onomatopees
et
noms d'oiseaux en
61
Latin.
:
146-156.
Anttila, R.
1975
Affective vocabulary
invitation.
in
Finnish:
Ural-Altaische
Another Jahrbucher
47
Argyle, M.
10-19.
1973
71-91.
Asano, T.
1978
Words)
Atzet,
J.,
Tokyo: Kadokawa.
and H. Gerard.
1965
study of phonetic symbolism among native Navajo speakers. Journal of Personality and 524-528. Social Psychology 5
:
Austerlitz,
R.
1967
identification
of Finnish
:
Language 43
20-33.
Barry, W.J.
1981
265
266
Battistella, E.L.
1990
York
Bentley,
Press.
M. and
E.J.
Varon
1933
An
1963
Some
Berlin, B.
1972
197 3
General principles of classification and nomenclature in folk biology. American 214-242. Anthropologist 75
:
1969
Basic Color Terms: Their Universality and Evolution Berkley: University of California
.
Press.
Bernard-Thierry,
S.
1960
240-269.
Bickerton, D.
1990
Chicago: University of
Bladon, R.A.
1977
Archivum
267
Boas,
F.,
and E. Deloria
1941
Academy
Boehm,
C.
of Sciences 23
16-90.
1989
Bolinger, D.
1964
of
.
833-848.
Brackbill, Y., and K. B. Little.
1957
guessing of
312-318.
Brown, C.H.
1976
Wittgensteinian
Linguistics
The Hague:
Mouton.
Brown, C.H.
1979
317-342.
Brown, R.
1958
Phonetic symbolism and metaphor. In Words and Things Edited by B. Roger. New York: Glencoe Free Press 110-154.
.
Brown,
R., A. Black,
195 5
in
natural
languages.
50
388-393.
268
Brown,
R.,
and R. Nuttall
1959
Method
59
:
in
phonetic
symbolism experiments.
441-445.
Burns, A.F.
1983
Press.
Carroll,
J.
B.
1959
Review of
the
:
measurement of meaning.
58-77.
Language 35
Chandola, A. C.
1963
their
implications.
Word
19
203-207.
Chastaing,
M. Le symbolisme des
de
i.
1958
voyelles,
signification
:
Journal
de Psychologic 55
403-423,
461-481.
Chastaing,
M. La
brilliance des voyelles.
:
1962
Archivum
Linguisticum 14
1-13.
Chomsky, N.
1968
New
York: Harcourt,
Chusid, J.G.
1970
Publications.
Correlative
.
LANGE
1969
267-270.
269
Cowan, W.
1972
Crawford, J.M.
1978
Talk. International
:
of American Linguistics 44
17-23.
Critchley, E.
1967
111.:
Springfield,
Crockett, D. B.
1970
in
Russian.
Word
Daniel,
W.W. 1990
Statistics
Boston:
Darwin, C.J.
1975
in speech and Process in Speech Perception Edited by C. A. Nooteboom. New York: Springer 178-193.
On
the
perception.
Structure
.
1986
Davis, R.
1961
The
of
fitness
cultural
270
DeCasper, A.
J.,
and
W.
P. Fifer.
1980
prefer their
:
Science 208
1174-1176.
Dellow, P.G.
1976
and
The
lexicalization of sound
symbolism
:
in
1972
Diffloth, G.
1979
Expressive phonology and prosaic phonology in Mon-Khmer. In Studies in Tai and MonKhmer Phonetics and Phonology Edited by
.
Doke, C. M.
1935
London:
Longmans Green.
Driver, H.E.
1966
/ntroduction
to
statistics
for
comparative
research. In Readings
.
in
Cross-Cultural
F.
Methodology Edited by
Haven:
W. Moore. New
HRAF
Press 310-338.
271
Durbin, M.
1969
Sound symbolism
Ethnosemantics.
in
the
family. Experimental
New
Mimeograph.
Emeneau, M.
B.
1969
Onomatopoetics
Language 45
Emeneau, M.B.
1978
a Linguistic
201-210.
Ertel, S.
1969
Psychophonetik: Untersuchungen uber Lautsymbolik und Motivation Guttingen, Germany: Verlag Fur Psychologie.
.
Falk, D.
1990
Brain evolution in
theory. Behavioral
Homo: The
"radiator"
333-381.
Farb, P.
1974
Word
Plav:
New
Farb, P. and G. Armelagos
York: Knopf
1980
Ferguson, C.A.
1964
1987
for
Acoustic determinants of infant preference motherese speech. Infant Behavior and Development 10 279-293.
:
272
Fink, B.R.
1975
Functional Study
New
Firth, J.R.
1935
distribution of certain
English
sounds. English
Fischer,
L.
Studies 17
8-18.
J.
1983
Magical imitation
In Glossogenetics
.
in
Edited by E. DeGrolier.
New
313-328.
Fischer-J0rgensen,
1978
On
the
universal
character of phonetic
to
vowels.
80-90.
Fonagy,
I.
1979
La Metaphore en Phonetique
Didier.
Ottawa: Marcel
Fudge, E.
1970
Phonological
Journal
structure
and
:
"expressiveness."
of Linguistics 6
161-188.
Gamble, G.
1975
Consonant symbolism
International
in
Yokuts.
Journal
of
American Linguistics
41
306-309.
Ganong, W.F.
1983
Alto, Cal.
LANGE
Publications.
273
Gardner, B.T., and R.A. Gardner
1971
Two-way communication
with an infant chimpanzee. In Behavior in Nonhuman Primates: Modern Research Trends Edited by A. M. Schrier and F. Stollnitz. New York: Academic Press 117-184.
.
Gebels, G.
1969
An
investigation
cultures.
of phonetic
symbolism
:
in
different
Journal
of Verbal
Behavior 8
310-312.
197 9
Paris:
Geoffrey, V.C., J.E. Bernthal, T.E. Bertozini, and J.F. Bosma. Interaction of experimentally elicited 19 84
auricular
Folia
Phonetricia 36
31-39.
Goudsblom,
J.
1983
The domestication of
Edited by
J.
fire
Benjamins
Gouzoules, H.,
S.
159-172.
1986
Vocal communication:
The Cayo
Santiago Macaques .Edited by R. G. Rawlins and M. J. Kessler. Albany State: University of New York Press 111-129.
Grammont, M. 1901
Onomatopees
et
mots expressifs.
.
In
Trentenaire de la Societe pour I'Etude des Langues Romanes Montpellier, Fr.: 261-322.
274
Greenberg, J.H.
1964
Some
universals of
word
.
order.
In
Proceedings of the Ninth International Congress of Linguists Edited by H. G. Lunt. The Hague: Mouton 418-420.
Greenberg, J.H.
1966
Language Universals. with Special Reference to Feature Hierarchies The Hague: Mouton.
.
Gudschinsky, S.C.
1964
The ABC's of
lexicostatistics. In
.
Language
in
Edited by D. Hymes.
New
Row
612-623.
M.
R.
1942
Types of reduplication
Linguistics
1
:
in
Thai. Studies
in
1-6.
Haas,
M.
R.
1970
Consonant symbolism in northwestern California: A problem in diffusion. In Languages and Cultures of Western North America Edited by E. H. Swanson. Pocatello:
.
Idaho
Hall, K.R.
State
University
Press
86-96.
1952
The
Journal
of Psychology 42
21-33.
Hamano,
S. S.
1986
Heise, D. R.
1966
14-27.
275
Henry,
J.
1936
Hewes, G.W.
1973
5-24.
Hewes, G.W.
1983
The invention of phonemically-based language. "In Glossogenetics: The Origin and Evolution of Language V.l. Edited by E. De Grolier. New York: Harwood Academic
Publications
143-162.
Hockett, C. F.
1985
Distinguished lecture:
f.
American
Anthropologist 87
Hockett, C.F.
263-281.
and R. Ascher.
1964
Anthropology
135-168.
197 3
New
Householder, F.W.
1946
On
the
English
Hudak,
T.J.
1990
Thai. In
The World's Major Languages Edited by B. Comrie. New York: Oxford University Press 757-775.
.
276
Jakobson, R.
1960
Why
In Perspectives
in
Wapner.
New
Universities
Press
Jakobson, R.
1978
Cambridge, Mass.
The
MIT
Jakobson, R., and L. Waugh.
Press.
197 9
Bloomington:
Jenkins,
J. J.,
W.A.
195 8
An
atlas of semantic profiles for 360 words. American Journal of Psychology 71 688-699.
:
Jerison, H.J.
1976
Discussion paper: The paleoneurology of language. Annals of the New York Academy 370-382. of Sciences 280
:
Jespersen, O.
1918
in
tillegnade
Esaias
Jespersen, O.
1921/1947
symbolism In Language: Its Nature. Development, and Origin Edited by O. Jespersen. Woking, England: Unwin Brothers Limited Chapter XX, 396-411.
Sound
277
Jesperson, O.
1922/1949
In
Selected
Edited by D.
Johnson, R.
C, N.
S.
Suzuki, and
1964
W. K. Olds Phonetic symbolism in an artificial language. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 233-236. 69
:
1975
Gender differences
in
mental function:
clue
Current
Anthropology 16
Jonckheere, A.R.
626-630.
195 4
distribution-free
k-smaple
test
against
:
ordered alternatives.
Biometrika 41
133-143.
Judson, L.S., and A.T. Weaver.
1942
Voice Science
Crofts Inc.
New
York: Appleton-Century-
Kahlo, G.
1960
35-42.
1942
Studies in
synesthetic thinking:
II.
The
:
role
278
Kingston,
J.
1990
Five exaptations in speech: Reducing the arbitrariness of the constraints on language. 738-739. Brain and Behavioral Sciences 13
:
Koehn,
E.,
and
S.
Koehn.
Apalai. In Handbook of Amazonian Languages Edited by D. C. Derbyshire and G. K. Pullum. The Hague: Mouton 33-127.
.
1986
Kunihira, S.
1971
Langdon, M.
1978
LeCron
Foster,
M.
1978
The symbolic
language. In
structure
of primordial
Human
.
Evolution:
S.
Biosocial
Perspectives
E. R.
Edited by
L.
Lehrer, A.
1974
Leith, D.E.
1977
Edited by
Cough. In Respiratory Defense Mechanisms J. D. Brain, D. F. Proctor and L. M. Reid. New York: Marcel Dekker 545-592.
Lenneberg, E.
1967
279
Lieberman,
P.
1984
The Biology and Evolution of Language Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
.
Lieberman,
P.,
198 8
and S.E. Blumstein. Speech Physiology. Speech Perception, and Acoustic Phonetics Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
.
Lund,
J.P.
1976
Oral-facial
mastication and voluntary movements of the jaw. In Mastication and Swallowing: Biology
and Clinical Correlates Edited by B. J. Sessle and A. C. Hannam. Toronto: University of Toronto Press 145-153.
.
Maddieson, L
1984
Patterns of Sounds
Press.
Mahapatra, K.
1976
Echo-formation in Gta? In Austroasiatic Studies Edited by P. N. Jenner, L. C. Thompson and S. Starosta. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press 815-831.
.
Malkiel, Y.
1963
configuration,
1990a
Company.
280
Malkiel, Y.
1990b
From phonosymbolism
In
to
morphosymbolism.
.
1990c
Malkiel.
Philadelphia:
John Benjamins
69-80.
Publishing
Company
Maltzman,
I.,
195 6
Critique and notes: an investigation of phonetics symbolism. Journal of Abnormal 249-251. and Social Psvcholoev 53
:
Marchand, H.
1959
Markel, N.
1966
The psycho-morph: Two exploratory studies. The Human Use of Symbols Conference. Tampa, Florida. Unpublished Manuscript
:
1-10.
Markel, N.
1990
Speaking style as an expression of solidarity: words per pause. Language in Society 19 81-88.
:
Markel, N.
1990
281
Markel, N.
1991
Psycho-Semiotics
of Florida: Gainesville.
Phillis.
197 3
The
relationship
of-voice.
Hamp
Connotative meanings of certain phoneme 47-61. sequences. Studies in Linguistics 15
:
1960
Marks, L.E.
1975
Synesthesia:
senses.
Psychology
Marks, L. E.
1982
Martin, S.
1962
Phonetic symbolism in Korean. In Uralic and Altaic Series Edited by N. Poppe. Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana University Press
.
177-189.
Masson, D.
I.
1952
Word
39-41.
McClure, E.F.
1976
McMurray, G.
1958
study of "fittingness" of signs to words by means of semantic differential. Journal of 310-311. Experimental Psychology 56
:
282
McWhirter, N.
1978
New
York:
Miles, H.L.
1983
Apes and language: The search for communicative competence. In Language Primates Edited by J. deLuce and H. T. Wilder New York: Springer- Verlag 43-61.
.
in
Miron, M.
S.
1961
cross-linguistic
investigation
of phonetic
Mithun, M.
1982
International
48
Mori, A.
49-58.
1983
eastern-gorillas,
Newman, P. 1989
in
Hausa ideophones.
Proceedings of the 15th Annual Meeting of the Berkley Linguistic Society Edited by K. Hall, M. Meacham, and R. Shapiro Berkeley, Cal.: Berkeley Linguistic Society Incorporated
248-255.
Newman, S. 1933
S.
Further
experiments
in
phonetic
symbolism.
:
53-75.
283
Nichols,
J.
1971
in
North
Norwood,
F.S.
1978
Odbert, H.S., T.F. Karwoski, and A.B. Eckerson. Studies in synesthetic thinking: I. Musical 1942 and verbal associations of color and mood
1972
On
against
ordered
Ohala,
J.J.
1984
An
41
:
ethological perspective
on
common
cross-
language utilization of
1-16.
Fo of
voice.
Phonetica
Ojemann,
1979
Motor-phoneme
205
:
identity
systems. Science
1401-1403.
Orr,
J.
1944
On some sound
Journal
of Psychology 35
1-8.
Osgood, C.E.
1960
The
cross-cultural
generality
of visual-
verbal
synesthetic
:
tendencies.
Behavioral
Sciences 5
146-169.
284
Osgood, C.E., GJ. Suci, and P.H. Tannenbaum.
195 7
Urbana: The
Osgood, C.E., W.H. May, and M.S. Miron. Cross-Cultural Universals of Affective 197 5 Meaning Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
.
Oyama,
T.,
and
J.
Haga.
1963
Common
131-144.
factors
Paget, R.
193
1981
Holt,
Rhinehart and
Pecjak, V.
Winston.
1970
Verbal synesthesiae of colors, emotions, and days of the week. Journal of Verbal Learning 623-626. and Verbal Behavior 9
:
Pederson, E.
1986
Expressive language in White Hmong. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkley Linguistic Society V. Nikiforidou, M. VanClay, M. Niepokuj, and D. Feder eds. Berkely: Berkeley Linguistic Society 472-
484.
Pinker, S., and P.
Bloom
Natural
1990
Premack, D.
1971
Language 808-822.
in
285
Pullman, G.K. and Ladusaw, W.A. Phonetic Symbol Guide. Chicago: University 1986
of Chicago Press.
Word
224-233.
Reichard, G.
1945
Journal
:
of
AmericanLinguistics
11
47-63.
Roper, C.W., P.W. Dixon, E.H. Ahern, and V.L. Gibson. Effect of language and sex on universal 1978
and Speech
Samarin,
W. 1967
J.
Journal of
Samarin,
W. 1970
J.
Samarin, W.J.
1971
Sapir, E.
1911
Diminutive and augmentative consonantism in Wishram. In Handbook of American Indian Languages Edited by F. Boas. Washington D. C. Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of America Ethnology Bulletin.
.
286
Sapir, E.
1929
Experimental
Sapir,
J.
D.
1975
Big and
linguistic
thin:
Two
Diola-Fogny meta-
terms.
4
Saussure, F. de
1-15.
1959
Course
in
General Linguistics
Library.
New
York:
Philosophical
Schuchardt, H.
1897
Zeitschrift
:
Shafer, R.
1964
104-109.
1990
Form and
Summer
Institute
Paramaribo,
Suriname.
Shields, K. C.
1976
On
Indo-European.
Siegel, A.,
I.
1967
On
the effects of
mode
of presentation on
1969
Visual
in
reinforcement
infants.
of
nonnutritive
:
human
Science 165
sucking 1144-1147.
287
Smithers, G. V.
1954
Some
Linguisticum 6
Snowdon, C.T.
Archivum
1986
Vocal communication. In Comparative Primate Biology. Edited by G. Mitchell and New York: Alan R. Liss 495-530. J. Erwin.
Solomon, L.N.
1958
Semantic approach
to
the
perception of
Solomon, L.N.
1959
Semantic reactions
:
to
systematically
varied
Swadesh, M.
1971
1976
What can
467-480.
Tarte, R. D.
primates
tell
of Science 280
1974
1971
Taylor,
I.
K.
1963
288
Taylor, I.K.
1967
Anatomy
phonetic
General
Taylor,
I.
K.,
1962
344-356.
Terpstra, T.J.
1953
distribution
of the
its
for
testing
normal
Mathematicae
Thorndike, E.L.
1945
On Orr's hypothesis concerning the front and back vowels- British Journal of Psychology 10-14. 36
:
Tiwary, K. M.
1968
in
Bhojpuri.
:
Linguistics 10
32-38.
Tsuru,
S.,
and H.
S. Fries.
193 3
problem
in
Psychology
Uhlenbeck, E.M.
1950
Ullmann,
S.
1966
Semantic universals.
.
In
Universals
of
289
Ultan, R.
1978
Stanford, Cal.:
525-568.
Waser, P.M., and C.H. Brown.
1984
Is there a "sound window" for primate communication? Behavioral Ecology and 73-76. Sociobiology 15
:
Washburn, S.L.
1960
Weiss,
J.
H.
1964
Weiss, J.H.
1966
study of the ability of English speakers to guess the meanings of nonantonym foreign
74
:.97-106.
I960
New
York:
M.
The
and
1958
Wescott, R.W.
1971a
American
290
Wescott, R.
W. 1971b
Linguistic iconism.
Language 47
416-428.
Wescott, R.W.
1980a
Ideophones
in
Sound and
Sense: Linguistic Rssavs on Phonosemic Subjects Edited by R. Wescott. Lake Bluff, Illinois: Jupiter Press 195-209.
.
Wescott, R.W.
1980b
The
origin of speech. In Sound and Sense: Essays in Phonosemic Subjects Edited by R. Wescott. Lake Bluff, Illinois: Jupiter Press 100-117.
.
Wescott, R.
W. 1980c
Sound and Sense: Linguistic Essavs on Phonosemic Subjects Edited by R. W. Wescott. Lake Bluff, Illinois: Jupiter Press.
.
Wescott, R.W.
1980d
Metaphones in Bini and English. In Sound and Sense: Linguistic Essavs on Phonosemic Subjects Edited by R. W. Wescott. Lake Bluff,
.
Illinois:
Jupiter
Press
210-220.
Wescott, R.
W.
Holesthemes or phonesthemes twice over. 67-72. General Linguistics 27
:
1987
Williams, K.
1976
Synaesthetic adjectives:
possible law of
:
semantic change.
Language 52
461-478.
Wissemann, H.
1954
291
Witkowski,
S.
197 2
Guttman scaling of kinship semantics. In Kinship Studiesin the Morgan Centennial Year Edited by P. Reining. Washington D.C.: Anthropological Society of Washington 167-188.
.
Witkowski,
S.,
1977
50-57.
Witkowski,
S.,
197 8
1982
Culture,
Man
18
72-89.
Wyke, B.
1967
in
Wynne,
J.D.
1982
Learning
Statistics:
.
Approach
New
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
Nick Ciccotosto was born
in Elmhurstjllinois in
1955. His
He
1978 and
his
M.A. from
the
same university
in
1984.
He was
interests
states,
languages origins,
bio-cultural
evolution,
trance
mentally
bilingual
translated
handicapped,
education,
J. P.
methods of
Sarte's
Mains
292
I have read this study and that in my opinion standards of scholarly presentation and acceptable conforms to fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the I
certify that
it
is
have read
this
conforms
fully
to acceptable standards adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
it
is
A/
certify that
to
it
conforms
is
Norman N. Markel
Professor of Communication Processes and Disorders
it I have read this study and that in my opinion is and presentation scholarly of standards acceptable conforms to fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the I
certify that
Robert
Lawless
Associate Professor of
Anthropology
certify that to
have read
this
conforms
fully
acceptable standards
of scholarly
it
is
adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
^^
Ronald Kephart
Assistant
Professor of
Foreign
Languages
This dissertation was submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Department of Anthropology in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences and to the Graduate School and was accepted as partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of
Philosophy.
December
1991